Tag Archives: Epoch Times

Is Biden Admin signing over US sovereignty to WHO?!

Is the Biden Administration negotiating to sign over US sovereignty to the World Health Organization (WHO)?!

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

Claim : Biden Admin Is Going To Sign Over US Sovereignty To WHO!

People are sharing an article by The Epoch Times, which claims that the Biden Administration is negotiating a deal to give WHO authority over US pandemic policies!

Here is an excerpt of the very long article, so please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

The Biden administration is preparing to sign up the United States to a “legally binding” accord with the World Health Organization (WHO) that would give the Geneva-based United Nations health agency the authority to dictate America’s policies during a pandemic.

Despite widespread criticism of the WHO’s response to the COVID pandemic, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra joined with WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus in September 2022 to announce “the U.S.-WHO Strategic Dialogue.” Together, they developed a “platform to maximize the longstanding U.S.–WHO partnership, and to protect and promote the health of all people around the globe, including the American people.”

These discussions and others spawned the “zero draft” (pdf) of a pandemic treaty, published on Feb. 1, which now seeks ratification by all 194 WHO member states. A meeting of the WHO’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body is scheduled for Feb. 27 to work out the final terms, which members will then sign.

Written under the banner of “the world together equitably,” the zero draft grants the WHO the power to declare and manage a global pandemic emergency. Once a health emergency is declared, all signatories, including the United States, would submit to the authority of the WHO regarding treatments, government regulations such as lockdowns and vaccine mandates, global supply chains, and monitoring and surveillance of populations.

Centralized Pandemic Response

“They want to see a centralized, vaccine-and-medication-based response, and a very restrictive response in terms of controlling populations,” David Bell, a public health physician and former WHO staffer specializing in epidemic policy, told The Epoch Times. “They get to decide what is a health emergency, and they are putting in place a surveillance mechanism that will ensure that there are potential emergencies to declare.”

The WHO pandemic treaty is part of a two-track effort, coinciding with an initiative by the World Health Assembly to create new global pandemic regulations that would also supersede the laws of member states. The World Health Assembly is the rule-making body of the WHO, comprised of representatives from the member states.

“Both [initiatives] are fatally dangerous,” Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, told The Epoch Times. “Either one or both would set up a worldwide medical police state under the control of the WHO, and in particular WHO Director-General Tedros.

“If either one or both of these go through, Tedros or his successor will be able to issue orders that will go all the way down the pipe to your primary care physicians.”

Physician Meryl Nass told The Epoch Times: “If these rules go through as currently drafted, I, as a doctor, will be told what I am allowed to give a patient and what I am prohibited from giving a patient, whenever the WHO declares a public health emergency. So they can tell you you’re getting remdesivir, but you can’t have hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. What they’re also saying is they believe in equity, which means everybody in the world gets vaccinated, whether or not you need it, whether or not you’re already immune.”

Regarding medical treatments, the accord would require member nations to “monitor and regulate against substandard and falsified pandemic-related products.” Based on previous WHO and Biden administration policy, this would likely include forcing populations to take newly developed vaccines, while preventing doctors from prescribing nonvaccine treatments or medicines.

Circumventing Senate, Constitution?

A key question surrounding the accord is whether the Biden administration can bind the United States to treaties and agreements without Senate consent, which is required under the Constitution. The zero draft concedes that, per international law, treaties between countries must be ratified by national legislatures, thus respecting the right of their citizens to consent.

However, the draft also includes a clause that the accord will go into effect on a “provisional” basis as soon as it’s signed by delegates to the WHO and would, therefore, be legally binding on members without being ratified by legislatures.

“Whoever drafted this clause knew as much about U.S. constitutional law and international law as I did, and deliberately drafted it to circumvent the power of the Senate to give its advice and consent to treaties, to provisionally bring it into force immediately upon signature,” Boyle said. In addition, “the Biden administration will take the position that this is an international executive agreement that the president can conclude of his own accord without approval by Congress and is binding on the United States of America, including all state and local democratically elected officials, governors, attorney generals, and health officials.”

There are several U.S. Supreme Court decisions that may support the Biden administration’s position. They include State of Missouri v. Holland, in which the Supreme Court ruled that treaties supersede state laws, while other decisions, such as United States v. Belmont, ruled that executive agreements without Senate consent can be legally binding, with the force of treaties.

There are parallels between the WHO pandemic accord and a recent Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) global tax agreement, which the Biden administration signed on to, although Republicans say has “no path forward” to legislative approval. In the OECD agreement, punitive terms are built in that allow foreign countries to punish American companies if the deal isn’t ratified by the United States.

As with the OECD tax agreement, administration officials are attempting to appeal to international organizations to impose policies that have been rejected by America’s voters. Under the U.S. Constitution, health care doesn’t fall under the authority of the federal government; it’s the domain of the states. The Biden administration found this to be an unwelcome impediment to its attempts to impose vaccine and mask mandates on Americans when courts ruled that federal agencies didn’t have the authority to do so.

“To circumvent that, they went to the WHO, for either the regulations or the treaty, to get around domestic opposition,” Boyle said.

According to the zero draft, signatories would agree to “strengthen the capacity and performance of national regulatory authorities and increase the harmonization of regulatory requirements at the international and regional level.” They will also implement a “whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach at the national level” that will include national governments, local governments, and private companies.

The zero draft stated that the new accord is necessary because of “the catastrophic failure of the international community in showing solidarity and equity in response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.”

A report from the WHO’s Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response (pdf) characterized the WHO’s performance as a “toxic cocktail” of bad decisions. Co-Chair Ellen Johnson Sirleaf told the BBC it was due to “a myriad of failures, gaps, and delays.” The solutions proposed by that report, however, didn’t suggest more local autonomy or diversified decision-making, but rather greater centralization, more power, and more money for the WHO.

Show less

Truth : Biden Admin Is NOT Going To Sign Over US Sovereignty To WHO!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS about the Biden Administration, and the WHO, 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 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.

With so many member countries involved, securing agreement is likely to be tricky.

Fact #4 : Future WHO Agreement May Not 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.

Fact #5 : Zero Draft Specifically Addressed Sovereignty

The zero draft of the proposed WHO agreement on preparing for future pandemics even addresses the issue of national sovereignty on Article 4 (3):

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.

Anyone who read the zero draft can clearly see that even the “draft” has clarified that no country is signing over its national sovereignty to the WHO.

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.

Fact #6 : WHO Treaty Cannot Bypass US Senate Ratification

The claim that the Biden Administration is using the WHO treaty to bypass US senate ratification is nonsense.

The US Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to approve, by a two-thirds vote or more, all international treaties (binding agreements) negotiated by the executive branch.

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;

In other words, the Biden Administration can negotiate any agreement it wants with other WHO member countries, but it must still seek ratification by the two-thirds of the US Senate.

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.

Support Tech ARP!

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

Kaden Clymer : 6-Foot Blood Clot NOT From Vaccine!

Leave a reply

Did high school athlete Kaden Clymer get a career-ending 6 foot long blood clot in his leg from the COVID-19 vaccine?!

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

Claim : Kaden Clymer Got 6-Foot Blood Clot From Vaccine!

Anti-vaccination activists, including the Gateway Pundit and Epoch Times websites, are promoting the story about a high school athlete called Kaden Clymer who was forced to end his football career after doctors found a 6 foot long clot in his leg.

They are claiming or suggesting that the super-long blood clot came from COVID-19 vaccines :

Think the stories of “unusual” blood clots is just wild “conspiracy theories”? Most of these examples die, but meet Kaden Clymer, a high school football player who, although his football playing days are over, lived through it

This is a heartbreaking story which begs a very big question. Could you please follow up w/ Kaden & ask him if he received the covid injection, when, which, batch/lot; whether his drs are looking into that & if he has filed a VAERS report? We need brave journalists to ‘go there’

My friend and colleague Meredith McBride, M.D., is a vascular surgeon. In her long and successful career in medicine she has never seen anything like this before. This is new, Dr. McBride posted on social media. “This is not normal.”

We know from a new peer-reviewed article that 94 percent of the blood of people who had COVID-19 vaccines and a subsequent illness displayed unusual clotting formations. You can read that science article here. Or read my Epoch Times article, with Dr. Joe Wang, about that article here.

Truth : Kaden Clymer Did Not Get Blood Clot From Vaccine!

It’s becoming a tradition for anti-vaccination activists to immediately blame all athlete deaths or injuries on the COVID-19 vaccine.

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS created and propagated by anti-vaccination activists, and here are the reasons why… and the current facts that we know so far.

Fact #1 : Kaden Clymer Has Inferior Vena Cava Atresia

On August 1, 2022, Kaden Clymer had severe pain in his back and legs. When his father took him to the Toledo Children’s Hospital emergency room, his calves were swollen by about 4 inches.

Doctors confirmed that he had blood clots in both legs, and surgeons later removed about 6 feet of blood clots from both of his legs.

It was then that doctors confirmed that Kaden was suffering from a rare condition called Inferior Vena Cava Atresia (IVCA) – in which there is a complete or partial absence of the inferior vena cava blood vessel.

It would be truly shocking if any vascular surgeon never heard of IVCA, and actually thinks “this is new“. Such surgeons would do well to read about this 2015 IVCA case, for example.

Fact #2 : Inferior Vena Cava Atresia Causes Blood Clots

While not directly life-threatening, IVCA greatly increases the risk of developing blood clots that cause intense pain and swelling of the legs. These blood clots can also cause pulmonary embolism, if pieces break off and travel to the lungs.

That is why Kaden Clymer now receives daily injections of blood thinners, as his mother shared:

He gets shots in his stomach every day, twice a day, which is not something fun. I don’t enjoy giving them to him and I know he doesn’t like getting them. Yet, he does it with a smile and we appreciate that. It could’ve been so much worse.

In short, his blood clots had NOTHING to do with the COVID-19 vaccine.

Fact #3 : Kaden Clymer Was Not Vaccinated + Never Had COVID-19

Kaden’s sister, McKayla, spoke out against those claims, stating that he was never vaccinated against COVID-19, and he never contracted COVID-19.

She also confirmed that Kaden was born without the Inferior Vena Cava (IVC), and that was the cause of his blood clots :

Kaden clymer is my brother. He was never vaccinated or had Covid. You can’t argue with facts. Kaden was born without his ivc vein which caused his bloodclots.

Fact #4 : Gateway Pundit + Epoch Times Spread Fake News

Both the Gateway Pundit and Epoch Times are notorious for creating and spreading FAKE NEWS about COVID-19 and vaccines.

Everything they post should be considered FALSE, until proven otherwise. Here are some of their articles that I debunked in the past :

Fact #5 : COVID-19 Vaccines Proven Safe + Effective

COVID-19 vaccines underwent massive clinical trials, and were only approved after they were proven to be safe and effective.

In addition, they were constantly monitored after they received their approvals, which picked up rare side effects after they were administered to billions of people.

Anti-vaccination activists have often claimed that those who received the vaccine would die. Yet, the opposite was true – the vaccines are not only safe, they are effective in protecting people from getting hospitalised or dying from COVID-19.

Even prominent antivaxxer Steve Kirsch is healthy and well, despite being fully-vaccinated against COVID-19!

Fact #6 : Claims Of Athletes Dying From COVID-19 Vaccine Proven False

This is yet another example of anti-vaccination activists abusing athlete deaths / injuries to create and propagate FAKE NEWS about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.

So far, claims of athlete deaths / injuries due to the COVID-19 vaccine have been proven false at every instance.

Will these anti-vaccination activists apologise for lying to you? Nope! They will just move on to the next athlete tragedy…

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.

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!

Can Bak Kut Teh Herbal Soup Cause Liver Damage?!

Leave a reply

Can a herbal soup like Bak Kut Teh cause liver damage, as alleged by an Australian study?!

Take a look at what the study showed, and what the facts really are!

Study : Bak Kut Teh Herbal Soup Can Cause Liver Damage!

Australian scientists recently caused a ruckus when their study alleged that the Asian herbal soup called Bak Kut Teh can cause liver damage.

The media excitedly jumped on it, with alarming titles to draw attention (and drive traffic?) :

ABC : Bak kut teh herbal soup may cause liver damage and interact with medication, study finds

Medical Xpress : Popular Malaysian soup can cause liver damage when mixed with medication

Adelaide Now : Adelaide forensic expert issues safety warning over liver failure soup

The Epoch Times : University Professor Warns of Risks Caused by Popular Chinese Soup

Says : Australian Researchers Find Bak Kut Teh Can Cause Liver Damage When Taken With Medicine

Truth : Study Does Not Show Bak Kut Teh Causing Liver Damage!

Despite the alarming titles, there is no need to panic… because the study does NOT show the herbal soup causing any liver damage.

Here is a quick summary for those who just need to know the basics :

It was a laboratory study, which means the results may not translate into actual effect in a living human being.
What we eat is digested and broken down, so our body absorbs the nutrients and not the actual food. Hence, the study does not accurately replicate what happens in our body.
They didn’t test bak kut teh… they only tested four soup bases used to make bak kut teh.
The soup concentrations were unspecified, so it is unknown if the doses are equivalent to what our livers are subjected to after a meal.
They did not test drug interactions, so it is amazing how so many media outlets claimed that the study showed that bak kut teh may interact with medication!

In short, this study does not show that bak kut teh causes liver damage. Neither does it show bak kut teh causing drug interactions of any kind.

I understand Professor Byard’s concerns about the “unknown” contents of these soup base preparations. Certain traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) have been associated with acute liver failure.

However, that isn’t so much a “bak kut teh” problem, but rather a problem with traditional Chinese medicine or Chinese herbal medicine.

For those who are interested in the details, please scroll down to the next section.

Why Study Does Not Show Bak Kut Teh Causing Liver Damage

Let’s start with the basics, and work our way through the Australian study.

Fact #1 : Study Was Conducted By Australian Scientists

First, the study was conducted by University of Adelaide and University of Melbourne scientists – Susan M. Britza, Rachael Farrington, Ian F. Musgrave, Craig Aboltins and Roger W. Byard.

It was published in the journal Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, and you can read the study here.

Fact #2 : It Was A Laboratory Study

It is important to note that this was an in-vitro study – a laboratory study, not a clinical study.

In-vitro studies are important, but they cannot be extrapolated to make any conclusion about what actually happens in a human body.

For example, in-vitro studies have shown that hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin have an inhibitory effect on the SARS-CoV-2 virus; but once tested in actual human beings – they were shown to have no clinical benefit.

In other words – what happens in a test tube, may not happen in an actual human being.

Fact #3 : What We Eat Is Not What Our Body Absorbs

There is one big problem with doing in-vitro tests on food – what we eat is not what our body absorbs.

Food gets digested, and broken down into nutrients that are absorbed in our intestines. Even simple sugar gets broken down into glucose, fructose, galactose, maltose, sucrose, etc.

So soaking liver cells in a bak kut teh soup would most definitely not reflect what our liver cells actually experience after a bak kut teh meal.

In short, this study does not replicate what happens in our liver when we eat bak kut teh.

Fact #4 : There Are Many Types Of Bak Kut Teh

Bak Kut Teh is not so much a “herbal soup” as it is a pork soup dish. The name “bak kut teh” literally means “meat bone tea” in the Hokkien dialect, but there is no tea in it.

It is usually just a dish of pork ribs simmered for hours in a broth of common herbs and spices like star anise, cinnamon, cloves, dong quai, fennel seeds and garlic.

But there are many variants of bak kut teh. In Malaysia and Singapore where bak kut teh is most popular, there are at least four main “styles” :

Teochew style : light in colour, with more pepper and garlic
Hokkien style : darker and more fragrant, thanks to a variety of herbs and soy sauce
Cantonese style : includes medicinal herbs for a stronger flavoured soup
Klang style : a thick and sticky gravy, like a stew

On top of that, there are also chicken and beef versions of bak kut teh. Muslims, for example, love the chicken version, which is colloquially called chi kut teh, chi being short for chicken.

And the Malaysian town of Melaka serves a delicious beef bak kut teh, which is based on a unique black pepper soup with red fermented bean curd.

Fact #5 : They Tested Four Soup Bases

The Australian team were somewhat aware of the wide variety of bak kut teh soup bases. They tested four varieties :

Formulation 1 : Dried hawthorn
Formulation 2 : Goji berries, ginseng, bark, and dried mushrooms
Formulation 3 : Polygonatum odoratum, ligusticum chuanxiong, codonopsis pilosula, cinnamomum cassia, angelica sinensis, illicium verum, piper nigrum, and Eugenia caryophyllata
Formulation 4 : Spices, pepper and salt

It is important to note that instead of preparing bak kut teh like you and I would – with meat, vegetables, bean curd slices, etc., the researchers tested soups that were created only using the ingredients listed above.

In short, they did not actually test bak kut teh… they tested soups made from the ingredients above.

Fact #6 : Soup Concentration Was Unspecified

To prepare the four soups for testing, researchers added a sachet of each soup mix to boiling water (of unspecified quantity) for 5 minutes.

The concentration of each soup base was unspecified. They only listed the dilution factor. As such, it is quite impossible to draw any sort of conclusion from the results.

As any toxicologist will tell you – the dose makes the poison. This is why the concentration of any substance is critical in any study. Even water and oxygen – essential to human life to be sure – is toxic at high doses.

Fact #7 : Soups Were Prepared In 5 Minutes

It is important to point out that the soups the researchers used were prepared in just 5 minutes. Bak kut teh is usually prepared by simmering the meat in the soup for hours.

It would have been a good idea to prepare the soup bases like real bak kut teh soup, because boiling the soup for several hours could potentially break down toxins present in its ingredients.

In fact, it would have been better for the researchers to just buy real bak kut teh, instead of resorting to their soup bases prepared in just 5 minutes.

Fact #8 : They Tested Using HepG2 Liver Cancer Cells

It is also important to note that the researchers tested the soup bases by adding them to HepG2 cell cultures, not normal liver cells.

HepG2 is a hepatoblastoma (a type of liver cancer) cell line that was obtained from a 15 year-old boy suffering from liver cancer in 1975.

Now, there is nothing wrong with that – HepG2 is commonly used to test cytotoxicity of substances. Still, it must still be pointed out that HepG2 is not the same thing as normal liver cells.

In-vitro studies based on these cells should not be used to draw any conclusion, only used to drive further research.

Differences	HepG2 Cells	Normal Liver Cells
Cell Size	12-19 µm	15 µm
Cell Shape	Polygonal	Cube
Nuclei	Single large nuclei with 3-7 nucleoli	Two or more nuclei
Mitochondrial Content	Low	High
Smooth Endoplasmic Reticulum	Poorly Developed	High
No. of Chromosomes	50-60	46
DNA Content	7.5 pg	~6 pg
Genome Stability	Unstable	Stable

Fact #9 : Spices, Pepper + Salt Did Worst In Their Tests

What I found most interesting in their results was the fact that the most “toxic” soup was Formulation 4, which consisted of nothing more than spices, pepper and salt.

Formulation 4 showed the most significant toxicity to the HepG2 cell line with approximately 83% cell death before dilution (p < 0.0001) and persistent toxicity even with dilution 1:10 (15% ± 3.7, p = 0.023) and 1:1000 (14% ± 3.8, p = 0.024)

Well, that’s gonna worry fans of Kentucky Fried Chicken, which boasts 11 herbs and spices, including pepper and salt!

Jokes aside, this result suggest that common spices, pepper and salt are more toxic to HepG2 liver cells than the more fanciful bak kut teh preparations!

Fact #10 : They Did Not Test Drug Interactions

I’m not sure how this study touches on drug interaction, since they didn’t test the soup bases with common hepatotoxic drugs like paracetamol to see if there is a synergistic effect.

No matter how you slice and dice this study’s results, they tell us nothing about any possible interaction with other herbs / drugs.

Yet so many media outlets made the startling claim that the study showed that bak kut teh may interact with medication! Nowhere in the study does it say that!

It seems obvious that most of these journalists did not even bother to read the study, and only paraphrased what other people were writing.

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.

Support Tech ARP!

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

Pfizer Hired 1,800 To Process 158K Vaccine Reports! Should We Worry?

Leave a reply

A Pfizer document showed that they hired 600 to 1,800 extra staff to process over 158,000 vaccine adverse event reports!

Find out if it’s really something to worry about!

Pfizer Hired 600 To 1,800 Staff To Process 158K Vaccine Reports?

The Epoch Times joined Children’s Health Defense (CHD) in “revisiting” the bombshell Pfizer document with the infamous 9 pages of adverse events.

This time, they claim to have discovered that Pfizer hired 600 to 1,800 extra full-time employees just to process 158,000 vaccine adverse event reports!

It’s a long post, so feel free to skip to the next section for the truth…

Pfizer Hired 600 Employees Due To ‘Large Increase of Adverse Event Reports’

Pfizer hired 600 employees in the months after its COVID-19 vaccine was authorized in the United States due to the “large increase” of reports of side effects linked to the vaccine, according to a document prepared by the company.

Pfizer has “taken a multiple actions to help alleviate the large increase of adverse event reports,” according to the document. “This includes significant technology enhancements, and process and workflow solutions, as well as increasing the number of data entry and case processing colleagues.”

At the time when the document—from the first quarter of 2021—was sent to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Pfizer had onboarded about 600 extra full-time workers to deal with the jump.

“More are joining each month with an expected total of more than 1,800 additional resources by the end of June 2021,” Pfizer said.

The document was titled a “cumulative analysis of post-authorization adverse event reports” of Pfizer’s vaccine received through Feb. 28, 2021. It was approved by the FDA on April 30, 2021.

The document was not made public until the Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency sued the FDA after the agency claimed it needed decades to produce all the documents relating to the emergency use authorization granted to the company for the vaccine.

Under an agreement reached in February, the FDA must produce a certain number of pages each month.

The analysis of adverse event reports was previously disclosed to the health transparency group, but certain portions were redacted (pdf), including the number of workers Pfizer onboarded to deal with the jump in adverse event reports.

“We asked that the redactions on page 6 of this report be lifted and the FDA agreed without providing an explanation,” Aaron Siri, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs, told The Epoch Times in an email.

After the document was produced, the FDA determined that the three redactions on that page “could be lifted,” an FDA spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.

The redactions had been made under (b) (4) of the Freedom of Information Act, which lets agencies “withhold trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person which is privileged or confidential.”

The unredacted version of the document also now shows that approximately 126 million doses of Pfizer were shipped around the world since the company received the first clearance, from U.S. regulators, on Dec. 1, 2020. The shipments took place through Feb. 28, 2021.

It was unclear how many of those doses had been administered as of that date.

Pfizer did not respond to emailed questions, including how many workers it has onboarded to deal with adverse events.

The companies that manufacture the other two COVID-19 vaccines that U.S. regulators have cleared, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson, did not respond when asked if they have seen an increase in adverse events and if they have hired more employees to deal with reports.

The number of post-vaccination adverse event reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, jointly run by the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has spiked since the vaccines were first cleared.

Problems linked to the vaccines include heart inflammation, blood clotting, and severe allergic shock.

Federal officials say the vaccines’ benefits outweigh the risks, but some experts are increasingly questioning that assertion, particularly for certain populations.

Show less

Pfizer Hired 1,800 To Process 158K Vaccine Reports! Should We Worry?

The Epoch Times tries to frame their coverage as somewhat neutral, but it’s not only somewhat inaccurate, it’s also misleading.

Let’s take a look at the facts…

Fact #1 : FDA Released Document On 17 November 2021

The Epoch Times claimed that the “document was not made public until the Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency sued the FDA“.

That’s factually untrue, as the FDA released that particular document on 17 November 2021, in the very first batch of documents released to PHMPT.

Notably, this document was amongst five batches of documents the FDA released to the PHMPT before the court ruling.

Fact #2 : FDA Could Have Delivered Documents Within 6 Years

All FOIA requests to the FDA are processed by their Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) – a small department with just ten employees, of which only seven people are trained to process FOIA requests.

The FDA has to process 400 other pending requests, not just the PHMPT. So it has a long-standing policy to process FOIA requests in 500-page blocks.

The FDA asked PHMPT to narrow their request by specifying records they don’t require, so they can focus on processing the important documents they need.

The PHMPT, however, insisted that the FDA process and deliver ALL documents related to the approval of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine – some 329,000 pages!

Their ridiculous request, which included irrelevant documents, would therefore take 75 years IF one assumes that the FDA is capable of only 500 pages a month.

But see – the FDA actually said that they process in blocks of 500 pages, not 500 pages a month. In fact, they were able to deliver 12,000 pages in January 2022 alone.

On average, they were processing close to 5,000 pages per month for the PHMPT, which would mean that they could have finished delivering all 329,000 pages in 5.5 years.

Fact #3 : There Were Only Three New Pieces Of Information

Next, I should point out that the FDA only redacted three pieces of information in that “bombshell” Pfizer document (highlighted in red) :

To date, Pfizer has onboarded approximately 600 additional full time employees (FTEs).
More are joining each month with an expected total of more than 1,800 additional resources by the end of June 2021.
It is estimated that approximately 126,212,580 doses of BNT162b2 were shipped worldwide from the receipt of the first temporary authorisation for emergency supply on 01 December 2020 through 28 February 2021.

That’s it. Nothing else was redacted in the original release. Not even the 9 pages of 1,291 adverse events of special interest.

Even without the actual figures, you can already tell from the original (redacted) document that Pfizer was increasing manpower to cope with an unexpected amount of adverse event reports.

Fact #4 : Nothing Shocking Hiring 1800 Extra Employees

The Epoch Times seem to think that it’s shocking that Pfizer hired 600 to 1800 extra employees to process the adverse event reports. What exactly is shocking about that?

As Pfizer explained in Page 6, they increased the number of full-time employees to ensure that all adverse events would be expeditiously processed.

What would be really shocking is if Pfizer tried to delay processing these adverse event reports, by refusing to hire more people.

I’m shocked that The Epoch Times was shocked that Pfizer would do the right thing by increasing manpower to expeditiously process these adverse event reports.

Would the CHD really prefer that Pfizer not increase manpower, and slow-walk the adverse event reports? That would be shocking indeed…

Fact #5 : More Shots, More Publicity = More Adverse Events

The Epoch Times stated that adverse event reports to VAERS “spiked since the vaccines were first cleared“, demonstrating their shocking ignorance after more than a year of public vaccinations.

The number of reported adverse events increases with the number of vaccine doses administered, and with the amount of publicity about potential side effects.

In fact, the adverse event reports are far more likely to be exaggerated, due to the overwhelming amount of public misinformation on the Internet.

In Page 5 of the document, Pfizer themselves pointed out that “the spontaneous reporting system yields reporting proportions not incidence rate“, and is influenced by “awareness” and “litigation“.

In other words, the high number of adverse event reports is likely due to the overwhelming amount of trepidation (and potentially abuse) driven by public misinformation.

Due to greater “awareness”, more people are reporting adverse events to open reporting systems like VAERS and Yellow Card, even if they are unrelated to the vaccine.

Fact #6 : 42,000 Adverse Event Reports Are Not Shocking

While Pfizer may have been caught off-guard by the number of reported adverse events, having 42,000 people reporting some sort of adverse event to open reporting systems isn’t shocking.

The same Pfizer document pointed out that 126 million doses were delivered. Even if just half were administered, that would mean that only 0.068% of vaccine recipients reported any adverse event.

Because vaccines, by nature, trigger our immune system to react to antigens and produce antibodies, they cause side effects like fever, muscle ache, headache, etc. in almost everyone.

You would expect millions of people to report them as as adverse events. But only 42,086 people actually did.

Even if we assume all of those 42,086 reports were genuine, and not falsely reported, that’s hardly shocking.

Fact #7 : Adverse Events Are Not Vaccine Side Effects

As Pfizer noted in Page 6, the large number of adverse event reports (AERs) do not necessarily mean that they are actually caused by the vaccine.

In fact, open reporting systems like VAERS and Yellow Card are notably open to abuse, and false reporting.

That’s why all reported adverse events must be investigated to find out if they are caused by the vaccine (anaphylactic reaction), or not (getting into a car accident).

Even if an adverse event could “potentially” be caused by the vaccine, it must still be confirmed that the vaccine directly caused it, because an anaphylactic reaction (for example) can also occur from a bee sting, or an existing peanut allergy.

Only once an adverse event is confirmed to be caused by the vaccine, is it then a vaccine side effect. Otherwise, it is merely an adverse event, not a side effect.

In other words – the adverse events in the Pfizer vaccine document are not vaccine side effects, until proven otherwise.

Fact #8 : Majority Of Adverse Events Were Not Serious

What the Epoch Times did not mention is that the majority of reported adverse events were not serious. In fact, they were what you would expect from ANY vaccination :

Headache : 24.1%
Fever : 18.2%
Fatigue : 17.4%
Chills : 13.1%
Vaccination site pain : 12.3%
Nausea : 12.3%
Myalgia (muscle pain) : 11.7%

And that’s before any effort was even made to determine if they were actually caused by the vaccine, and not caused by a concomitant infection or pre-existing disease, for example.

Fact #9 : No New Safety Concerns Despite 158K Adverse Event Reports

Despite 42,086 people reporting over 158 thousand adverse events, Pfizer’s investigation showed that the “data do not reveal any novel safety concerns or risks“.

Pfizer could only confirm that anaphylaxis is an important risk of the COMIRNATY vaccine.

In other words – the 158K adverse events were weighed, measured… and found wanting. There was NO NEW SAFETY CONCERN with the vaccine!

The Epoch Times is correct in pointing out that heart inflammation, blood clots and anaphylaxis have been linked to COVID-19 vaccines, but interestingly, did not mention that :

those risks apply to different vaccines
those risks differ according to age groups
those risks are rare
those risks can be mitigated or treated
those risks are far MORE COMMON with COVID-19 infections

Fact #10 : 10K New Pages Were Released

What’s really shocking is that both The Epoch Times and the CHD had to “recycle” this document which was released in the very first batch back in November 2021.

Could they not find anything new to gripe about after digging through the latest batch of 10,000 new pages released by the FDA?

Perhaps actual evidence of Pfizer bribing the FDA with $2.8 million?

Please don’t risk your life, and your family’s lives, on misinformation created and peddled by The Epoch Times.

And please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check out!

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.

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!

Tech ARP

For the best in science + technology!

Tag Archives: Epoch Times

Is Biden Admin signing over US sovereignty to WHO?!

Claim : Biden Admin Is Going To Sign Over US Sovereignty To WHO!

Truth : Biden Admin Is NOT Going To Sign Over US Sovereignty To WHO!

Please Support My Work!

Recommended Reading

Support Tech ARP!

Can Bak Kut Teh Herbal Soup Cause Liver Damage?!

Study : Bak Kut Teh Herbal Soup Can Cause Liver Damage!

Truth : Study Does Not Show Bak Kut Teh Causing Liver Damage!

Why Study Does Not Show Bak Kut Teh Causing Liver Damage

Please Support My Work!

Recommended Reading

Support Tech ARP!