Connect with us

COVID-19

Post Fauci NIH can’t help itself. Still misleading public about severity of COVID

Published

8 minute read

From the Brownstone Institute

By Ian Miller

NIH’s Latest Desperate Attempt to Incite Fear

The response to the Covid-19 pandemic revealed many concerning aspects of how government functions and how committed individuals and institutions are to maintaining their preferred narratives.

Truth, data, science, evidence…apparently none of those matter relative to the importance of ensuring the public complies with their desired behavior. Perhaps no single individual has been a better representation of the symbiotic relationship between government officials and media members, as well as their ceaseless commitment to ideological priorities, than Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Fauci’s NIAID and its parent organization, the National Institutes of Health, have been two of the most prolific spreaders of ideologically motivated misinformation ever during the pandemic. But Fauci is no longer part of NIH, having departed for the considerable financial rewards available from the private sector.

So as a result of his timely exit, we must finally be witnessing improvements regarding government studies and communication, right? Right?

Not exactly.

Government Covid Misinformation Continues Unabated

A triumphant, breathless press release from the National Institutes of Health was just released in the past week covering a new study that claimed a horrifying new conclusion. Contracting Covid-19 once is bad, but God forbid you experience two bouts of the virus…It’s terrifying.

That’s their claim resulting from utilizing massive volumes of “health data” on over 200,000 Americans who they believe had Covid at least once over a two-and-a-half-year period from 2020-2022.

“Those individuals were originally infected between March 1, 2020-Dec. 31, 2022, and experienced a second infection by March 2023. Most participants (203,735) had Covid-19 twice, but a small number (478) had it three times or more,” the study says.

The conclusion, is at first glance, concerning.

“Using health data from almost 213,000 Americans who experienced reinfections, researchers have found that severe infections from the virus that causes COVID-19 tend to foreshadow similar severity of infection the next time a person contracts the disease. Additionally, scientists discovered that long COVID was more likely to occur after a first infection compared to a reinfection,” the NIH summary claims.

That sounds pretty bad. If you get infected a second time, you’re likely to experience a severe case of Covid. Right?

Except that is a completely inaccurate conclusion based on the limited data presented.

“About 27% of those with severe cases, defined as receiving hospital care for a coronavirus infection, also received hospital care for a reinfection. Adults with severe cases were more likely to have underlying health conditions and be ages 60 or older. In contrast, about 87% of those who had mild Covid cases that did not require hospital care the first time also had mild cases of reinfections,” the researchers write.

And there’s the real story, hidden in plain sight.

We know from years of experience that Covid significantly impacts those who are in poor health, have underlying conditions, or are older AND in poor health. We also know that a very small percentage of Covid cases require treatment in a hospital setting.

All this study shows is that those who are in poor health, have underlying conditions, or are older, are more likely to need additional care if they get Covid a second time. Even then, 73% of those who had a second infection and were hospitalized the first time did not need hospitalization for the second infection. Sure enough, the vast, vast majority of those who had mild Covid cases the first time had mild Covid cases the second time.

The protection from natural immunity is highly important and generally durable, though less so when an individual with poor underlying health has contracted the virus. This is nothing new. But that didn’t stop the new head of the NIH from spouting some impressive fear-mongering and bad science.

NIH Can’t Stop Getting Things Wrong

Dr. Monica Bertagnolli posted a link to the study on X, and a short summary. She repeated the same line about the severity of Covid reinfections, which were intended to undermine the importance of natural immunity.

And more importantly, she claimed that the results underscore “the importance of preventing infection.”

After analyzing data from 200K Americans who had #COVID19 twice, researchers found that a severe #COVID case tended to foreshadow a similarly severe infection the second time, underscoring the importance of preventing infection[.]

Except that’s an impossibility. SARS-CoV-2 is an endemic virus. It will never be eliminated. It will never be stopped. Infection cannot be avoided. Vaccinations don’t prevent it, masks surely are ineffective, and any public interaction may result in an infection.

There simply is no way to prevent infection, which is why some countries have now reported that roughly 70% of their population, even with masking and vaccination, have tested positive. Telling those at risk to try to avoid infection is irresponsible and inaccurate. So why is this coming from the NIH?

Sure enough, these researchers also accidentally made the case for natural immunity. When studying the nonexistent phenomenon of “long Covid,” they found that those who had typical, longer-lasting effects from viral infections had bigger reactions after their first infection.

“Scientists also discovered that regardless of the variant, long Covid cases were more likely to occur after a first infection compared to a reinfection,” the study says.

Why is that? Because of natural immunity.

Under Anthony Fauci, they spent years downplaying it. They continue to undermine it in 2024. But the reality and the science continue to prove that natural immunity is protective and durable, and this is especially true for those in good health and younger age groups. Imagine if government agencies had been willing to admit this in 2020 instead of pointlessly locking down all of society in order to somehow prevent a virus that cannot be prevented.

That would have been the correct evaluation and communication.

But since when have government agencies handled a single aspect of Covid correctly?

Republished from the author’s Substack

Author

Ian Miller is the author of “Unmasked: The Global Failure of COVID Mask Mandates.” His work has been featured on national television broadcasts, national and international news publications and referenced in multiple best selling books covering the pandemic. He writes a Substack newsletter, also titled “Unmasked.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

COVID-19

Andrew Cuomo had aides manipulate death stats to cover up COVID record, report finds

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

Republican Brad Wenstrup, chairman of the House subcommittee, explained that ‘the Cuomo Administration is responsible for recklessly exposing New York’s most vulnerable population to COVID-19’

Former New York Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo personally edited state COVID-19 statistics to downplay deaths caused by his placement of contagious people in nursing homes, a new congressional investigation found.

For months, New York was the hardest hit of any state by the pandemic, due in large part to the coronavirus spreading within the state’s nursing homes. Cuomo, who resigned in 2021 over sexual harassment claims, ordered that nursing homes cannot turn away patients diagnosed with COVID-19 despite the fact the virus was most dangerous to the elderly.

He initially tried to blame nursing home deaths on the Trump administration by claiming that a federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance forced him to put the infected back in nursing homes (the CDC actually called for elderly housing decisions to be made on a case-by-case basis). But even the office of New York Attorney General (and fellow Democrat) Letitia James found Cuomo’s administration undercounted COVID-19 deaths in nursing homes by as much as half.

A 2021 report by the Judiciary Committee of the New York State Assembly found that Cuomo and his senior aides edited state COVID-19 reports and undercounted nursing home deaths “on multiple occasions” to “strengthen the defense” of his order by excluding COVID deaths that occurred once patients left their nursing home.

On Monday, the U.S. House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released a memo confirming those findings, National Review reported.

“The Cuomo Administration is responsible for recklessly exposing New York’s most vulnerable population to COVID-19,” subcommittee chair Brad Wenstrup, a Republican from Ohio, said. “Today’s memo holds Mr. Cuomo and his team accountable for their failures and provides the most detailed and comprehensive accounting of New York’s pandemic-era wrongdoing.”

The committee found that Cuomo assistant Stephanie Benson emailed top aides to get out a “report on the facts” to prevent the governor’s nursing home directive from becoming a “great debacle in the history books. Cuomo has publicly denied involvement in creating the report, his former adviser, Jim Malatras, testified that Cuomo made his desires clear to the authors through his aids and handwritten notes, and even reviewed and edited the document himself multiple times.

Former New York State Department of Health official Dr. Eleanor Adams told investigators that her department did not independently author the report or was it peer reviewed. Others testified that the decision to remove out-of-facility deaths from the count came from the New York Executive Chamber, i.e., the governor’s cabinet.

Cuomo himself testified before the subcommittee this week, where he continued to maintain his innocence. He did, however, admit that he never spoke to anyone at the CDC or Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services about the scientific justification for his nursing home directive before issuing it.

In May, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch penned an opinion identifying America’s COVID response measures as “the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country,” against which Congress, state legislatures, and courts alike were largely negligent to protect constitutional rights, personal liberty, and the rule of law.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

‘Mind-boggling’: Billions gone and little to show for it years after rampant COVID fraud

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

“The estimated amounts of waste, fraud, and abuse in COVID-related programs are simply … mind-boggling,” Subcommittee on Government Operations and the Federal Workforce Chairman Pete Sessions, R-Texas, said at the hearing. “Half a trillion dollars. Maybe more. Much of it lost to criminal actors and our enemies. Often using comically simple tactics.”

Years after the passage of federal COVID-era relief and the subsequent loss of likely hundreds of billions of those taxpayer dollars, lawmakers are still unsure where that money went, how to get it back, and seemingly have done little to prevent it from happening again.

Federal watchdog and other reports estimate anywhere from $200 billion to half a trillion was lost to waste, fraud and abuse across various federal and state COVID-era programs.

“Insiders, including those who worked for state workforce agencies, conspired with organized crime factions and other individuals to defraud state UI programs and the states did little to stop them,” a Republican-led House Oversight Committee report released this week said. “Some states even hired individuals convicted of identity theft to process UI claims.”

Examples like that and the scope of the amount lost was the subject of a House Oversight hearing this week where lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and experts grappled with the scope of the lost funds and what to do about it.

“The estimated amounts of waste, fraud, and abuse in COVID-related programs are simply … mind-boggling,” Subcommittee on Government Operations and the Federal Workforce Chairman Pete Sessions, R-Texas, said at the hearing. “Half a trillion dollars. Maybe more. Much of it lost to criminal actors and our enemies. Often using comically simple tactics.”

The most common among those tactics was stealing unemployment dollars doled out by the federal government during the pandemic.

One inspector general report from the Small Business Adminstration estimated at least $200 billion in taxpayer money was lost.

“We estimate that SBA disbursed over $200 billion in potentially fraudulent COVID-19 EIDLs, EIDL Targeted Advances, Supplemental Targeted Advances, and PPP loans,” the report said. “This means at least 17 percent of all COVID-19 EIDL and PPP funds were disbursed to potentially fraudulent actors.”

Nearly all of those “fraudulent actors” have so far gotten away with the theft.

Congress approved $40 million for the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, tasked with finding and preventing fraud. That committee and other investigative efforts have shown the COVID-era fraud was rampant and that little has been done to recover those funds.

That committee’s authority expires next year.

“Every dollar that goes to a fraudster doesn’t go to the small business, to the unemployed, to others that Congress were intending to help,” Michael Horowitz, Chair of PRAC, said at the oversight hearing this week. “If we want to continue to advance the fight against improper payments and fraud, we shouldn’t allow this important and fraud fighting tool to expire.”

Horowitz also said at the hearing that there is “clearly insufficient” access to data for oversight, such as accessing Social Security Administration’s death database so that payments are not sent to deceased individuals. He also pushed for his authority to be expanded to helping other agencies.

Orice Williams Brown, chief operating officer at the U.S. Government Accountability Office, also testified at the hearing that federal agencies can do more to prevent fraud of this kind. But federal agencies are not alone in the blame.

The House Oversight report released this week is called the “Widespread Failures and Fraud in Pandemic Unemployment Relief Programs” showing that states mishandled funds doled out by the federal government for unemployment insurance, sometimes with little oversight.

From the report:

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) estimates 11 to 15 percent of total benefits paid during the pandemic were fraudulent, totaling between $100 to $135 billion. The Department of Labor (DOL) Office of Inspector General (OIG) estimates that at least $191 billion in pandemic UI payments could have been improperly paid, with a significant portion attributable to fraud. As of March 2023, states reported recoveries of improper payments in an amount of only $6.8 billion.

The design of the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program led to massive fraud. During the program’s first nine months, claimants did not have to provide any evidence of earnings or prior work which made the program susceptible to fraud. DOL reported that the PUA program had a total improper payment rate of 35.9 percent.

Both sides have lamented the lost taxpayer dollars, but so far little has been done to prevent it from happening again, even as Congress continues to pass multi-trillion dollar spending bills often with little time for lawmakers to review.

Lawmakers passed two bills in 2023 to increase reporting from federal agencies on fraud and to prevent those previously convicted of financial crimes from receiving certain federal payment.

The House Oversight report recommended stronger security measures, cross checking with other relevant databases, more oversight and transparency, and more documentation from benefit recipients.

“If this is not a call to action…” Sessions said at the hearing. “I simply do not know what is.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X