Tag Archives: Vigilant Fox

Did California DNC delegates refuse to vote for Kamala Harris?!

Did California DNC delegates pass and refuse to vote for Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party candidate for President?! Take a look at the viral video, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : California DNC delegates refused to vote for Kamala Harris!

Some people are sharing a video, which they claim / suggest shows California DNC delegates passing and refusing to vote for Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party candidate for President!

MJTruthUltra / Jack Straw : Fake pic! That is a guy that got shot with Buckshot years ago, stop with the fear porn already

The Vigilant Fox : California delegates initially chose to PASS instead of casting their votes for Kamala Harris.

Donald J. Trump – Parody / Aayat Fatima : BREAKING: California and Minnesota PASS on casting their delegate votes for Kamala Harris! Holy! That is HILARIOUS! She ruined that state! They don’t want her either!

https://www.techarp.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/DNC-California-delegates-passes-to-vote-for-Kamala-Harris-small.mp4?_=1

Truth : California DNC delegates did not refuse to vote for Kamala Harris!

This appears to be an example of fake news circulating on social media, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : California and Minnesota passed during DNC roll call

Let me start by pointing out that it wasn’t just California delegates who “passed” on voting for Kamala Harris during DNC roll call, Minnesota delegates also did the same.

Fact #2 : California and Minnesota passed as tradition dictated

Even though delegates from California and Minnesota passed on voting for Kamala Harris during the DNC roll call, they eventually did so at the end.

As WUSA9 explains, that’s because it’s tradition for the nominees’ home states to pass on voting initially, so they can cast the “deciding votes” at the end of the roll call.

Why California, Minnesota passed at the DNC

California and Minnesota, the home states of Harris and her running mate, Tim Walz, have passed during the convention roll call — letting the party roll on.

This year’s roll call has been unlike any in political history. But one tradition held, the one mandating that the home state of the nominee generally passes, then goes near the end to pass the deciding vote to formally clinch the nomination.

This year, Minnesota, where Walz is governor, could get the count close and let Harris’ California and its motherlode of delegates put her over the top as the Democratic nominee.

Vice President nominee Tim Walz is the governor of Minnesota, so its delegates voted to nominate Kamala Harris close to the end. Kamala Harris is from California, so its large number of delegates were given the privilege to put her over the top as the Democratic Party nominee in the 2024 Presidential election.

In fact, it was California governor Gavin Newsom who delivered the state’s delegates to Vice President Kamala Harris, surrounded by members of the California delegation.

Fact #3 : No legitimate report of CA delegates refusing to vote for Kamala Harris

If delegates from California actually refused to vote to nominate Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate for President, it would have been widely reported.

Yet, there has been no legitimate media reporting of such a shocking development. That’s because it never happened – the delegates from California voted for her at the end, as tradition dictated.

Fact #4 : DNC roll call was only ceremonial

I should also point out that the roll call vote during the 2024 Democratic National Convention was only ceremonial, because the Democratic Party already held a virtual vote on August 6, that formally nominated Kamala Harris as its official nominee in the 2024 Presidential election.

What you saw at the 2024 DNC was just a fun, “celebratory” roll call, with DJ Cassidy spinning a special song for each state as they took their turn to nominate Kamala Harris.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Politics | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Cureus retracts study linking COVID vaccines to cancer!

Leave a reply

Find out why the journal Cureus just retracted a controversial Japanese study which claimed to link COVID-19 vaccines to cancer!

Cureus Retracts Study Linking COVID Vaccines To Cancer!

Cureus just retracted a controversial Japanese study by Gibo M, Kojima S, Fujisawa A, et al. which claimed to link COVID-19 vaccines to cancer, a decision which drew outrage amongst the anti-vaccine community.

Some publications even suggested that Cureus made that decision after it was fact-checked by Facebook or Reuters.

Children’s Health Defense / Vigilant News :

Journal Retracts Peer-Reviewed Study Linking COVID Vaccines to Cancer After Reuters ‘Fact Checks’ It

Mortality for some cancers increased by as much as 9.7%, according to a study by Japanese researchers who analyzed government statistics to compare age-adjusted cancer mortality rates during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022) with pre-pandemic rates.

The journal Cureus last week retracted a Japanese study that found statistically significant increases in cancer mortality following COVID-19 vaccination, especially after the third COVID-19 shot.

Slay News : Top Journal Removes Peer-Reviewed Study Linking Covid Shots to Cancer after Facebook ‘Fact Check’

An explosive peer-reviewed study was recently published in a prestigious medical journal which identifies a direct link between Covid mRNA shots and cancer.

As Slay News reported, the study, published in the Cureus journal, found that the risk of dying from cancer dramatically increased each time a patient received an mRNA injection.

Why Cureus Retracted Study Linking COVID Vaccines To Cancer!

Here is a quick primer on why Cureus retracted the controversial Japanese study linking COVID-19 vaccines to cancer, and what it means…

Fact #1 : Cureus Relies On Post-Publication Peer Review

Let me start by quickly pointing out that Cureus relies on post-publication peer review.

Even though this paper was marked as “peer-reviewed”, the peer review process at Cureus is “unusually fast“, and Cureus relies on “post-publication peer review“, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication.

Therefore, “peer-reviewed” studies published in Cureus can and do get retracted after further review, like the infamous article “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al.

Even if the paper was properly peer-reviewed by a prestigious journal, that would only be the first step in the scientific review process, which would include replication and verification, as well as criticism by other members of the scientific community.

Fact #2 : Cureus Says Study’s Conclusions Are Invalid

After publishing the study on April 8, the Editors-in-Chief at Cureus initiated a comprehensive post-publication editorial review on June 12, after the scientific credibility of the article was severely criticised.

The Editors-in-Chief have been made aware of several concerns regarding the scientific credibility of this article. A comprehensive post-publication editorial review is being conducted to determine if any action is required.

Finally, on June 26, the Editors-in-Chief at Cureus determined that the data in the study did not show any correlation between mortality rates and vaccination status, which invalidated its conclusion. They then decided to retract the study:

The Editors-in-Chief have retracted this article. Upon post-publication review, it has been determined that the correlation between mortality rates and vaccination status cannot be proven with the data presented in this article. As this invalidates the conclusions of the article, the decision has been made to retract.

The authors disagree with this retraction.

This may seem like closing the stable doors after the horses have bolted, but at least the controversial article has finally been retracted. In hindsight, perhaps such studies should undergo a more stringent peer-review process before being allowed to be labelled as “peer-reviewed”, or published…

Fact #3 : Japanese Study Had So Many Problems

The Gibo et. al. study only performed statistical analysis of publicly-available data to look at whether there has been any increase in cancer deaths. While such studies may suggest a potential issue with the COVID-19 vaccines, they cannot prove any correlation, much less causation.

Back in April, I wrote a comprehensive look at that study, but here are the key points of why that Japanese study does not show a rise in cancer deaths in Japan and/or that they were caused by mRNA vaccines:

it did not even establish the COVID-19 vaccination status of people in the data!
Japan used a mix of COVID-19 vaccines, not just mRNA vaccines
the study lacked a control group of unvaccinated people, which invalidated its conclusion
cancer deaths have been rising for decades, as the chart below shows
Japan has an aging population, which could easily explain the increase in cancer rates and deaths
cancer has been the leading cause of death in Japan since 1981

The study did not even establish the vaccination status of people included in the data, never mind how many actually received the third dose! The authors actually admitted that at the end of their long paper:

Fact #4 : Turbo Cancer Does Not Exist

Finally, there is no such thing as “turbo cancer”, and after billions of doses have been administered worldwide in the past 3 years – there is still no evidence that any COVID-19 vaccine can cause cancer, or make cancer go “turbo”.

The US National Cancer Institute also clearly states that there is no evidence that any COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer, lead to recurrence, or lead to disease progression. It also pointedly stated that COVID-19 vaccines do not change your DNA.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Sports | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did RFK Jr Expose NIH Kickbacks From Moderna Vaccine?!

Leave a reply

Did RFK Jr. just expose the massive kickbacks the NIH gets from the Moderna mRNA vaccine?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : RFK Jr. Exposed NIH Kickbacks From Moderna Vaccine!

People are sharing a video clip from a Dr. Phil interview, in which Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr) claimed or suggested that the NIH is getting kickbacks worth billions of dollars from the Moderna mRNA vaccine!

The Vigilant Fox / Erin Elizabeth / jamiemcintyre :

Dr. Phil Outraged as RFK Jr. Exposes NIH Kickbacks from Moderna Vaccine

Not only does the NIH own half of the Moderna shots, raking in billions of dollars, but 4 to 6 high-level deputies under Fauci pocket a staggering $150,000 a year forever from it.

https://www.techarp.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/RFK-Jr-NIH-kickbacks-from-Moderna-vaccine-video-small.mp4?_=2

Truth : RFK Jr. Did Not Expose NIH Kickbacks From Moderna Vaccine!

This is yet another example of fake news created or promoted by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : NIH Is Not Getting Kickbacks From Moderna

Let me start by pointing out that the NIH isn’t getting kickbacks from the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. Unsurprisingly, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. never provided any actual evidence to back up his claims.

The truth is – the NIH is merely asserting its intellectual property rights to licence technologies used in the creation of the Moderna mRNA vaccine for COVID-19. This is no different from how commercial companies licence out their technologies for other companies to use in their own products.

As Axios pointed out way back in June 2020, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) often invents basic scientific technologies that it licences out to pharmaceutical companies. As the NIH Director then, Dr. Francis Collins said in May 2020, “We do have some particular stake in the intellectual property” behind the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine.

Moderna ultimately licensed two technologies developed at the NIH for use in its mRNA vaccine for COVID-19. By the end of 2021, seven other pharmaceutical companies (including BioNTech) also paid royalties for using the same techniques in their COVID-19 vaccines.

This isn’t a kickback / bribery. It is basic common sense to licence NIH technologies to commercial companies, instead of letting them use them for free! What exactly is wrong with that?

Does RFK Jr. prefer that the NIH let Moderna use those technologies for free??? Why should Moderna not pay NIH for the work done by its researchers???

Fact #2 : US Government + Taxpayers Benefit From Moderna Vaccine!

It is ludicrous to claim or suggest that the NIH is receiving kickbacks from Moderna, because those patents that NIH licences out belong to the US government. The NIH also explained this in its statement three years ago:

NIAID scientists created stabilized coronavirus spike proteins for the development of vaccines against coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2. Recognizing the importance of these novel immunogens, NIAID has sought patents to preserve the government’s rights to these inventions and to provide incentive for commercial partners to invest the capital and resources needed to advance their development, commercialization, and public use as vaccines.

NIAID has adopted a non-exclusive licensing approach for these patent rights in order to allow multiple vaccine developers to utilize these immunogens in their proprietary vaccine platforms. The mRNA vaccine candidate resulting from NIAID’s collaboration with Moderna, embodied in the material transferred to UNC, is an example of this approach: the stabilized spike protein developed by NIAID investigators is expressed from Moderna’s proprietary mRNA vaccine platform. Responsibility for obtaining regulatory approval of the mRNA vaccine candidate, a product produced and formulated by Moderna, rests with Moderna.

Federal employees listed as inventors on these patent applications assigned their rights to the US government. Accordingly, should the USPTO and other national patent authorities grant the patents, the US government will hold ownership interest in the patents.

Show less

The US government owns those patents, and not the individual inventors working at the NIH. After all, the research was funded by the US federal government. Ultimately, the US government and taxpayers benefit from the licensing of NIH technologies to Moderna.

Fact #3 : NIH Inventors Benefit From Their Hard Work

This isn’t the first time Robert F. Kennedy Jr. claimed that top NIH officials are being paid $150,000 a year for life for the Moderna mRNA vaccine against COVID-19. Back in March 2021, RFK Jr. made similar claims in a NewsGuard interview.

The Moderna vaccine—his agency owns half, but six of the top guys who work for him own pieces of that patent, so they will each get $150,000 a year for life for every patent that they own.

However, he never provided any evidence – then or now, that Dr. Anthony Fauci, or any top NIH official, are actually receiving $150,000 per year from the Moderna mRNA vaccine patents.

The truth is – the $150,000 per year figure is the official limit on royalty that any scientist may receive from all inventions while working at the NIH. As NIAID spokesperson Jennifer Routh explained in February 2021:

[In NIH licensing agreements,] the first $2,000 of royalties received under a license go to the inventor, and then at least 15 percent thereafter per year are shared with the inventors as a group under that license. Inventors are capped at $150,000 per year per person from all licenses. Very few NIH inventors receive that amount.”

In other words – even if an NIH scientist invents ten groundbreaking drug that makes BILLIONS each for the NIH, he/she is only entitled to $150,000 per year for all ten drugs.

While it is plausible that the six NIH scientists listed in the two patents used by Moderna and other pharmaceutical companies may receive $150,000 per year, there is still no evidence that they actually received that much.

But to be clear – the only people getting this royalty money are the scientists whose names are listed in the patent applications, and simply “top NIH officials”.

Fact #5 : Patent Protection Only Lasts 20 Years

In the video, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. claimed that NIH officials would receive $150,000 per year forever – not only during their lifetime but also their children’s.

That is rather absurd as patent protection generally lasts only 20 years in the United States. There won’t be a need to licence for any pharmaceutical companies to licence those two patents from the NIAID / NIH for future mRNA vaccines after patent protection expires 20 years later.

In other words – those inventors in NIH can only expect to receive royalty payments for a maximum of 20 years, not forever…

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Health | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Was Robert Fico shot for rejecting WHO Pandemic Treaty?!

Leave a reply

Was Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico shot for rejecting the WHO Pandemic Treaty?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : Robert Fico Was Shot For Rejecting WHO Pandemic Treaty!

Right after Robert Fico was shot multiple times in the central Slovak town of Handlova, some people claimed or suggested that the Prime Minister of Slovakia was shot for rejecting the WHO Pandemic Treaty!

Concerned Citizen : 🚨 🇸🇰 Breaking: Slovakia

The Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico has just been shot in public.

This comes only days after Fico formally & publicly rejected The WHO Global Pandemic Accord ‼️

Vigilant Fox : Prime Minister Robert Fico of Slovakia Has Been Shot

Here’s Fico in December 2023 calling the WHO Pandemic Treaty “nonsense invented by greedy pharma companies.”

He also said, “One study after another confirms the scandalous consequences of mass vaccination with untested experimental vaccines.”

There is no other head of state in the world who has had the guts to say this publicly and so explicitly.

He also rejects funding for Ukraine. You can imagine that there are a lot of powerful people who would want him dead.

William Makis MD : BREAKING NEWS: Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico has survived an assassination attempt today! (He recently rejected the WHO Global Pandemic Accord)

Pubity : BREAKING: The Prime Minister of Slovakia, Robert Fico, has just been shot in public.

This comes only days after Fico formally & publicly rejected The WHO Global Pandemic Accord.

Show less

Truth : Robert Fico Was Not Shot For Rejecting WHO Pandemic Treaty!

This is yet another example of fake news / misinformation circulating on social media, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Assassination Attempt Was Politically Motivated

First, let me just point out that Robert Fico was not shot because he was against the WHO Pandemic Treaty.

On 15 May 2024, Robert Fico was greeting people outside the House of Culture in Handlova, when a gunman fired five shots at him, hitting him in the abdomen, head and chest. The gunman, who was later identified as 71 year-old Juraj Cintula from Levice, was immediately detained by Fico’s security detail.

Both Defense Minister Robert Kaliňák and Interior Minister Matúš Šutaj Eštok called the shooting “politically motivated,” with Šutaj Eštok saying that “the suspect made the decision to do it shortly after the presidential election,” which ended just last month – on 6 April 2024.

Juraj Cintula frequented events organised by the pro-Russian paramilitary group, Slovenski branci (Slovakian Recruits), and praised the group and its anti-immigration stance multiple times on social media.

There is no evidence that Juraj Cintula was inspired to shoot Robert Fico because he was against the WHO Pandemic Treaty. In fact – none of those who made those suggestions or claims ever provided any evidence to back them up!

Fact #2 : Peter Kotlár Rejected WHO Pandemic Treaty Recently

I should also point out that Robert Fico did not recently “formally and publicly rejected” the WHO Pandemic Treaty, as some people have claimed or suggested.

It was Peter Kotlár, the Slovak Government Plenipotentiary for the COVID-19 pandemic, who formally and publicly rejected the “current version” of the WHO Pandemic Treaty on 10 May 2024.

Fact #3 : Robert Fico Did Not Outright Reject WHO Pandemic Treaty

Robert Fico is a politician, and like all politicians, they have a way of speaking in a way that offers a way out. So we have to examine carefully what he said.

Even though Robert Fico has said that he is against the WHO Pandemic Treaty months ago, he never actually rejected it outright. Here is the English translation of the video that people share of him “rejecting” the WHO Pandemic Treaty:

I also declare very clearly that SMER (Slovakian Social Democracy) will not support strengthening the powers of the World Health Organization at the expense of sovereign states in managing the fight against pandemics.

If you carefully read what he said, you will realise that Robert Fico never actually said that he was rejecting the WHO Pandemic Treaty. He only said that the SMER party will not support expanding the powers of the WHO, at the expense of the state’s right to tackle future pandemics.

In other words, it very much sounds like Robert Fico is okay with WHO gaining more powers, as long as Slovakia still retains the right to tackle future pandemics its own way. And that brings us to this next point…

Fact #4 : WHO Pandemic Treaty Does Not Affect Sovereignty!

If you download and read the zero draft, or any of the Pandemic Treaty’s draft agreements, you will realise that WHO Member States will continue to have the right to “determine and manage” their own healthcare initiatives, including how to tackle future pandemics!

In fact, the issue of sovereignty was addressed at least three times in the latest April 2024 draft:

… reaffirming the principle of sovereignty of States in addressing public health matters,

Recalling the sovereign right of States over their biological resources…

… the sovereign right of States to adopt, legislate and implement legislation, within their jurisdiction, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, the WHO Constitution and the principles of international law, and their sovereign rights over their biological resources;

Only those who did not read any of the draft agreements will remain unaware that the WHO Pandemic Treaty would not affect any country’s sovereignty!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Crime | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Will Pandemic Treaty Threaten US Sovereignty + Constitution?!

Leave a reply

Will the WHO Pandemic Treaty threaten US sovereignty and its constitutional rights?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : WHO Pandemic Treaty Will Threaten US Sovereignty!

People are sharing posts that claim or suggest that the WHO Pandemic Treaty will threaten US sovereignty and its constitutional rights!

Vigilant News / The Vigilant Fox :

US Senators Drop a Bombshell on the World Health Organization

The tide is turning.

In a shocking turn of events, all Republican senators (49), led by Senator Ron Johnson, have formally urged President Joe Biden to withdraw his support in expanding the World Health Organization’s (WHO) pandemic authority.

The letter, sent ahead of the 77th World Health Assembly scheduled from May 27 to June 1, 2024, in Geneva, Switzerland, argues that the WHO’s mishandling of the COVID-19 crisis underscores the need for major reforms rather than granting it more power.

The senators warn that such an expansion could threaten U.S. sovereignty and constitutional rights, emphasizing that any international agreement enhancing WHO’s authority should be treated as a treaty, requiring a two-thirds supermajority vote in the Senate for approval.

“THIS IS BIG NEWS!!!” wrote Dr. Meryl Nass on 𝕏.

“49 Senators (every Republican Senator) have told President Biden to withdraw US support for the Treaty and IHR amendments–but if the US does go forward, the treaty(s) will have to be submitted to the Senate for its advice and consent, requiring a 2/3 vote (which is an appropriate threat).”

Show less

These claims are based on a letter that Senator Ron Johnson and Senator Rick Scott sent to the Biden Administration:

Dear Mr. President:

Next month, during the Seventy-seventh World Health Assembly (WHA), your administration is expected to commit the United States to two international agreements that would strengthen the World Health Organization’s (WHO) authority to declare public health emergencies of international concern and expand the WHO’s authority over member states during such emergencies. This is unacceptable.

The WHO’s failure during the COVID-19 pandemic was as total as it was predictable and did lasting harm to our country. The United States cannot afford to ignore this latest WHO inability to perform its most basic function and must insist on comprehensive WHO reforms before even considering amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) or any new pandemic-related treaty that would increase WHO authority. We are deeply concerned that your administration continues to support these initiatives and strongly urge you to change course.

Article 55 of the IHR requires the text of any IHR amendment to be communicated to member states at least four months before the WHA at which they are to be considered. As the WHO has still not provided final amendments text to member states, we submit that IHR amendments may not be considered at next month’s WHA. Some of the over 300 proposals for amendments made by member states would substantially increase the WHO’s health emergency powers and constitute intolerable infringements upon U.S. sovereignty. As such, it was essential that the WHO abide by the four-month notice period to allow member states time to ensure that no traces of such proposals were included in a final amendment package for consideration by the WHA. Having failed to do so, amendments are not in order.

The WHO’s most recent publicly available draft of its new pandemic response treaty is dead on arrival. Instead of addressing the WHO’s well-documented shortcomings, the treaty focuses on mandated resource and technology transfers, shredding intellectual property rights, infringing free speech, and supercharging the WHO. Moving forward with a new pandemic preparedness and response treaty ignores the fact that we are still unsure of COVID-19’s origins because Beijing continues to block a legitimate independent investigation. We strongly urge you not to join any pandemic related treaty, covenant, or agreement being considered at the Seventy-seventh WHA. Should you ignore this advice, we state in the strongest possible terms that we consider any such agreement to be a treaty requiring the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate under Article II Section 2 of the Constitution.

In light of the high stakes for our country and our constitutional duty, we call upon you to (1) withdraw your administration’s support for the current IHR amendments and pandemic treaty negotiations, (2) shift your administration’s focus to comprehensive WHO reforms that address its persistent failures without expanding its authority, and (3) should you ignore these calls, submit any pandemic related agreement to the Senate for its advice and consent.

Sincerely,

Ron Johnson, United States Senator
Rick Scott, United States Senator

Show less

Truth : WHO Pandemic Treaty Will Not Threaten US Sovereignty!

This is yet another example of fake news about the WHO Pandemic Treaty, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : WHO Member States Want To Better Prepare For Future Pandemics

This claim is based on WHO member state discussions, which started in 2022, to amend existing International Health Regulations to strengthen the world’s preparedness against future global pandemics.

The International Health Regulations (IHR) were first adopted by member states in 1969, empowering the WHO to monitor global diseases. Those regulations have since been revised over the years, including in 2005 – after the SARS outbreak.

On 1 December 2021, world leaders agreed to kickstart the process to draft and negotiate an agreement or convention to “strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response“.

Fact #2 : Recommendations Came From WHO Member States

The proposed recommendations came from WHO member states, and not WHO itself. Among the more than 200 recommendations on how to better prepare for the next pandemic were:

sharing of data and genomic sequences on emerging viruses
a plan for equitable vaccine distribution
a ban on wildlife markets
incentives for reporting new viruses or variants

Fact #3 : Biden Administration Does Not Want A Binding Agreement

The European Union proposed that the changes be adopted in the form of a new treaty, a measure backed by Britain, Indonesia and Kenya, among other countries.

Despite what people are claiming on social media, the United States has opposed a binding treaty. India and Brazil are similarly reluctant about adopting a treaty.

The EU proposed the treaty and is its biggest backer, with support from Britain, Indonesia, Kenya and others.

The United States will take part in the talks but has opposed a binding treaty. India and Brazil have also voiced reservations.

Yet, all GOP senators are apparently insisting that the WHO Pandemic Treaty should be a binding treaty??? Do they want to maintain US sovereignty, or hand it over to the WHO???

Fact #4 : WHO Pandemic Treaty Is Unlikely To Be Binding

The zero draft of the proposed WHO agreement on preparing for future pandemics was released on 1 February 2023, and was the focus of the article by The Epoch Times.

If you download and read the zero draft, you will realise that the WHO is still calling it a “convention, agreement, or other international instruments“, clearly showing that member countries have not decided whether they want it to be binding or otherwise.

In the third point noted on the very first page of the draft, it was even pointed out that this is just a draft that is being used for “commencing negotiations“, and that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed“.

The INB (Intergovernmental Negotiating Body) further agreed that the zero draft would be considered at its fourth meeting as a basis for commencing negotiations at that meeting, it being understood that the zero draft will be without prejudice to the position of any delegation and following the principle that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”.

So it is ludicrous for anyone who read the first page of the zero draft to claim that the Biden Administration is planning to sign away US sovereignty to the WHO. Moreover, the Biden Administration does not want a binding agreement, while the GOP senators appear to be demanding for one!

More to the point – if the Biden Administration holds firm, the Pandemic Treaty will not be binding, as every country has to agree to these changes, or nothing changes.

Fact #5 : WHO Pandemic Treaty Does Not Affect Sovereignty!

In fact, the issue of sovereignty was addressed at least three times in the latest April 2024 draft:

… reaffirming the principle of sovereignty of States in addressing public health matters,

Recalling the sovereign right of States over their biological resources…

Only those who did not read any of the draft agreements will remain unaware that the WHO Pandemic Treaty would not affect any country’s sovereignty!

Fact #6 : WHO DG Dismissed Sovereignty Claim In May 2022

On May 17, 2022, WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus dismissed the claim that countries signing up for this new agreement would be giving up their sovereignty.

The accord process is led by Member States with their own Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (called INB), representing all regions of the world. The INB has now started a two-year process that includes global public hearings with all stakeholders. This represents the world’s opportunity to plan together, detect pathogens quicker, share data broadly and collectively respond more effectively to the next diseases X or known pathogens.

Unfortunately, there has been a small minority of groups making misleading statements and purposefully distorting facts.

I want to be crystal clear. WHO’s agenda is public, open and transparent. WHO stands strongly for individual rights. We passionately support everyone’s right to health and we will do everything we can to ensure that that right is realized.

The first ever World Health Assembly, which took place soon after the WHO Constitution entered into force in 1948, was a watershed event in global public health. And like the proposed pandemic preparedness accord, this did not mean WHO usurped nations’ sovereignty; in fact it strengthened countries’ ability to fight diseases together.

WHO is an expression of Member States’ own sovereignty and WHO is entirely what the sovereign 194 Member States want WHO to be.

Every year, these sovereign governments come together at the World Health Assembly to set the health agenda for the world. Individually we can’t beat pandemics; our best chance is together.

Please help us fight fake news – SHARE this article, and SUPPORT our work!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Health | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did CDC redact all 148 pages of its mRNA myocarditis study?!

Leave a reply

Did the CDC redact all 148 pages of its MOVING study on myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : CDC Redacted All 148 Pages Of mRNA Myocarditis Study!

People are claiming or suggesting that the CDC released its 148-page MOVING vaccine myocarditis study with 100% of its pages redacted!

The Vigilant Fox / Vigilant News : CDC Releases Paper on Myocarditis After COVID Vaccination, and EVERY WORD Is Redacted

“148 pages. The entire thing is redacted. What good does a study do if there’s nothing there?”

There’s obviously something very damning that they’re trying to hide.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr : The level of arrogance and contempt for the public in releasing a 100% redacted document is staggering. The CDC is thumbing their nose at the Freedom of Information Act.

Without transparency, there is no such thing as democracy. When I’m President, the CDC won’t get to decide what the public can see. Everything will be out in the open, and you won’t need a FOIA request to read any taxpayer-funded data.

Peter McCullough : One more example of all trust lost with @CDCgov
Agency releases vaccine myocarditis manuscript with all pages redacted so patient and scientific community is blocked from learning more about this deadly COVID-19 vaccine side effect.

The People’s Voice : CDC Redacts Every Single Word of 148-Page Study on Myocarditis After Covid Vaccination

The Gateway Pundit : CDC Finally Releases 148 Page Study on Myocarditis Following COVID Vaccine – And EVERY SINGLE WORD is Redacted!

Hans Mahncke : The CDC “released” a 148 page study on myocarditis after COVID-19 “vaccination” and every single page is completely redacted. This must be a new record.

Show less

Truth : CDC Did Not Redact Its mRNA Myocarditis Study!

This is yet another example of fake news created or promoted by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : It Was CDC Document, Not Study

Let me start by pointing out that the 148-page “study” was not a study, but a document released by the CDC to The Epoch Times after its Freedom of Information Act request for “information about the CDC’s MOVING project”.

Even Zachary Stieber of The Epoch Times, who posted the document (PDF), did not label it as a study. He stated that it was a FOIA-released document on the CDC’s long-term study on myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination:

Seeing some confusion about this document: It’s a CDC document sent to us in response to a Freedom of Information Act request and is fully redacted. The request asked for information about the CDC’s MOVING project.

There is no indication that the documents contained any actual CDC study. So why would anyone claim that this 148-page document was a CDC myocarditis study???

Fact #2 : Document Was Redacted Under (b)(5) Privilege

Whenever a US government agency redacts a document, it has to label the redaction so the recipient has an idea why the information was redacted.

I went through the entire 148-page CDC document, and noticed that they were all redacted under the (b)(5) privilege. The (b)(5) redaction applies only to “inter-agency” or “intra-agency” letters or memorandums that “would not be available by law” to anyone except those that are “in litigation” with the agencies.

Exemption 5, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5), applies to “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency,” which has been interpreted to incorporate civil litigation privileges.

(A privilege is a legal rule that protects communications within certain relationships from compelled disclosure in a court proceeding.)

In other words – there is nothing nefarious about the redactions, and they do not conceal any study.

The redacted pages were simply letters or memorandum that would not be made available by law, except to those who have sued the CDC, or the agency / agencies involved in those letters or memorandums.

They may, for example, contain personal information of the study participants, or other confidential information that the CDC is not permitted to release by law, except in cases of litigation.

Fact #3 : CDC Study Was Already Published Publicly!

There is also no indication that the CDC is attempting to cover up the findings of its MOVING (Myocarditis outcomes after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination) study. After all, the CDC already published its initial study in The Lancet, on 21 September 2022 – more than 1.5 years ago!

Even Zachary Stieber acknowledged that, and provided the same link to the MOVING study in The Lancet. He also pointed out that the CDC told The Epoch Times in January 2024 that it planned to submit another paper with updated findings for peer review.

The CDC plans to submit another paper on updated findings from the project for peer review, a spokesperson told us in January.

To be clear – the CDC published its first study more than 1.5 years ago on the results from its MOVING project on monitoring myocarditis outcomes after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

And when its updated MOVING study paper is peer-reviewed and published, it will also be available for public consumption. What exactly is being covered up here???

Fact #4 : Most mRNA Myocarditis Cases Recovered After 90 Days

According to the CDC study that was published in September 2022, its MOVING project collected data on 519 young people who developed myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

It found that most individuals recovered from myocarditis after 90 days, with normal or back-to-baseline:

troponin levels : 91%
echocardiograms : 94%
electrocardiograms : 77%
exercise stress testing : 90%
ambulatory rhythm monitoring : 90%

On top of that, the study concluded that “the quality of life measures were comparable to those in pre-pandemic and early pandemic populations of a similar age“.

Fact #5 : There Are Many Studies On Post-Vaccination Myocarditis

Claims that the CDC is attempting to hide its data by redacting documents is also not logical, because other organisations and research teams have already published multiple studies on post-vaccination myocarditis and/or pericarditis. For example:

Myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination and non-COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis (link) by Ryan Ruiyang Ling et. al.
Myocarditis and Pericarditis after COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines (PDF) by Public Health Ontario
Systematic review and meta-analysis of myocarditis and pericarditis in adolescents following COVID-19 BNT162b2 vaccination (link) by Patrick D.M.C. Katoto et. al.
SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and Myocarditis in a Nordic Cohort Study of 23 Million Residents (link) by Øystein Karlstad et. al.
Clinical outcomes of myocarditis after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in four Nordic countries: population based cohort study (link) by Anders Busby et. al.

Not only are these studies publicly available, they confirm CDC findings that post-vaccination myocarditis is rare, and most patients recovered within 90 days.

Fact #6 : COVID-19 Myocarditis Is More Common

What anti-vaccine activists may not tell you is that COVID-19 is known to cause myocarditis. In fact, the CDC reported in September 2021 that COVID-19 patients have nearly 16X the risk of developing myocarditis:

During March 2020–January 2021, patients with COVID-19 had nearly 16 times the risk for myocarditis compared with patients who did not have COVID-19, and risk varied by sex and age.

The findings in this report underscore the importance of implementing evidence-based COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination, to reduce the public health impact of COVID-19 and its associated complications.

The risk of dying from COVID-19 myocarditis (13.54% of cases) is also almost 5X higher than non-COVID-19 myocarditis (2.88% of cases), according to a 2022 German study.

If you are worried about dying from myocarditis, well, you should certainly want to avoid getting a COVID-19 infection!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Health | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Alex Soros Call For Donald Trump To Be Assassinated?!

Leave a reply

Did Alex Soros just publicly call for Donald Trump to be assassinated?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : Alex Soros Called For Donald Trump To Be Assassinated!

People are claiming or suggesting Alex Soros, who took over the Open Society Foundation from his billionaire father, George Soros, just publicly called for Donald Trump to be assassinated!

The People’s Voice : Alex Soros openly called for the assassination of Donald Trump on Sunday, warning that the chance of Trump becoming president is too risky for the globalists to ignore.

The Gateway Pundit : Alex Soros is currently facing scrutiny due to his recent tweet sharing a post from the far-left The Atlantic that features a bullet hole and a sum of $47. Many have raised concerns, asserting that this action may be a direct threat towards President Trump.

The Vigilant Fox : George Soros’ Son Amplifies Apparent Assassination Threat Against Donald Trump

Alex Soros is currently under fire for his recent tweet, which shared an article from The Atlantic, displaying a bullet hole alongside $47 in cash.

Laura Loomer : 🚨🚨 ANALYSIS OF THE ASSASSINATION THREAT AGAINST PRESIDENT TRUMP BY ALEX SOROS, SON OF DEMOCRAT PARTY MEGA DONOR GEORGE SOROS🚨🚨

. @AlexanderSoros is the son of @georgesoros .

His post tonight is a direct threat of violence against President Trump.

If you look closely at the photo in the @TheAtlantic article Alex Soros posted tonight, there is a call for assassination embedded in the pictures.

Not only does one of the pictures have a single bullet hole through glass, and not only is $47 of cash seen, but there’s messaging conveyed through the arrangement of the money.

While some of the bills are upside down with obfuscated writing, “States of America” is legible on one of the bills. On another bill, the finger is covering the face of the US President.

And on another bill, the words “silver certificate” are legible.

The $47 in cash is a reference to the 47th President of the United States Of America (Donald Trump).

Silver Bullet= simple guaranteed solution for a difficult problem =certificate

Alex Soros is conveying that “the silver bullet” for $47 is death and that a financial award will be paid to the person who does it.

This is a threat against the life of President Trump. The son of George Soros and @TheAtlantic are suggesting they will give an award to whoever kills 47 because the other legible text on the bottom bill with the President’s face on it says “will pay to the bearer on demand”.

Aka a paid hit man.

This assassination threat needs to be taken very seriously.

Show less

Truth : Alex Soros Did Not Call For Donald Trump To Be Assassinated!

This is yet another example of fake news circulating on X (formerly Twitter) and some websites, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Alex Soros Did Not Call For Trump Assassination

First, let me start by pointing out that Alex Soros never publicly called for Donald Trump to be assassinated. None of those claims are backed up by actual evidence.

There is ZERO evidence Alex Soros ever called for Donald Trump to be assassinated. Neither did The People’s Voice provided any evidence to back up its claim that Alex Soros said that “He’s too dangerous alive“.

Fact #2 : Alex Soros Only Shared Article On Crime + Inflation

The whole premise behind these claims of a Trump assassination threat is based on a single tweet by Alex Soros, who shared an article by The Atlantic on the leading theories behind the crime and inflation crises.

Alex Soros never mentioned Donald Trump in his tweet. Neither did he attribute the article to Donald Trump, or suggested that it was somehow linked to him.

Last year, the crime and inflation crises largely evaporated. So did the leading theories about what had caused them.

To be clear – Alexander Soros did not write the article posted by The Atlantic. Neither did he select the photos used for that article.

Last year, the crime and inflation crises largely evaporated. So did the leading theories about what had caused them. https://t.co/WguJQkj1PG

— Alex Soros (@AlexanderSoros) January 22, 2024

Fact #3 : Those Were Stock Images

Right-wing conspiracy theorists are claiming that the bullet hole referred to an assassination attempt, with the hand holding out 47 dollars is a reference to Donald Trump being the future 47th President of the United States.

That’s completely bonkers because the two photos used in The Atlantic article are stock photos from Getty Images that have no relevance to Donald Trump, or assassinations.

The bullet hole photo (source) was taken on 1 July 2023, by New York Daily News, at the scene of a double shooting of an MTA bus in The Bronx, New York. An appropriate photo for an article on crime, don’t you think?

The photo of a hand holding $47 was taken by George Marks in the 1950s (source). I’m sure you will agree that it is an appropriate photo for inflation, and has nothing to do with Donald Trump.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Politics | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did New Study Show Vaccines Causes Long COVID?!

Leave a reply

Did a new study just show that COVID-19 vaccines dramatically increase the risk of getting long COVID?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : Vaccines Greatly Increase Risk Of Long COVID!

People are sharing a video by The Epoch Times which claims or suggests that a new study just showed that COVID-19 vaccines dramatically increase the risk of getting long COVID!

The Epoch Times : COVID vaccines linked to “Long Covid”.

According to a new study just published on the NIH website: being vaccinated with 2 shots of the Covid vaccine dramatically increases a person’s chance of getting Long Covid.

Epoch TV : According to the CDC, Long Covid arises in people following a Covid-19 infection. And they claim that g getting vaccinated is a good method of preventing Long Covid. However, according to a new study just published on the NIH website: being vaccinated with 2 shots of the Covid vaccine, actually dramatically increases a person’s chance of getting Long Covid.

The Vigilant Fox : Here’s something you won’t hear from the TV.

The CDC told you that the COVID-19 “vaccine” would reduce the risk of so-called long COVID, but a study has found the exact opposite to be true.

When you crunch all the numbers, the study showed that a person who received two doses of the COVID-19 “vaccine” prior to actually getting infected with COVID was 2.32 times more likely to develop long COVID than an unvaccinated individual.

Is anyone surprised?

Show less

Truth : Vaccines Do Not Increase Risk Of Long COVID!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS created or promoted by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Arjun et. al. Study Was Published In 2022

Let me start by pointing out that the M. C. Arjun et. al. study mentioned in the Epoch Times videos is not new, as alleged.

The Arjun et. al. study is actually more than a year old, being published in PLOS ONE on 20 December 2022. You can read it in full here, and verify the date of publication.

Why would The Epoch Times dig up this study from 2022, when several newer studies showed that COVID-19 vaccines significantly reduced the risk of developing long COVID?

Fact #2 : Study Did Not Conclude Vaccines Increase Long COVID Risk

While the Arjun et. al. study results show that receiving two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine was a predictor of long COVID, the authors did not reach the conclusion, calling it “an observational paradox” that might be explained by vaccination patients more likely to survive COVID-19 infections.

This collider bias, they pointed out, was to be expected since their sample only included patients with access to hospital care. In fact, their study showed that patients who received hospital care were associated with a higher risk of developing long COVID symptoms!

An observational paradox in our study was that the participants who took two doses of COVID-19 vaccination had higher odds of developing Long COVID. It could be due to better survival in vaccinated individuals who may continue to exhibit symptoms of COVID-19 disease.

We could not find any interaction effect of COVID-19 vaccination and acute COVID-19 severity on causing Long COVID.

This association might have also arisen due to Collider bias [40]. The Collider bias might have operated in this case since the sample included only COVID-19 positive tested patients who accessed the hospital (healthcare workers included) making the sample inherently biased to derive such conclusions.

They also pointed out that other studies have shown that COVID-19 vaccination reduced long COVID risks. So why would anyone use their paper to draw a completely different conclusion?

Fact #3 : Other Factors Were Far More Significant

If you read the Arjun et. al. study, you will notice (see results) that it actually found that other factors were more strongly associated with a higher risk of developing long COVID:

suffering from 1 to 4 symptoms of COVID-19
suffering from 5 or more symptoms of COVID-19
developing severe or critical COVID-19
being admitted to a hospital

In other words – you are more likely to get long COVID, if you experience moderate or severe COVID-19. Which means the benefits of vaccination still outweighs the risks.

Fact #4 : Newer Studies Show Vaccines Greatly Reduce Long COVID Risk

Curiously, this sudden interest in the old the Arjun et. al. study came just after Scientific American posted its article on how several new studies show how getting multiple COVID-19 vaccine doses “dramatically lowers long COVID risk“.

A growing consensus is emerging that receiving multiple doses of the COVID vaccine before an initial infection can dramatically reduce the risk of long-term symptoms. Although the studies disagree on the exact amount of protection, they show a clear trend: the more shots in your arm before your first bout with COVID, the less likely you are to get long COVID.

One meta-analysis of 24 studies published in October, for example, found that people who’d had three doses of the COVID vaccine were 68.7 percent less likely to develop long COVID compared with those who were unvaccinated.

It is also a welcome departure from earlier studies, which suggested that vaccines provided only a modest defense against long COVID. In 2022 Marra’s team published a meta-analysis of six studies that found that a single dose of the COVID vaccine reduced the likelihood of long COVID by 30 percent. Now, that protection appears to be much greater.

A study published in November in the BMJ found that a single COVID vaccine dose reduced the risk of long COVID by 21 percent, two doses reduced it by 59 percent and three or more doses reduced it by 73 percent. Vaccine effectiveness clearly climbed with each successive dose.

That lines up with the findings of several new studies, which similarly show this ladderlike benefit. Marra’s October 2023 meta-analysis found that two doses reduced long COVID likelihood by 36.9 percent and three doses reduced it by 68.7 percent. And in a study published last year in the Journal of the American Medical Association, other researchers found that the prevalence of long COVID in health care workers dropped from 41.8 percent in unvaccinated participants to 30 percent in those with a single dose, 17.4 percent with two doses and 16 percent with three doses.

Show less

In short – newer studies show that COVID-19 vaccines not only protect against long COVID, the protection increases with each additional dose!

Therefore, if you are worried about long COVID, you should definitely be up-to-date on your COVID-19 vaccinations!

Fact #5 : Long COVID More Common In Unvaccinated People

According to Scientific American, the prevalence of long COVID is significantly greater in unvaccinated people, compared to people who had two or more doses of the COVID-19 vaccines.

Unvaccinated : 11%
Fully-vaccinated : 5%

Again, it clearly shows that COVID-19 vaccines have a significant protective effect against long COVID.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Health | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Slovakia PM Just Reject Signing WHO Pandemic Treaty?!

Leave a reply

Did Robert Fico – the new Prime Minister of Slovakia, just reject signing the WHO Pandemic Treaty?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : Slovakia PM Rejects Signing WHO Pandemic Treaty!

People are sharing a video clip, claiming or suggesting that the new Prime Minister of Slovakia, Robert Fico, just rejected signing the WHO Pandemic Treaty!

William Makis MD : Slovakia rejects signing the WHO Pandemic Treaty – Newly Elected Prime Minister Robert Fico speech that shocked the world:

Fico calls WHO Pandemic Treaty “nonsense invented by greedy pharma companies”

Michael P Senger : Slovakia PM Robert Fico confirms the nation will reject the WHO’s new Pandemic Treaty:

“It would transfer health powers from the national ministries of health of signatory countries to the WHO. The WHO would then acquire draconian decision-making powers.”

The Vigilant Fox : Slovakia Shocks the World: New Prime Minister Rejects Signing the WHO Pandemic Treaty

Prime Minister Robert Fico calls the WHO Pandemic Treaty “nonsense invented by greedy pharma companies.”

He also said, “One study after another confirms the scandalous consequences of mass vaccination with untested experimental vaccines.”

There is no other head of state in the world who has had the guts to say this publicly and so explicitly.

Slovakia is leading the world out of the dark ages of biological warfare by the pharmaceutical industry and globalist institutions like the WHO, in a move that is seen as completely unexpected.

This move will set off a chain reaction of events…

Show less

No Evidence Slovakia Rejected WHO Pandemic Treaty!

Let’s take a closer look at what this WHO Pandemic Treaty is all about, and why there’s no evidence Slovakia has actually rejected it!

Fact #1 : WHO Pandemic Treaty Has Not Been Finalised

Let me start by pointing out that the WHO Pandemic Treaty is still not finalised, with the deadline to conclude negotiations extended to May 2024. That is when the final WHO Pandemic Treaty is expected to be submitted to the 77th World Health Assembly for its approval.

Until then, there is no actual WHO Pandemic Treaty for Slovakia or any other country to accept or reject, which makes the delight of the anti-vaccine / conspiracy theory crowd… premature ejaculation at best.

Fact #2 : Robert Fico Did Not Outright Reject WHO Pandemic Treaty

Robert Fico is a politician, and like all politicians, they have a way of speaking in a way that offers a way out. So we have to examine carefully what he said.

Here is the English translation that can be seen in the video above:

In other words, it very much sounds like he’s okay with WHO gaining more powers, as long as Slovakia still retains the right to tackle future pandemics its own way. And that brings us to this next point…

Fact #4 : WHO Pandemic Treaty Does Not Affect Sovereignty!

If you download and read the zero draft, you will realise that it clearly states in Pages 10 and 11 that countries like Slovakia will continue to have the right to “determine and manage” their own healthcare initiatives, including how to tackle future pandemics.

3. Sovereignty – States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to determine and manage their approach to public health, notably pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems, pursuant to their own policies and legislation, provided that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to their peoples and other countries. Sovereignty also covers the rights of States over their biological resources.

Unless the new Prime Minister of Slovakia did not read the Zero Draft before making that comment, it is likely that Robert Fico was well aware that the WHO Pandemic Treaty will not affect Slovakia’s sovereignty. In other words – he wouldn’t be breaking his word, if Slovakia eventually ratifies the WHO Pandemic Treaty!

Fact #5 : WHO Pandemic Treaty Must Be Ratified By Member Countries

Even if the final WHO Pandemic Treaty is adopted in the 77th Health Assembly in May 2024, it must still be ratified by each individual country. This is clearly stated in Article 33(1) with my emphasis in bold:

The WHO CA+ shall be subject to ratification, acceptance, approval or accession by States, and to formal confirmation or accession by regional economic integration organizations. It shall be open for accession from the day after the date on which the WHO CA+ is closed for signature. Instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval, formal confirmation or accession shall be deposited with the Depositary.

Fact #6 : Robert Fico Only Said SMER Will Vote Against Treaty

Robert Fico never actually said that his government will reject the WHO Pandemic Treaty. In fact, his government lacks the power to ratify such treaties.

In the viral video, he even pointed out that it is the National Council that will ultimately decide on whether to ratify the WHO Pandemic Treat, which conveniently offers him (and the SMER party) a way out.

According to the Constitution of the Slovak Republic, the validity of such international agreements in favour of the World Health Organization requires the consent of the National Council of the Slovak Republic.

And I do not believe that the sovereign Slovak political parties will express such approval. The SMER party and its MPs certainly won’t.

In short – his statement that SMER and its MPs won’t agree to the WHO Pandemic Treaty is rather “toothless”, as they only won 42 seats (28%) out of 150 seats in the National Council. As long as a majority of Slovak MPs vote to ratify the treaty, it will be adopted regardless of what SMER or Robert Fico says.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Health | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Is Italian Health Minister under investigation for vaccine murder?!

Leave a reply

Is Italian Health Minister Roberto Speranza under investigation for murder for concealing COVID-19 vaccine deaths?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : Italian Health Minister Under Investigation For Vaccine Murder!

People are sharing an article (archive) by Vigilant News Network, claiming / suggesting that Italian Health Minister Roberto Speranza is under investigation for murder for concealing COVID-19 vaccine deaths!

Italian Health Minister Under Investigation for Murder for Concealing COVID-19 Vaccine Deaths

“He knew the shots were killing people and gave orders to local health authorities to conceal deaths and serious side effects.”

“Former Italian Health Minister Roberto Speranza is under investigation for homicide after emails reveal that from the very start of the vaccinations, he knew the shots were killing people and gave orders to local health authorities to conceal deaths and serious side effects in order to reassure Italian citizens of their safety and to not jeopardize the vaccination campaign,” reported InfoWars contributor Greg Reese in viral X post shared by Alex Jones.

These staggering accusations were been reported on by both a German and Italian news network.

The Rome Public Prosecutor’s office is investigating Roberto Speranza, the Italian government’s Health Minister, during the time of COVID measures. He was responsible for the vaccination campaign. The investigations are the result of complaints related to the so-called AIFA emails from the Italian Medicines Agency. The former director of AIFA, Nicola Magrini, is also under investigation.

The publication of these internal emails revealed that they had been aware of the dangers of the COVID vaccination from the start. The accusation is that the responsible minister and the head of the drug authority knowingly and deliberately exposed the unsuspecting Italian population to this risk.

Show less

No Evidence Italian Health Minister Under Investigation For Vaccine Murder!

Let’s take a closer look at the claims, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Roberto Speranza Is Former Italian Health Minister

First, I should just point out that Roberto Speranza is the former Italian Health Minister, who served from 5 September 2019 to 22 October 2022.

The current Italian Health Minister is Orazio Schillaci, who has been serving in that capacity from 22 October 2022.

Fact #2 : Murder Investigation Claims Started In November

I should also point out that the viral claims of a Roberto Speranza murder investigation over COVID-19 vaccines originated in November 2023.

The Italian TV show ‘Fuori dal Coro‘ covered it, and so did the conservative Italian newspaper, La Verità. It was only some three weeks later that the story was picked up by English websites and social media users, including Infowars.

Fact #3 : No Evidence Of Roberto Speranza Murder Investigation

The Vigilant News Network article offered no actual evidence that former Italian Health Minister Roberto Speranza is being investigated for murder for concealing COVID-19 deaths. It appears to be referring to what was “reported” by Greg Reese, an Infowars contributor.

In any case, these claims appear to originate from a photo of a document which allegedly shows Roberto Speranza and Nicola Magrini (Director-General of AIFA, the Italian Medicines Agency) being added to the registry of suspects at the Rome prosecutor’s office.

Neither the photo, nor the purported document, have been verified to be genuine. But even if the document was genuine, it doesn’t mean that the Rome prosecutor’s office has decided to prosecute Speranza or Magrini, or that an official investigation had actually started.

Fact #4 : Rome Prosecutor Appears To Decline Investigation

According to La Repubblica (archive) – a moderate Italian daily outlet, the “prosecutor’s office therefore decided not to proceed with the investigation.”

If that La Repubblica news report is correct, that means the Rome prosecutor’s office had already decided not to investigate Roberto Speranza and Nicola Magrini in November 2023, if not earlier.

If that is the case, why would anyone still claim that Roberto Speranza is being investigated for murder over the COVID-19 vaccines?

Fact #5 : Complaints Were Forwarded With Dismissal Request

On November 23, 2023, Rai News (archive) – website of Italy’s national public broadcaster, published a story which quoted Roberto Speranza’s attorney Danilo Leva as saying that those complaints about the COVID-19 vaccines had been “forwarded to the competent Court of Ministers with a simultaneous request for dismissal“.

With regard to the press reports relating to the registration of the former minister Roberto Speranza in the register of suspects at the Rome prosecutor’s office – we read in the note – following some complaints regarding vaccines, it is specified that the documents were forwarded to competent court of ministers with simultaneous request for dismissal.

In other words, it appears that the Rome prosecutor’s office received some complaints about the COVID-19 vaccines, declined to investigate, and summarily forwarded them to the Court of Ministers with a request to dismiss them.

The Court of Ministers will have to make a formal decision on whether to dismiss the complaints, typically within 90 days. But from what we have seen so far – there does not appear to be any murder investigation involving the former Italian Health Minister Roberto Speranza, or AIFA Director General Nicola Magrini.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Science | Tech ARP

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!