SASHA LATYPOVA: And, in summary, I can say none of it is regulated. The FDA kind of pretend regulates [the vaccines], and that's been the case since forever...

"None of it [vaccines] is regulated. The FDA kind of pretend regulates these things, and that's been the case since forever...up until 1973 there were no regulations and no standards for manufacturing...[then] in '86 there was [The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act]."… pic.twitter.com/iqX6py1O3a

— Sense Receptor (@SenseReceptor) October 9, 2024

"None of it [vaccines] is regulated. The FDA kind of pretend regulates these things, and that's been the case since forever...up until 1973 there were no regulations and no standards for manufacturing...[then] in '86 there was [The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act]." Retired pharma R&D executive Sasha Latypova (@sasha_latypova) describes for Dr. Drew (

@drdrew

) how "vaccines" are not actually regulated in the U.S. by the FDA but rather only "pretend regulated." The pharma insider notes that the injections were entirely unregulated prior to 1973, and then, by 1986, protected by The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act—meaning there's no liability and thus, in effect, still no regulations. "My colleague, Katherine [Watt], traced the relevant US law all the way back to late 1700s. And so, we now have a better understanding of the regulatory frameworks in the US as it applies to all vaccines in general, and then, a much greater understanding about the COVID shots, which are EUA countermeasures and how that's regulated," Latypova says. "And...in summary, I can say none of it is regulated. The FDA kind of pretend regulates these things, and that's been the case since forever..." "In the US, the vaccines have not been under FDA mandate until 1973," Latypova adds. "Many people don't realize that. They were not regulated at all as pharmaceuticals. They were manufactured essentially by public health service, which is predecessor of CDC, the US government, public health service." "After 1973, they technically came under FDA purview. And as you know, in '86, there was [The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and] that shielded all the manufacturers from liability; that was under Reagan." "Since then, the manufacturers of vaccines [have] had no liability. And if you have no liability for injuries or deaths that you cause, then it's as if regulations don't exist for you because you have no consequences," Latypova notes. Partial transcription of clip: "So the manufacturing, those remain great concerns. In fact, I've I've gotten additional information that it's even worse, than I thought, and the problem actually goes a long time back. Even my colleague, Katherine [Watt], traced the relevant US law all the way back to late 1700s. And so, we now have a better understanding of the regulatory frameworks in the US, as it applies to vaccines, all vaccines in general, and then, a much greater understanding, about the COVID shots, which are EUA countermeasures and how that's regulated. And...in summary, I can say none of it is regulated. The FDA kind of pretend regulates these things, and that's been the case since forever... "So the law research is ongoing, and, Katherine and one of the colleagues are writing a big report on relevant law tracing back to, as I said, late 1700s when, you know, vaccination as we kind of know it in a modern world has, started being used more or less in mass subjects. Now, in the US, the vaccines have not been under FDA mandate until 1973. Many people don't realize that. They were not regulated at all as pharmaceuticals. They were manufactured essentially by public health service, which is predecessor of CDC, the US government, public health service. And, they were sort of, you know, you could order order the samples or whatever you needed, the box. You could even, like, order it in the mail from the US government, and they would send it to you. "And so up until 1973, there were no regulation and no standards for manufacturing, for purity testing, for contaminants, for, characterizing what you have made in the pharmaceutical process, which is standard for anybody who works in pharma making drugs. That didn't exist, really. It wasn't anything codified. After 1973, they technically came under FDA purview. And as you know, in '86, there was a national vaccine, I forget the correct name of the law, but basically, the act that came in that, shielded all the manufacturers from liability that was under Reagan. "And since then, the manufacturers of vaccines had no liability. And if you have no liability, for injuries or deaths that you cause, then it's as if regulations don't exist for you because you have no consequences."

SHARYL ATTIKISSON: But no matter how they crunched the numbers, they got the same disappointing result: flu shots had not reduced deaths among the elderly, January 24, 2006

Admittedly, it doesn’t work, but get your shot today! https://t.co/BbXHQ4hFXr

— Roman Bystrianyk (@RBystrianyk) October 8, 2024

From January 24, 2006.

From women entering menopause and may even increase their risk of heart disease in contrast to study for years ago found that for women in their 60s who've already gone through menopause and take hormones do increase their risk of heart attack and stroke now those conclusions still stand.

00:20. The CDC is taking a closer look at how best to protect seniors from the flu.  The agency is holding a symposium about that and other issues this week.  It all follows a series of studies that question the effectiveness of flu shots given to older people.  Here is Sharyl Attkisson with our report.

Millions of seniors swear by their annual flu shot.  After all, 90% of people killed by the flu are 65 or older.  But CBS News has learned that behind the scenes, Public Health officials have come to a new and disturbing conclusion: mass vaccinations of the elderly haven't done the job. Dr. Walter Orenstein was among the first to notice the problem when he headed up the Centers for Disease Control's National Immunization Program.  He says it's now become a consensus among Public Health experts.

What is absolutely clear is that there is still a substantial burden of deaths and hospitalizations out there that have not been prevented through the present strategy.

1:24. Here's what scientists have found.  Over twenty years, the percentage of seniors getting flu shots, 1980-2001, increased sharply from 15% to 65%.  It stands to reason that flu deaths among the elderly should have taken a dramatic dip, making an X graph like this.  Instead, flu deaths among the elderly continued to climb.  It was hard to believe, so researchers at the National Institutes of Health set out to do a study, adjusting for all kinds of factors that could be masking the true benefits of a shot.  But no matter how they crunched the numbers, they got the same disappointing result: flu shots had not reduced deaths among the elderly.  It's not what health officials had hoped to find.  NIH wouldn't let us interview the study's lead author, so we went to Boston and found the only co-author not employed by NIH, Dr. Tom Reichert.

We realized that we had incendiary material.

Dr. Reichert says they thought their study would prove vaccinations had helped. 

We were trying to do something mainstream, that's for sure.

Were you surprised?

Astonished.

Did you check the data a couple of times to make sure?

Well, even more than that.  We've looked at other countries, now, and the same is true.

That study soon to be published finds the same poor results in Australia, France, Canada, and the United Kingdom, and other new research stokes the idea that decades of promoting flu shots in seniors and the billions spent haven't had the desired result.

The current head of National Immunizations, Dr. Anne Schuchat, confirms CDC is now looking at new strategies but stopped short of calling the present policy a failure.

There's an active dialogue into how we can do better to prevent influenza and its complications in the elderly.  Dr. Anne Schuchat

So what's an older person to do?  The CDC says they should still get their flu shots, that it could make the flu less severe or prevent other problems not reflected in the total numbers.  But watch for CDC to likely shift in the near future more toward protecting the elderly in a roundabout way by vaccinating more children and others around them who could give them the flu.  Sharyl Attkisson CBS News Washington

LATYPOVA: Three days after the DOD/USAMRDC announced that they began growing the stock of “covid virus”, the CDC captured 3000+ people from two cruise ships, Diamond Princess (arriving internationally) and Grand Princess (domestic travel, the ship never left CA)

Note that Fort Detrick was the center of the U.S. biological weapons program from 1943 to 1969. Since the renaming of the biological weapons program into “infectious disease research”, it has hosted most elements of the United States biological defense program. 

During the presser on March 5, 2020, Col Wendy Sammonds-Jackson [director, of USAMRDC's Military Infectious Diseases Research Program, 2018-2020] announced that “we (the DOD/USAMRDC) have received the pathogen (SARS-Cov2) and we are growing it”:

Find the VIDEO after a few paragraphs.

She’s got THE SAMPLE! Yippee! We are off to the races. The DOD team stated that the alleged sample of the pathogen came from to 1 (one!) US patient from Washington state. Even if that really happened, a sample of one is absolutely meaningless for anything - diagnostic, treatment or vaccine development. I believe that 1 “sample” was only necessary to check the exemption box that allows to classify the activities that followed as “defense, infectious disease research”, rather than making of the internationally prohibited bioweapons. The production of these prohibited substances was necessary for seeding the subsequent “pandemic” and the deadly OWS EUA Countermeasures theatrics that it enabled. Prior to March 5, 2020, there had been no “COVID” disease in the US. CDC claims there were about 200 “cases” by that time, although nobody except the CDC could have tested or verified anything. Immediately after Col Wendy Sammonds-Jackson started making stocks of it (whatever “it” was) at Ft. Detrick, the “pandemic” materialized in the US:

Three days after the DOD/USAMRDC announced that they began growing the stock of “covid virus”, the CDC captured 3000+ people from two cruise ships, Diamond Princess (arriving internationally) and Grand Princess (domestic travel, the ship never left CA). The detainees were lied to, sold a sci-fi script about an asymptomatic deadly disease, and, for good measure, threatened with prosecution, and placed into a military prison (quarantine camps) at several US Air Force bases around the country with no means to appeal other than to the same people who imprisoned them, the CDC.

A quarantine order requires a sign-off by a medical doctor. The original order for all passengers on the Grand Princess was issued by Nicole Cohen, MD, on March 8, 2020.

There are several almost identical orders and re-issues in this package. They were signed by the following individuals:

All of these doctors are employed by the CDC. The justification provided by Dr. Cohen boils down to the following statements.

She issues a “professional judgment” (she is the sole judge and jury here) that the detainees are in the “qualifying stages of COVID-19”:

She says that Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) is defined by executive orders 13295 (2003 Bush), 13375 (2005 Bush) and 13674 (2014 Obama):

Note that an executive order is a directive issued by the President of the United States that manages the operations of the federal government. It is a written and published instruction that has the force of law, typically based on existing statutory powers. Executive orders do not require Congressional approval or legislative action to take effect, and Congress cannot overturn them. Executive orders have the authority of law, binding on executive branch agencies and employees.

I am not offering any legal advice here, just pointing out that this is a circle jerk of federal government that issues directives to itself that are only “law” to itself. In this case, the federal government decided that it needed to hunt and imprison anyone with signs of seasonal cold or flu, or anyone they think MIGHT one day have signs of seasonal cold or flu. That’s called “qualifying stages of Disease X”. Whatever disease they want to claim. By these EOs, the executive branch has authorized anyone to be put in military detention on their say-so. There is no need for actual illness to be demonstrated at all. Nice that they carved out influenza separately. No test has ever been clinically validated to differentiate influenza from COVID.

Also note that the endless internet fights about “virus no isolated” are irrelevant to how the HHS announces pandemics or how CDC issues quarantine orders. No virus needs to exist at all! The pandemic illness is defined by a presidential executive order as basically fever and cough that in the sole opinion of one CDC employee can potentially be world-ending. As long as they think that and assert it in writing, no other proof is necessary. Thus, filing a thousand FOIA requests asking CDC for proof of virus is a waste of time and a distraction from what is going on in reality.

Please read Katherine Watt’s detailed historical analysis of the relevant law, going back to the 18th century:

"Federal communicable disease control, quarantine, and biological product law, 1798-1972; orientation through Founding of Marine Hospital Service," Katherine Watt, August 5, 2024

For example, here is an act from the 51st Congress, 1890 (way before substantial body of virology was developed and way before computerized fakery such as PCR was introduced). They simply state that whenever the President thinks that cholera, smallpox, or plague exists… then the Sec of the TREASURY can make whatever rules and regulations he likes.

Incidentally, fake pandemics are still the tools of the central bankers. Listen to the clip of Catherine Austin Fitts here. Transcript and clip by Sense Receptor News:

"Bird flu has nothing to do with health. It's a tool of the central bankers...when you're printing monetary inflation you need a way to create deflation on demand."  Investment banker, former HUD official, and founder of the Solari Report) Catherine Austin Fitts describes

At the time of the Grand Princess quarantine orders, in March 2020, the CDC (that had merged with the DOD via “the whole of government approach”) was the sole possessor of the “test” to determine if someone has “SARS-cov-2”. Therefore, they had the magic wand to wave around the quarantine ships, and, Eeny, meeny, miny, moe," into the military prison you go!

They further state that between January 2020 and March 2020, there has been sufficient “scientific” evidence collected showing that COVID-19 is SARS by the definitions of the cited EOs:

But of course! “Fever and signs of respiratory illness” is all that was needed, and the rest could be just asserted.

Next, they cite that by March 7, 2020, 200 “cases” (by CDC’s secret magic PCR wand that nobody else could scientifically check, validate, or verify) were found in the US (out of 300M+ population):

And because they found 20 “cases” on board the ship, everyone on the ship was now tagged “pre-communicable stage of COVID-19”:

The quarantine orders are basically an arrest without due process based on an imaginary cause.  In several countries, including Canada, the EU, Australia, and New Zealand, military and police-enforced quarantine was already used in 2020. The Blob is planning the next phase of global terrorism. Under a fake/PHEIC public health emergency declaration - they can round up people into indefinite detention, like they did with the cruise passengers, or shut down any city/town/community this way. 

I am publishing this material because you will not find this information in any mainstream media. Most of the “freedom community leaders” ignore this, too. Having this information and sharing with your friends and family will prepare you to face the government goons who might try to bluff their way into detaining you. Traveling and crossing international borders, especially by cruise ships, puts you in a vulnerable position. Knowledge is power.

To help you think through this matter and prepare, here is a discussion that Katherine, I, and one of our readers:

For example:

"Courts have held, however, that not all types of searches and seizures necessarily require probable cause and a warrant.

Searches and seizures conducted with the consent of an authorized person and those searches and seizures that are conducted to avert an imminent threat to health or safety do not run afoul of the Fourth Amendment even when conducted without probable cause and a warrant."

It's meant to look like a form of probable cause, warrant, due process, and judicial review, without being substantive, but instead being fake, like everything else.

After being taken into detention, a detainee can file a habeas corpus petition for judicial review under 28 USC 2241, like any other criminal, [except they haven’t been charged with a crime, but are detained for “non-law enforcement” reasons], and can also request an administrative hearing, not for constitutional or due process issues, only for medical and scientific issues. 

Katherine’s post:

On habeas corpus, probable cause, warrants, detention, and extrajudicial state killing under declared public health emergencies. by Katherine Watt

Read on Substack

From my own very simple perspective (informed by the history of totalitarianism), I can state with certainty that following the “health” commissars to the secondary crime scene (detention center) is a bad idea no matter what law you think applies. In theory, there may exist some remnants of the constitutional procedure for you to theoretically appeal your undue imprisonment. But once you are locked up by the Red Guards, do you think that the judges that have sided with the Red Guards to date will look at your case fairly and apply the Constitution? I personally would not test this theory.

Please subscribe, comment, and if you would like to support [Sasha's work], become a paid subscriber.

pandemic potential avian flu H5N1 virus was determined a fake promoted by WHO, CDC, Robert Koch Institute and Friedrich Loeffler Institute in 2006.

With so much gratitude to Sasha Latypova, her efforts, and intelligence.   

WHO, CDC, Robert Koch Institute (RKI), and Friedrich Loeffler Institute (FLI) claim that H5N1 (avian flu virus) is “highly contagious”. Further, Reinhard Kurth, president of RKI, says that H5N1 “threatens potentially all six billion people on earth”.

We identified four fundamental questions underlying these claims and requested supporting studies from FLI (which according to the German Government “possesses virus isolates of H5N1”):

1. Does H5N1 exist?

2. Is it pathogenic to animals?

3. Is it transmissible and pathogenic to humans, and does it have pandemic potential?

Have other causes for observed disease been studied

FLI responded with four papers: PNAS [1], Science [2], J Virol [3] directed toward questions 1 and 2; EID [4] towards question 3; PNAS [1] towards question 4.

Question 1 (existence). FLI responded with, “H5N1/asia virus can be produced completely in vitro by using reverse genetics. The virus generated this way, also called infectious clone, cannot contain contaminants from sick animals” [translated from German]. However, PCR cannot be used to identify viruses which have not been previously sequenced [5].

The PNAS paper (as the others) does not show or reference the composition of the stock virus – nor does Subbarao et al. (referenced by the EID paper), which claims the first characterization of H5N1 disease in a human in 1997 [6]. Though the EID study failed to detect “H5N1” in several of the diseased organs, this anomaly was labeled an “enigma”, rather than a “contradiction”.

Robert Webster, corresponding author of the PNAS paper and Director of WHO’s Collaborating Center for Studies on the Ecology of Influenza in Animals and Birds, informed us that stock viruses “are classified as select agents” and “we are not at liberty to release this information”. Without verification, and without purification described in any of these papers, we cannot accept that stock virus is pure and fully characterized. Inquiries for clarification to Webster, CDC Select Agents Program, and FLI received no response.

Question 2 (animal pathogenicity). Papers describe the use of natural routes, but the disease was only achieved with extraordinary concentrations, up to 10 million EID per animal. None of the experiments used controls or blinding. The Science paper is highly abstract molecular science, employing elevated concentrations of chimeric variants.

Question 3 (human pathogenicity and pandemic potential). The EID paper is an anecdotal report of a 6-year-old boy from Thailand with severe multi-organ disease. No evidence was given for transmissibility to humans. The scientists found evidence of aspergillosis, and the boy was treated with toxic agents (broad-spectrum antimicrobial and antivirals) before he died.

Subbarao et al. (referenced by the EID paper), describe a previously healthy 3-year-old Hong Kong boy who developed flu-like symptoms on May 9, 1997, and was treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics and salicylic acid, though this is commonly contraindicated. He developed Reye’s Syndrome and died eleven days later [7]. A search commenced for causation within a limited range of flu viruses. H5N1 was claimed causative, even though coronaviruses, flaviviruses, enteroviruses, other pathogens and chemicals can also cause flu symptoms. There was no confirmation of prior avian contact. Regardless, warnings of an “explosive pandemic” appeared in this early document, though FLI conceded: “There is no scientific forecasting method that can evaluate the possibility that an influenza virus induces a new pandemic.”

Question 4 (non-“H5N1” causation). Neither the Subbarao et al study nor the FLI references consider reasonable, competing theories for disease causation, e.g., environmental and pharmaceutical factors.

Our analysis shows the papers do not satisfy our four basic questions. Claims of H5N1 pathogenicity and pandemic potential need to be challenged further.

References

1. Hulse-Post D.J., Sturm-Ramirez K.M., Humberd J., Seiler P., Govorkova E.A., Krauss S. Role of domestic ducks in the propagation and biological evolution of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza viruses in Asia. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102(30):10682–10687. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

2. Hatta M., Gao P., Halfmann P., Kawaoka Y. Molecular basis for high virulence of Hong Kong H5N1 influenza A viruses. Science. 2001;293(5536):1840–1842. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Hulse D.J., Webster R.G., Russell R.J., Perez D.R. Molecular determinants within the surface proteins involved in the pathogenicity of H5N1 influenza viruses in chickens. J Virol. 2004;78(18):9954–9964. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Uiprasertkul M., Puthavathana P., Sangsiriwut K., Pooruk P., Srisook K., Peiris M. Influenza A H5N1 replication sites in humans. Emerg Infect Dis. 2005;11(7):1036–1041. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Brown T.A. Genomes. 2nd ed. Bios Scientific Publishers; 2002. The polymerase chain reaction. [chapter 4.3] [Google Scholar]

6. Subbarao K., Klimov A., Katz J., Regnery H., Lim W., Hall H. Characterization of an avian influenza A (H5N1) virus isolated from a child with a fatal respiratory illness. Science. 1998;279(5349):393–396. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Hurwitz E.S., Barrett M.J., Bregman D., Gunn W.J., Pinsky P., Schonberger L.B. Public Health Service study of Reye’s syndrome and medications. Report of the main study. JAMA. 1987;257(14):1905–1911. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

As I previously reported, the “pandemic potential avian flu virus H5N1” fake narrative was re-animated in 2011 by Ron Foucher and Erasmus Medical Center (NL). They were hoping to get the fear porn going again after it was defeated in 2006. They succeeded, despite many sound journalists and scientists identifying the false narrative at the time.

Fouchier and Erasmus were not the only ones stoking fear about “highly pathogenic” bird flu, it is now standard trope of every criminal health authority and academic hanger-on worldwide.

There is no H5N1 virus, not in nature and not in the lab. Nobody can make viruses nor modify viruses in the labs. They can make a chemical soup using PCR and other fraudulent, or at a minimum, unvalidated methods and may show some lab tricks for scaremongering purposes, but none of these abracadabras survive in the open. That’s because they are a dead chemical soup to begin with and are non-compatible with living organisms. The only risk that “bioengineered pathogens” represent is poisoning. Which DOES NOT CAUSE PANDEMICS. Poisoning is always localized. The pandemics are faked by government officials, military and intelligence, academia and mainstream media, as I discussed here: