BY RHODA WILSON ON JANUARY 24, 2023
A jaw-dropping article published by The Wall Street Journal in December 2020 has resurfaced. In it, American physicians admitted to ventilating patients who did not need it as a step in their protocol. It was done not as a treatment that was likely to benefit the patient, but rather as a fruitless and callous way of attempting to stop the spread of covid-19.
Doctors are treating a new flood of critically ill coronavirus patients with treatments from before the pandemic, to keep more patients alive and send them home sooner.
Before the pandemic, between about 30% to more than 40% of ventilator patients died, according to research … As the pandemic grew, hospitals in the US reported death rates in some cases of about 50% for ventilated covid-19 patients.Hospitals Retreat from Early Covid Treatment and Return to Basics, The Wall Street Journal, 20 December 2020
Add to the fact that up to 50 per cent of covid-19 “cases” were just “PCR positive” false positives, wrote James Lyons-Weiler. “Euthanising humans is illegal. Especially for the benefit of other patients.”
Did Protocolists Euthanise Covid-19 Patients with Ventilators and Sedatives “To Save Other Patients”, >50% kill rate? Up to 70% of covid-19 Deaths Due to Ventilators
TRIGGER ALERT: If you lost a loved one to covid-19 and the doctors tried to ventilate your loved one early, please do not read any further. Have someone close to you read this, read the full article, and describe the article to you in a calm, quiet setting. You will need a friend to help you through this.
If you are a doctor who has been persecuted for doing the right thing, perhaps you lost your license or it is being threatened, send this Wall Street Journal article to your lawyers – and thank you for not acquiescing to the demands that you kill patients on ventilators and with strong sedatives.
Either way, I encourage PR readers to read the WSJ article yourself and see if you agree or disagree.
WSJ Article: McCullough, Kory, Lyons-Weiler, and Others Were Right
In a jaw-dropping article published by The Wall Street Journal – ‘Hospitals Retreat From Early Covid Treatment and Return to Basics’ – physicians admit to ventilating patients who did not need it as a step in their protocol – get this – not as a treatment that was likely to benefit the patient, but rather as a fruitless and callous way of attempting to stop the spread of covid-19.
Last spring, with less known about the disease, doctors often pre-emptively put patients on ventilators or gave powerful sedatives largely abandoned in recent years. The aim was to save the seriously ill and protect hospital staff from Covid-19.
Now hospital treatment for the most critically ill looks more like it did before the pandemic. Doctors hold off longer before placing patients on ventilators. Patients get less powerful sedatives, with doctors checking more frequently to see if they can halt the drugs entirely and dialling back how much air ventilators push into patients’ lungs with each breath.
“We were intubating sick patients very early. Not for the patient’s benefit, but to control the epidemic and to save other patients,” Dr. Iwashyna said “That felt awful.”
Yes, euthanising humans is illegal. Especially for the benefit of other patients. It should feel awful.
Last spring, doctors put patients on ventilators partly to limit contagion at a time when it was less clear how the virus spread when protective masks and gowns were in short supply. Doctors could have employed other kinds of breathing support devices that don’t require risky sedation, but early reports suggested patients using them could spray dangerous amounts of virus into the air, said Theodore Iwashyna, a critical-care physician at University of Michigan and Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals in Ann Arbor, Mich.
Subsequent research found the alternative devices to ventilators, such as delivering oxygen through nasal tubes, weren’t as risky to caretakers as believed. Doctors also gained experience with covid-19 patients, learning to spot signs of who might suddenly turn seriously ill, some said.
The WSJ article describes a study conducted that now allows doctors to predict who needs a ventilator and who does not:
It found more doctors now follow the pre-pandemic protocols, which have reduced the number of deaths and shortened the time patients spend on ventilators, HCA’s chief medical officer said.
Before the pandemic, between about 30% to more than 40% of ventilator patients died, according to research. Numbers were sharply higher in the pandemic’s early hot spot in Wuhan, China. As the pandemic grew, hospitals in the US reported death rates in some cases of about 50% for ventilated covid-19 patients.
(25.6 – 7.6)/25.6 = 70% of Covid-19 Deaths Due to Ventilators? Up to 50% Who Died in Hospital Did Not Have covid-19?
One study of three New York City hospitals found the death rate for all covid-19 patients dropped to 7.6% from 25.6% between March and August after accounting for younger, healthier patients in the summer. Hospitals in New York were less crowded in August than during the April surge, which could increase mortality, the study’s authors wrote in October in the Journal of Hospital Medicine. The study also suggests patients may have benefited from new medications and improved treatment, they said.
Add to the fact that up to 50 per cent of covid-19 “cases” were just “PCR positive” false positives. This means under protocolists’ “care,” perhaps as many as 50% of people who died with a PCR positive test result died because of a false positive PCR test. They either never had covid-19, or they became infected in the hospital after going home for ten days with a respiratory ailment other than covid-19 that, if tended to properly with outpatient care, would never have led to hospitalisation.
Perverse Incentives to Ventilate Patients
In a remarkable rarity of “fact-checking” gone right during the heyday of covid-19 disinformation, USA Today actually verified Dr. Scott Jensen’s reports that hospitals were receiving financial incentives that he considered “gaming the system,” citing numerous independent so-called fact-checker opinion websites.
“We rate the claim that hospitals get paid more if patients are listed as covid-19 and on ventilators as TRUE,” they reported in April 2020.
“Hospitals and doctors do get paid more for Medicare patients diagnosed with covid-19 or if it’s considered presumed (sic) they have covid-19 absent a laboratory-confirmed test, and three times more if the patients are placed on a ventilator to cover the cost of care and loss of business resulting from a shift in focus to treat covid-19 cases.”
It’s REAL Early Treatment, Stupid
We were right. So many of us were right. Protocolists should have listened.
Further reading: Who Are the World’s Leading Authorities in covid-19 Treatment? James Lyons-Weiler, 27 September 2021
Immeasurably Callous: Now That the Vaccinated Are Being Hospitalised Far More, “Guidelines are just guidelines”
From the WSJ article: “Researchers and doctors continue to study covid-19 patients who require ventilators, and some experts have called for flexibility from pre-pandemic standards for doctors to decide how to calibrate ventilators. ‘It’s personalisation, that’s the key word,’ said John Marini, a professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota. ‘Guidelines are just guidelines’.”
Anyone paying attention to the Public Health takeover of allopathy understands the reality that guidelines are only guidelines until someone in HHS or the White House decides to shut you down on personalised medicine.
We need harsh, hard investigations with consequences – and activists need to write bills tying the hands of protocolists to prevent them from ever again killing one patient to hypothetically save another – under threat of a murder charge.
We need legislation for “on-demand” scripts for off-label medicines that patients want for potentially deadly infections – regardless of “FDA Approval” – FDA does not, by definition, have to “approve” off-label scripts.
Also: there are helmet-based ventilator options – that are far less invasive, patients do not feel they are being attacked or strangled – and they come with free training.
About the Author
James Lyons-Weiler is a research scientist and author of ‘Cures vs. Profits’, ‘Environmental and Genetic Causes of Autism’, and ‘Ebola: An Evolving Story’. He regularly publishes articles on a Substack page titled ‘Popular Rationalism’ which you can subscribe to and follow HERE.
Pfizer Executive: ‘Mutate’ COVID via ‘Directed Evolution’ for Company to Continue Profiting Off of Vaccines … ‘COVID is Going to be a Cash Cow for Us’ … ‘That is Not What We Say to the Public’ … ‘People Won’t Like That’ … ‘Don’t Tell Anyone’
- Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations – mRNA Scientific Planner: “One of the things we’re exploring is like, why don’t we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could create — preemptively develop new vaccines, right? So, we have to do that. If we’re gonna do that though, there’s a risk of like, as you could imagine — no one wants to be having a pharma company mutating f**king viruses.”
- Walker: “Don’t tell anyone. Promise you won’t tell anyone. The way it [the experiment] would work is that we put the virus in monkeys, and we successively cause them to keep infecting each other, and we collect serial samples from them.”
- Walker: “You have to be very controlled to make sure that this virus [COVID] that you mutate doesn’t create something that just goes everywhere. Which, I suspect, is the way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. It makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bullsh*t.”
- Walker: “From what I’ve heard is they [Pfizer scientists] are optimizing it [COVID mutation process], but they’re going slow because everyone is very cautious — obviously they don’t want to accelerate it too much. I think they are also just trying to do it as an exploratory thing because you obviously don’t want to advertise that you are figuring out future mutations.”
[NEW YORK – Jan. 25, 2023] Project Veritas released a new video today exposing a Pfizer executive, Jordon Trishton Walker, who claims that his company is exploring a way to “mutate” COVID via “Directed Evolution” to preempt the development of future vaccines.
Walker says that Directed Evolution is different than Gain-of-Function, which is defined as “a mutation that confers new or enhanced activity on a protein.” In other words, it means that a virus such as COVID can become more potent depending on the mutation / scientific experiment performed on it.
The Pfizer executive told a Veritas journalist about his company’s plan for COVID vaccines, while acknowledging that people would not like this information if it went public.
“One of the things we [Pfizer] are exploring is like, why don’t we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could create — preemptively develop new vaccines, right? So, we have to do that. If we’re gonna do that though, there’s a risk of like, as you could imagine — no one wants to be having a pharma company mutating f**king viruses,” Walker said.
“From what I’ve heard is they [Pfizer scientists] are optimizing it [COVID mutation process], but they’re going slow because everyone is very cautious — obviously they don’t want to accelerate it too much. I think they are also just trying to do it as an exploratory thing because you obviously don’t want to advertise that you are figuring out future mutations,” he said.
“Don’t tell anyone. Promise you won’t tell anyone. The way it [the experiment] would work is that we put the virus in monkeys, and we successively cause them to keep infecting each other, and we collect serial samples from them.”
Walker drew parallels between this current Pfizer project and what may have happened at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
“You have to be very controlled to make sure that this virus [COVID] that you mutate doesn’t create something that just goes everywhere. Which, I suspect, is the way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. It makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bullsh*t,” he said.
“You’re not supposed to do Gain-of-Function research with viruses. Regularly not. We can do these selected structure mutations to make them more potent. There is research ongoing about that. I don’t know how that is going to work. There better not be any more outbreaks because Jesus Christ,” he said.
Walker also told the Veritas journalist that COVID has been instrumental for Pfizer’s recent business success:
Walker:Part of what they [Pfizer scientists] want to do is, to some extent, to try to figure out, you know, how there are all these new strains and variants that just pop up. So, it’s like trying to catch them before they pop up and we can develop a vaccine prophylactically, like, for new variants. So, that’s why they like, do it controlled in a lab, where they say this is a new epitope, and so if it comes out later on in the public, we already have a vaccine working.
Veritas Journalist:Oh my God. That’s perfect. Isn’t that the best business model though? Just control nature before nature even happens itself? Right?
Walker:Yeah. If it works.
Veritas Journalist:What do you mean if it works?
Walker:Because some of the times there are mutations that pop up that we are not prepared for. Like with Delta and Omicron. And things like that. Who knows? Either way, it’s going to be a cash cow. COVID is going to be a cash cow for us for a while going forward. Like obviously.
Veritas Journalist:Well, I think the whole research of the viruses and mutating it, like, would be the ultimate cash cow.
Walker:Yeah, it’d be perfect.
Walker went on to explain how Big Pharma and government officials, such as at the Food & Drug Administration [FDA], have mutual interests, and how that is not in the best interest of the American people:
Walker:[Big Pharma] is a revolving door for all government officials.
Walker:In any industry though. So, in the pharma industry, all the people who review our drugs — eventually most of them will come work for pharma companies. And in the military, defense government officials eventually work for defense companies afterwards.
Veritas Journalist:How do you feel about that revolving door?
Walker:It’s pretty good for the industry to be honest. It’s bad for everybody else in America.
Veritas Journalist:Why is it bad for everybody else?
Walker:Because when the regulators reviewing our drugs know that once they stop regulating, they are going to work for the company, they are not going to be as hard towards the company that’s going to give them a job.
About Project Veritas
James O’Keefe established Project Veritas in 2010 as a non-profit journalism enterprise to continue his undercover reporting work. Today, Project Veritas investigates and exposes corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions to achieve a more ethical and transparent society and to engage in litigation to: protect, defend and expand human and civil rights secured by law, specifically First Amendment rights including promoting the free exchange of ideas in a digital world; combat and defeat censorship of any ideology; promote truthful reporting; and defend freedom of speech and association issues including the right to anonymity. O’Keefe serves as the CEO and Chairman of the Board so that he can continue to lead and teach his fellow journalists, as well as protect and nurture the Project Veritas culture.
Project Veritas is a registered 501(c)3 organization. Project Veritas does not advocate specific resolutions to the issues raised through its investigations.