Blog Archives

TGA run by Big Pharma

By Dr Luke Ferst

We taxpayers are funding two opposing groups with opposing goals. I have had dealings with both entities, the more in-depth association being with the NPS. (National Prescribing Service) The ‘article’ below: WHY ARE WE TAXPAYERS FUNDING OPPOSING GROUPS?

Question to all MPs. We taxpayers are funding the Therapeutic Goods Administration, which states taxpayers should not have access to information provided by physicians. The government ‘officially’ states we taxpayers are duty bound to check all information regarding our healthcare. We taxpayers fund the NPS to ensure exactly that. WHICH MUST GO? TGA or NPS?

The TGA, according to its own website “Does Not Regulate Healthcare Professionals”. Therefore, it cannot ‘review’ licensed physicians no matter how much it tries to give that impression. See: https://www.tga.gov.au/what-tga-doesnt-do 1. However, a recent ABC news article states, “The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has banned Australian doctors from prescribing the drug to combat COVID-19”. Link: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-22/melbourne-doctors-under-review-hydroxychloroquine/13179248 If the article is accurate, then ‘Houston, we have a problem’.

The TGA receives taxpayer funds yet by attempting in any way to restrict medical information reaching the Australian public, it opposes another taxpayer funded department, risking putting one or both of those entities heads on the chopping block. Craig Kelly might want to know this information. 2. The Australian Taxpayer funded TGA seeks to prevent experienced medical professionals from sharing their vast healthcare knowledge, yet at the same time taxpayers’ money funds the NPS which is paid to educate the public by “building the health literacy of Australians”.

The focus is on the public learning and researching their own health care. So in 2021 what is the Australian Government doing? Whilst on one hand they are paying taxpayer funds to promote the need for the public to check any medical therapies they accept; on the other they are spending taxpayer funds via the TGA to stop the public’s access to information. These are two policies that are diametrically opposed to one another. 3. The Nuremburg Code 1947 raises a much more insidious prospect for any individual involved in preventing members of the public from deciding for themselves what medical information to review or reject or administering any therapy.

The Nuremberg Code (1947) specifically addresses any public servant or practitioner who seeks to absolve their individual responsibilities. See Article 6 Sections 1 and 3. ALL who insist on forcing others to do anything based on their own opinion of proper healthcare, (whether based on the $ or not), need to be reminded that they will be charged for CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY as were WAR CRIMINALS as The Nuremburg Code, there is NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.

In February 2021, there are still guards and secretaries being charged for crimes committed 75 years ago! Here are links to three cases: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/21/us/us-deports-former-nazi-guard.html https://www.dw.com/en/german-prosecutors-charge-nazi-camp-secretary/a-56469619 https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2021-02-09/former-nazi-guard-age-100-charged-with-accessory-to-murder Those at the TGA might wish to reconsider their positions.

Letter to the Editor:

I have also written many letters to the TGA John Skerritt, and so far he has always answered. Mainly over the banning of HCQ. The last letter I wrote, links the Covid Medical task force, nearly all Monash employed academics and Monash received funding to the tune of $44million from Gates foundation. I can send you the letter if you like you may find the contents interesting. I also to wrote him to reassess the authorisation of these pseudo-vaccines which Pfizer didnt conduct human trials because too many animals died of ADE http://tribeqr.com/v/pfizerneedtoknow.

regards John Huntley

PCR Covid testing 94% inaccurate, ignored by TGA boss John Skerritt

Any Covid statistics quoted by government are completely erroneous

By Danielle Burnie

Professor John Skerritt

Therapeutic Goods Association

info@tga.gov.au

devices@tga.gov.au

PO Box 100

Woden ACT 2606

Australia

CC: Australian Department of Health; Office of Health Protection; The Public Health Laboratory Network; The Advisory Committee on Medicines; Australian Medical Association; Political bodies; media outlets; Australia Federal Police; Victoria Police; The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet; Parliament of Australia; Australian Human Rights Commission; My Aged Care.

FORMAL COMPLAINT – PCR TESTING AUSTRALIA

Dear Mr Skerritt,

I am writing to make an official complaint about the medical device and subsequent testing process for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Australia.

The PCR tests being used in Australia were expedited due to the ‘pandemic’ nature of Covid-19. This means they have been approved based on very limited clinical and performance data.

Head of the Therapeutic Goods Authority Professor John Skerritt apparently has ignored this excellent summary of the ineffectiveness of PCR Covid testing. The TGA has long been held captive by Big Pharma and the Australian Medical Association.

It is well and truly overdue that the PCR testing be properly and thoroughly evaluated.

Before this occurs, I urge you to call an immediate cessation to the use of these testing devices in Australia.

These tests are being used by the government to justify measures protecting against a pandemic. The pandemic was declared by the WHO and it should be noted that the WHO changed the definition of a ‘pandemic’ 12 years ago, a pandemic was originally defined as a disease that spread worldwide resulting in widespread serious illness and death. Now it merely requires that a disease spread worldwide. If we, in Australia accept this definition, it makes it very easy to declare a pandemic when a screening tool like PCR tests are used as diagnostic tools. The number of deaths and ‘cases’ in Australia does not merit the declaration of a pandemic here, especially when these numbers are based on PCR testing.

The Government is using these tests results not only in Australia but the rest of the world, where PCR is also being used, to justify the following (not limited to):

  • Passing laws to give unprecedented authority to civilians (Omnibus).
  • Passing federal laws to enable foreign troops and foreign police forces to enter Australia in the event of an emergency, immune from prosecution. (Defence Legislation Amendment (Enhancement of Defence Force Response to Emergencies) Bill 2020.
  • Violating privacy by the proposed use of telephone GPS for contact tracing.
  • Border closures
  • 200+ days and counting of severe restrictions on the state of Victoria including:
  • Limits on numbers of visitors in households
  • Limits on numbers of contacts outside the home
  • Shutting down of schools
  • Businesses closed
  • 5km radius restriction from homes
  • Denied access of visitors to retirement homes
  • Isolation of ‘suspected’ or ‘confirmed’ cases
  • Mandatory wearing of masks in public
  • Mandatory wearing of masks by children in school
  • Limit of 1 hour exercise per day
  • A nightly curfew between 8pm – 5am
  • Social distancing.

A vaccination campaign has already begun with policies such as no jab, no pay. No jab, no travel. This is a serious and provocative threat by the government and once again justified in their opinion by ‘case’ numbers.

The physiological and psychological consequences of these policies will have devastating and uncountable consequences on the lives of all Australians. The deaths and permanent injuries caused will outnumber by thousands any death or permanent injury caused by Covid-19.

The weight that is being placed on the statistics is monumental. And the statistics are all being derived from PCR testing.

You have a responsibility to investigate this medical fraud, I do not use that term lightly. But there is enough evidence for me to be extremely concerned that this is exactly that, medical fraud.

Please see below the information I have gathered about PCR testing.

1. The TGA’s own ‘information for health professionals’ page says there is limited evidence available to assess the accuracy and clinical utility of available Covid-19 tests. AND ‘Covid-19 is an emerging viral infectious disease. There is limited evidence available to assess the accuracy and clinical utility of available Covid-19 tests’.

2. PCR TESTING DOES NOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN COVID-19 AND INFLUENZA

The Covid-19 virus has never been isolated. Each and every positive test is an ‘assumption’ that the test is picking up the SARS-CoV-2 virus. As confirmed by the CDC1.

‘The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019- nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in Limit of Detection studies. Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen’.

In the user guide of one test available in Australia, it clearly states the PCR test does not distinguish between SARS-CoV-2, influenza, RSV A and B types. The guide goes on to say that a positive result should be evaluated by a health care professional in the context of medical history, symptoms and other tests2.

In September 2020, Roche Pharmaceuticals developed a unique PCR test that distinguishes between the flu and Covid-19. This has received emergency authorisation in the US3. This clearly shows that before this date no tests were able to distinguish between Covid-19 and the flu.

3. THE SARS-CoV-2 VIRUS HAS NEVER BEEN ISOLATED

A FOI request to Public Health England revealed that the virus has not been isolated4. The FOI response can be found in the references.

Public Health England also confirmed that detecting viral material by PCR does not indicate that the virus is fully intact nor infectious5.

Dr Andrew Kaufman criticised a paper published in Nature which claims to prove the pathogenicity of Covid-19. Dr Kaufman disproved the study showing that SARS-CoV-2 does not meet Koch’s 4 postulates for germ theory. Koch’s postulates are the basic principles that must be met before a virus can be proved to cause disease6.

This is collaborated in another article showing that SARS-CoV-2 fails to meet even one of Koch’s postulates let alone them all7. This is a vital point that has been deliberately ignored by governments worldwide.

PCR tests are calibrated to match a specific RNA, but we do not know that the RNA is specifically from the SARS-CoV-2 virus because it has never been correctly isolated or purified. So, to which RNA are the PCR tests showing positive?

In an article titled ‘PCR Covid-19 Test are Scientifically Meaningless’, study authors of all relevant papers (‘proving the existence of SARS-CoV-2) were contacted and they all confirmed that the shots depicted in their experiments did not show purified viruses8.

4. FALSE POSITIVES

PCR tests have a false positive rate of around 0.8%. Dr Yeadon, former Chief Science Officer for Pfizer states ‘The likelihood of an apparently positive case being a false positive is between 89 to 94 percent or near certainty’9.

According to Dr Malcolm Kendrick10, the negative percentage agreement (NPA) of most commercially available tests is 95.6%. If we look at a practical example using the UK figures (since Australia’s ‘cases’ are so low), it would look like this: From 350,001 tests, 2, 948 were positive. Using the NPA we get the following figures:

0.956 = TN / 350,100

Therefore, the number of true negatives is:

TN = 350,100 * 0.956 = 334696

Therefore, the number of false positives we would expect from 350,100 tests is: FP = 350,100 – 334,696 = 15,404

This is more than five times the number of positive tests reported, which means we cannot have any confidence that any one of those positive tests represents a genuine case. When you apply this to the Australian cases, the numbers are so drastically low that it is statistically impossible for any of them to be true positives. The question is ‘where are all the false positives’?

Contributing to the evidence of false positives, a study called ‘Diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection: the danger of over-reliance on positive test results’ found the following: ‘The high specificity (usually 100%) reported in PCR-based tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection do not represent the real-world use of these tests, where contamination and human error produce significant rates of false positives. Widespread lack of awareness of the real-world false positive rates affects an array of clinical, case management and health policy decisions. Similarly, health authorities’ guidance on interpreting test results is often wrong. Steps should be taken immediately to reduce the frequency and impacts of false positive results, including checking positive results with additional tests at least when prevalence is low11’.

Another study, ‘An optimisation of four SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR assays in a Kenyan laboratory to support the national COVID-19 rapid response teams’, found the following: ‘We highlight the challenges encountered in the use of the BGI kit that we noted was prone to false positives, but this was mitigated by diluting the reagent volumes and by including an additional confirmatory assay12.

It should be noted that Victoria is using the BGI kits.

A study on the potential false positive rates of asymptomatic patients found that ‘In the close contacts of COVID-19 patients, nearly half or even more of the ‘asymptomatic infected individuals’ reported in the active nucleic acid test screening might be false positives,’ the false-positive rate of positive results was 80.33%’13.

Dr Reiner Fuellmich14 from the German Corona Investigative Committee explains that the developer of the Covid-19 PCR test, Professor Drosten used an old SARS virus to create the PCR test which returned a positive from Covid-19 victims in China. This very inaccurate beginning was enough for the WHO to declare a pandemic and authorise worldwide use of PCR testing. They have never validated Drosten’s test. Drosten himself said in 2014 that PCR testing was so highly sensitive that even very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive.

This test cannot detect infection. An infection is when a virus penetrates cells and causes symptoms and only then is a person contagious. Until then, it is completely harmless.

Alarmingly, in 2007 PCR tests were responsible for the incorrect belief that whooping cough was spreading through a hospital in New Hampshire, US. This mistake had serious ramifications. Thousands were given antibiotics and vaccines. 8 months later the victims received an email saying the tests were incorrect due to their over sensitivity15. There is a very high chance this is happening around the world now, especially in Australia given the extremely low case numbers. However, the ramifications here, are even more serious than just antibiotics and vaccines (although this is also incredibly concerning). Read the rest of this entry

 COVID-19 never left the page upon which it was conceived

https://livinginconsciousness.blogspot.com/2020/03/covid19-is-not-what-you-think.html?m=1

by Heather Warfield, RN, MSN and JB Lewis, B.S. Biology

The name, COVID19, was created to segregate it from the legitimate Coronavirus. This was done so that the original, not-so-dangerous virus, can be turned into an invisible terrorist – mixing a little truth with a lot of lies seems to authenticate the issue in the minds of nearly everyone and makes it more believable. By declaring COVID19 as a new bug (novel), a version without a past or known ailments or causes, the idea of it can be used as a (weapon) to control the public at large. In this way, any number of false terrors can be attributed to it; a ghost virus that can (get) you from anywhere and by any means, they say. It is time to realize the media and leaders do not have your best interest at heart.

Side Note:  No One Has EVER had COVID-19. Do not confuse it with the actual Coronavirus.

COVID-19 is Not a virus. It is a fictional talking point created by the John Hopkins School of Medicine, The Council on Foreign Relations, The World Health Organization, The Center For Disease Control, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and a few others; conceived only as a tool of manipulation.

It is important for you to know that on October 19, 2019, these groups hosted, what they called, a Tabletop Exercise of a Fictional Novel Coronavirus Pandemic? 

Those players could have chosen any number of viruses to execute their Virus Exercise; yet, they invented a fictional virus that magically leapt off the page and became a pandemic one month later. Global populations accepted this pandemic as real because the world at large had no idea the exercise was underway. And yes, it was the intention of the exercise to deceive the world.

How do we know the coronavirus pandemic is fictional?

On their website plan, they call it fictional by stating, “…for the scenario, we modeled a fictional novel coronavirus pandemic.

Event 201: https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/

More than a coincidence? We’ll even go a step further and say, calling it an exercise is a cover for the actual False Pandemic plan going into motion. It is time to be logical, reasonable, and use our basic common sense.

EVENT 201 and COVID-19 Are The Same Thing … https://livinginconsciousness.blogspot.com/2020/04/event-201-and-covid19.html

Why Use Coronavirus In A False Pandemic:

Because blending the name of a known virus with a fictional one makes confusing the public a lot easier. The news has been doing this for decades – there are no new tricks here. Still, the public continues to believe it.

Why Is COVID-19 False:

Animals of varying types have been known to carry certain strains of a virus called coronavirus; however, these sequences do not have a history of transmuting to humans via normal contact. A virus of this nature must be taught how to invade another species cellular makeup by manipulating the genetic code of the cells. Then, it has to be injected into a human via a vaccine or some other invasive measure; say, if an infected animal bit you. Even then, one would not necessarily become sick or shed the virus to someone else.

Of the people who have had the flu shot, or other vaccines, within the last 15 to 20 years, it is possible, but not guaranteed, that a portion of the population has one or more of the 6 known strains of the animal based Coronavirus, or other animal sequences, lying harmlessly dormant in their system. This would be due to several modern vaccines being synthesized through animal tissue. What the population Does Not have is a COVID-19 infection. COVID-19 never left the page upon which it was conceived. There are those in positions of power that are making every effort to purposely confuse the Coronavirus and COVID-19 in order to mislead everyone. The art of confusing the public is not a new one …