12 Comments
Oct 20·edited Oct 20Liked by Jonathan Engler

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/presentation/introduction-international-coalition-medicines-regulatory-authorities-icmra_en.pdf

https://www.mcnz.org.nz/about-us/news-and-updates/historic-memorandum-of-understanding-signed-between-iamra-and-the-world-health-organization/

Give 'em a call:

Media inquiries: Ms Sarah Heermans, IAMRA Director of Operations, 1-817-868-4019 (direct) or email:

secretariat@iamra.com

When it comes to the funding most roads lead here:

https://www.gatesfoundation.org/our-work/programs/global-development/global-health-agencies-and-funds

Further "harmonization" and centralization of the largest sector of the global economy with the intent of concentration of wealth and social control.

Such outfits have been around forever, as noted in the reference to the Flexner Report, they are just seeking to tighten the controls even further using national and regional and international "regulatory" bodies to legitimize their racketeering operations and force feed these programs to local, state and national bodies.

Expand full comment
author

I have emailed her...

Expand full comment

Are the International "Coalition" and "Association" two different orgs. or the same one?

Expand full comment
Oct 20Liked by Jonathan Engler

In Australia we have the Immunisation Coalition - a private organisation promoting "whole-of-life" immunisation. Incidentally, their stats show that Influenza disappeared in Australia between April 2020 and March 2022. Nobody, to my knowledge, is interested in any serious 'evidence-bassed' inquiry to explain this little mystery, on which the whole official Covid narrative depends.

https://www.immunisationcoalition.org.au/about-us/

https://www.immunisationcoalition.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/MAIN-Aust-Flu-Stats-worksheet-2024.xlsx-9.pdf

Expand full comment

I heard your interview on the Tom Woods podcast yesterday and wanted to say that I admire the intellectual integrity you demonstrated by asking to withdraw your support of the Great Barrington Resolution once you realized that the whole episode was a fraud. In my opinion you definitely came to the correct conclusion. I was in medical practice in southern California for over 40 years from the late 1970s through 2020 and my BS meter was flashing red right at the start of the "pandemic". Everyone in medical practice knew that each year during the cold and flu season there was an influx of patients to the hospital---mostly the elderly and infirm---whose respiratory infection would trigger a cascade of events resulting in increased deaths. My practice had been at one of the largest community hospitals on the west coast and although retired from active practice, I still performed ECG interpretations for the hospital and went there 2 or 3 times per week to pick up and leave paperwork. When I heard the initial reports (largely from New York) in March and April of 2020, I decided to walk the wards of our hospital and see what was going on. I found that not only was there no overcrowding but rather a number of wards were completely empty and the patients with seasonal respiratory diseases were packed into a few "covid wards". At the same time I had seen a number of videos recorded by people in New York City who had gone into the supposedly overcrowded hospitals and recorded videos that showed most of the wards were deserted. Then there were the unused refrigerated trucks outside the hospitals, the emergency erection of hospital tents in Central Park that remained empty, and the docking of a large US Navy hospital ship in New York harbor that never saw even one patient. All of his convinced me that there was something peculiar going on. Later in the year when I checked the mortality figures and learned that there was really no excess mortality during the entire period, that confirmed my earlier suspicions. So you are absolutely correct in concluding that this was a scam and one has only to view the video of Event 201 on the internet to confirm that this was planned in advance. My training and practice were all in conventional medicine and I share your skepticism concerning ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as effective remedies. All of the "covid tests"---PCR and antibodies---were unreliable and any statistics using those data are unreliable. In my experience, bactericidal antibiotics were the only effective treatment for the elderly and infirm who developed secondary bacterial infections following the initial (possible) viral infection.

Expand full comment
Oct 25Liked by Jonathan Engler

One point of clarification on NYC:

The city reported the biggest non-war mass casualty event in a US city’s history and the near-equivalent of ten World Trade Center disasters, so it is NOT the case that there is no reported excess there.

The point is that the event is rife with serious problems when it comes to the purported toll.

Not only was this an iatrogenic (vs “pathogenic”) event, the all-cause death curve bears markings of manipulation and outright fraud

https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/eleven-serious-problems-with-the

Expand full comment

Thank you for posting your excellent article on NYC events during the early phase of the pandemic. The data you found make it a virtual certainty that the reports were phony. Failure to respond to FOI requests also speaks volumes. Certainly there was a significant amount of iatrogenic death involved. I can tell you from years of experience that placing an elderly or frail patient on a ventilator is a virtual death sentence. Because of age, weakness, and other debilitating factors, it is almost impossible to "wean" them off the ventilator. This is why conscientious physicians have always been very reluctant to place them on assisted ventilation to begin with. But the hospitals were incentivized to do this with a $39,000 extra payment from the government for each patient that went on a ventilator. Add to that the fact that the corporatization of the medical and hospital systems has placed the decision making for most hospital patients in the hands of "hospitalists" and "intensivists" who have little or no connection with the patients they "serve". Rather they work for the hospital directly or on contract. This combination of circumstances certainly had a lot to do with the iatrogenic portion of the increased deaths.

Expand full comment

“…to extirpate ANY challenge to their inconceivably dangerous policies…”

My operating heuristic is that the medical industrial complex, and by extension all captured regulators, are all dangerous, all malevolent, by iatrogenic design. The motives are many - racketeering, depop, Malthusian fantasies, technocracy, eugenics, genocide, serial murder, megalomania, psychopathy - but the raison d’etre is clear: maim, sicken, kill and extirpate as many humans as possible for the longest time.

Expand full comment

Here's something else to think about Jonathan...in regard to controlling the medical profession...

You're familiar with the Vaccine Confidence Project, director is Heidi Larson? https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/who-we-are/team/heidi-larson/

Heidi Larson gave the plenary lecture at the WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit held on 2-3 December 2019.

I'll state the date again... 2-3 December 2019.

The title of her lecture is: Vaccine safety in the next decade. Why we need new modes of trust building?

During her lecture, which occurs just before all hell breaks loose re 'Covid', Larson notes:

QUOTE

This was our first, we developed a vaccine confidence index, which we've been running for five years, we're under review now, and an analysis of 250,000 people in 148 countries, we have all their background, demographics to look at, what are the trends and patterns. But this is one of the first ones we did, 67 countries in 2016. And I was actually surprised at Europe being so acutely sceptical when it came to safety. I knew other countries were having some issues, but it was quite acute in Europe. When we tried to disaggregate that by different kinds of reasons, safety is the biggest issue, safety is the biggest issue, fear of side effects, low sense of risk.

The other thing that’s a trend and an issue is, not just just confidence in providers, but confidence of healthcare providers. We have a very wobbly health professional front-line, that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem. Because to this day, any study I’ve seen, and we’re constantly looking on any studies in this space, still the most trusted person on any study I've seen globally is the healthcare provider. And if we lose that, we’re in trouble.

And we haven’t lost it yet, but we’ve talked about it earlier, some of the challenges are when the front-

line professionals are starting to question, or they don’t feel like they have enough confidence about the safety to stand up to it, to the person asking them the questions. I mean most medical school curriculums, even nursing curriculums, I mean in medical school you’re lucky if you have a half day on vaccines, never mind keeping up to date with all this.

One of the things that we need to think about, as we generate more safety data, how can we get it into the hands, the people that need to represent and speak for it? Because they’re not getting enough of it.

END OF QUOTE

Think about that Jonathan...

What action was taken to rein in that "very wobbly health professional front-line, that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines"?

Also, for some more background on the Vaccine Confidence Project, please see my BMJ rapid response published in February 2019: 'Pharma-led chorus' dominates the public narrative on vaccination: https://www.bmj.com/content/364/bmj.l312/rr-6

Videos of sessions at the WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit 2-3 December 2019 are still accessible here: https://www.who.int/news-room/events/detail/2019/12/02/default-calendar/global-vaccine-safety-summit

I transcribed Heidi Larson's lecture, I'll send you a copy.

Expand full comment

I saw this interview a long time ago and wondered when somebody would delve into it. Glad to see you now doing so.

Expand full comment

" In 2004, Ursula Springer sold Springer Publishing Company to Mannheim Holdings, LLC, a subsidiary of the Mannheim Trust. In 2008 they established a division to focus on nursing, and "signs to look for" when abuse is suspected.[3] In 2015, Demos Medical Publishing merged into Springer Publishing.[7]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springer_Publishing

-----

"In 2013, prior to the merger with Springer and the creation of Springer Nature, Nature Publishing Group's owner, Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, bought a controlling stake[3][4] in Frontiers.[5] Before Springer Nature was formed in 2015, Nature Research (as the Nature Publishing Group) was a part of Macmillan Science and Education, a fully owned subsidiary of Holtzbrinck Publishing Group.[6]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_Portfolio

-----

"Holtzbrinck Publishing Group (German: Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck) is a privately held German company headquartered in Stuttgart, that owns publishing companies worldwide. Through Macmillan Publishers, it is one of the Big Five English-language publishing companies.

In 2015, it merged most of its Macmillan Science and Education unit (including Nature Publishing Group) with Springer Science+Business Media, creating the company Springer Nature. Holtzbrinck owns 53% of the combined company.[2][3]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holtzbrinck_Publishing_Group

-----

it's all the same kooks

Expand full comment