Exert from Medical Musings by Dr. Pierre Kory

Pierre Kory, MD, MPA

Major Covid mRNA policy reversals and awakenings occurred this week within a major U.S health system, a large U.S state, a South American country, and in the UK. The dominoes are starting to fall.

This week a nurse reached out with disturbing descriptions of some major changes she has witnessed inside the Ohio State University Medical Center (OSUMC) system.

OSUMC s a large and comprehensive healthcare organization, with a significant presence in Ohio and a strong focus on research, education, and patient care. It is a massive institution with over 23,000 employees, including:

• Over 2,000 physicians
• More than 1,000 residents and fellows
• Nearly 5,000 nurses

Lets start off with this screenshot of a webpage from OSUMC’s website which provides information to the public as to where they can get Covid-19 vaccines. Check out the highlighted sentence at the bottom of the page:

Wait, what? Ohio State is suddenly no longer offering the Covid-19 vaccine to any of their employees but they are happily offering to inject them into the public? How can such a policy be justified? Why was this change in policy done and why was it done so quietly?

Let’s get this straight. Ohio State’s leadership is now making an institutional decision that employees should not be offerred access to any Covid-19 mRNA vaccine. I am (pretending to be) confused. I mean, if the vaccines could protect patients from being infected by staff members and they were safe to give to staff members, why wouldn’t you do everything possible (like a mandate) to ensure they receive them?

The only possible reason for the action above is that either OSUMC leadership recently discovered that the vaccines: a) do not work or b) are not safe. I think you would agree that, of the two possible answers, the only one that makes sense to explain this abrupt change in policy is B) they are not safe. I say this because if they were safe but instead just didn’t really work very well, Ohio State would not have the incentive to divorce themselves so abruptly and strongly from the recommendations of our benevolent federal government. I believe such an action would pretty quickly and negatively impact federal research funding by the NIH. It is my belief that agency’s money kept the nations 126 major academic medical centers in line throughout Covid, as those CEO’s and Deans are well aware that NIH retaliation in terms of rejecting grant funding if they “dissent” is real and happens (inflated reimbursements from the gov’t was another one of course).

I asked the brave browser AI, “why is Ohio State Medical Center no longer offering Covid-19 vaccines to its employees?” Two sentences jumped out:

• “Based on the provided search results, it appears that Ohio State Medical Center did offer COVID-19 vaccines to its employees at one point.”
• “Without further information or clarification from Ohio State Medical Center, it’s difficult to provide a definitive answer on why they may not be offering COVID-19 vaccines to their employees.”

So it must be the case that Ohio State leadership somehow found themselves a stronger financial disincentive to subjecting employees to Covid-19 vaccine injection. Where would such a disincentive come from? Answer: lawsuits. I also suspect that fear of worsening staff shortages from disability and/or death further disrupting operations played a role as well (as you will learn below).

This new policy action (taken very quietly) is absolutely dam breaking to me in terms of progress towards the truth about the mRNA platform getting out to the public. It is also appears ethically reprehensible, i.e. the institution made the decision to keep jabbing the public with a toxic and lethal vaccine while becoming aware that same vaccine is either exposing them to unmanageable legal risks and/or is disrupting their operations by negatively impacting the health of their workforce. Welcome to dystopia.

To see the rest of this article click here.

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

The Canadian author and psychologist revealed that he will undergo ‘re-education’ mandated by the College of Psychologists of Ontario to fight for Canadian professionals who are not able to stand up to the  mob.

Dr. Jordan Peterson accepted the College of Psychologists of Ontario’s (CPO) social media “training” as a way to defend free speech for all Canadians.

In an op-ed published September 14th by the National Post, the best-selling Canadian author and clinical psychologist who gained fame for his opposition to compelled speech and gender ideology, announced that he will undergo the social media “training” mandated by the CPO for challenging the LGBT agenda.

“I have accepted the college’s ruling, even though the so-called ‘social media experts’ recommended by that board are members of a profession that does not exist, and that there is no evidence whatsoever that their recommendations for altering my behaviour, whatever they might be, will have any effect whatsoever on improving my ability to function as a professional psychologist,” he wrote.

Last August, the regulatory body mandated that he undergo social media “training” after complaints related to his posts social media opposing gender ideology, specifically the mutilation of children. Peterson was threatened with the removal of his clinical license if he refused the training.

Peterson has spent months fighting the CPO’s mandate. His case made its way to the Supreme Court of Canada. However, in early August, the court rejected Peterson’s appeal, leading him to finally agree to the re-education program.

Peterson explained that he is “financially independent” and does not need his license to support himself, having closed his clinical practice some time ago.

Nevertheless, he declared that he will not leave quietly, instead fighting for other professionals who do not have the resources to stand up against the LGBT mob.

“However, this is not only about me, since all regulated professionals in our fair country find themselves in the same leaky boat I currently occupy,” he explained.

“Thus, if I capitulate in any manner — if I simply resign, if I settle in any other way without addressing the public issues that have been raised by the case — then all the engineers, teachers, lawyers, physicians, psychologists etc. in Canada remain at risk for reputation, financial security and livelihood every time they dare open their mouths,” he warned.

“How can Canadians possibly remain well served by those very professionals when they risk everything every time they dare offer their genuine opinions on such matters, say, as the gender identity of a confused adolescent (psychologically), or when they wish to express skepticism about some new wonder drug or treatment pushed forward by the pharmaceutical cabal, walking hand in hand with the very regulators they have captured (medically)?” he questioned.

Peterson also repeated his pledge to publicize “the details of this charade as widely and effectively as possible.”

“There is no bloody way I am going to allow my professional organization to maneuver as they prefer behind closed doors, in the secretive style all petty tyrants prefer,” he declared.