Category Archives: Vaccine Mandates

Dr. Jack C. Askins, M.D.: HALLELUJAH, IT’S OVER! 4 (1)

Posted on by One comment

by Dr. Jack C. Askins, M.D.

Well, look at this. It’s beginning to be cool again to be truthful if you are a physician or work in the medical profession. The New York Times, The Atlantic, Bill Maher, and other liberal outlets are now running articles saying the absurdity of masks, mandates, boosters and school lockdowns must end. For the past 2 years, if a physician said anything negative about vaccines, masks, Fauci, or lockdowns, there was a risk of everything from censorship to loss of employment to loss of medical licensure.

Consequently, physicians remained largely uninformed and misinformed or simply cowered in fear of opening their mouths to object to the medical tyranny on full display. It was very disappointing to observe physicians across the country relinquish their responsibility in the medical management of the individual patient and turn that management over to autocratic and totalitarian bureaucrats.

Meanwhile, back at the academic medical centers, those physicians were receiving their generous NIH research grant checks which kept them in line and signed up for the vaccine and mandate cause. I think you can also throw hospital administrators into that compromised group who have been on the receiving end of taxpayer largesse.

Physicians have also been complicit in denying early treatment strategies using repurposed safe and approved drugs such as hydroxychlorine and ivermectin that could have saved thousands of lives. But, of course, the availability of effective treatments would have taken away the emergency use authorization (EUA) of the genetic “vaccines”, and we couldn’t have that. So, the physicians readily accepted the CDC disparagement of these drugs and became active participants in the promotion and administration of genetic “vaccines” who still have the EUA.

But it wasn’t just physicians who were taken in by all this nonsense. Smart psychologists and bioethicists have been writing about and explaining mass formation psychosis which explains how social isolation and “free floating anxiety” (anxiety not tethered to a source which can be visualized, I.e. you are anxious but don’t know why) can lead to anger and blind following of “leaders” who explain the cause of the anxiety (Covid and the unvaccinated) and offer a solution (vaccines and mandates). Millions of people were manipulated by these psychodynamics which were exploited by cleverly evil political leaders. I won’t go into detail about mass formation, but if interested, I recommend listening to the Joe Rogan podcast interview of Dr. Robert Malone on Spotify.

As Pfizer and Moderna rolled out their drugs for mass inoculation, and rolled up billions of dollars in profits, it quickly became obvious the “vaccines” were to be ineffective and potentially dangerous as the adverse events reported in the CDC VAERS data exploded.

Physicians should have locked arms in solidarity and said not just NO but HELL NO.

Instead, the vast majority of physicians meekly climbed aboard the boxcars of the Fauci submission train and took the inoculations and then eagerly participated in promoting the “vaccines” to their patients who were given the experimental (that’s right, experimental) shots without any semblance of informed consent. So much for the Nuremberg Code, the Hippocratic Oath, the Declaration of Helsinki, general medical ethics, and numerous Constitutional rights. Who needs all that ethics stuff when we have Biden, Fauci, and the CDC?

So here we are one year later, and we are beginning to see the facade of this evil plandemic start to crumble. Apparently, the political totalitarians in Washington, the CDC, and leftist “journalists” in the liberal media are reading the polls and realize the majority of the American people have had enough and Democrats may lose their grip on what they value most – totalitarian power to tell the rest of us how we are to live our lives.

The CDC released data 2 days ago that proclaims natural immunity is better than vaccine immunity. Can you believe it? The CDC could have said that 2 years ago as any sophomore medical student knows natural immunity is the gold standard compared to vaccine immunity. In that CDC data, Covid recovered patients are 27 times less likely to be hospitalized and 6 times less likely to die than the vaccine only patient with no prior Covid infection.

It sounds like the elites have finally reached their inconvenienced threshold and want out of the propaganda. They want their kids back in school, they don’t want useless boosters ad infinitum, and they are tired of wearing their masks and having to show their “papers” to go anywhere. Have you noticed they are vacationing in Florida and then moving there or to Texas? However, we may be seeing the beginning of the new propaganda which rejects the previous Covid narrative and we will soon hear the pronouncement that “Hallelujah, the pandemic is over”, thanks to the Herculean efforts of Joe Biden who needs you to vote Democrat this November so he can continue succeeding for the American public.

Hang on to your wallet and your barf bag.

“Dr. Jack C.  Askins, M.D. is a cardiologist in Wichita Falls, TX. This is the first article in a series of four he has authored that we intend to publish here. His reasoned scientific voice needs to be heard during these times as the COVID-19 Vaccines have become politicized through government mandates. We are encouraged by his boldness and expertise that he brings to the subject.” 

Bill Lockwood: Vax Totalitarianism 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

It’s happening all around the world; Anti-Vax Protests. Responding to the tightening regulations orchestrated by Klaus Schwab and the Word Economic Forum and implemented by socialist world leaders, people are rising in rebellion against this totalitarianism.

In France there have been over 105,000 protestors. Germany has seen 16,000 in Hamburg alone as the government there considers beginning mandating the jab for 5-11 year-olds. Forty thousand protested in Vienna, Austria against “compulsory vaccinations.” Massive fines have been proposed there for citizens who are not convinced they ought to comply to these government mandates. CNN reports that 3,000 protestors tried to storm Parliament buildings in Sofia, Bulgaria.

Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of England, has led the country to end “All covid passports, mask mandates, work restrictions.” He further announced that “Self-isolation rules may be thrown out at the end of March.” Covid passes for nightclubs will be canceled at the end of this month. “Indoor mask wearing will no longer be required.”

People are beginning to awaken to the facts that there is something definitely wrong in the vaccination mandate program, not to mention the vaccinations themselves. Dr. Peter McCullough has laid it out in five simple points on a Rumble video:

• If people are sick, stay home
• There should be no asymptomatic testing. The virus is not spread asymptomatically. This means we never need to lock down or wear masks as it is only spread by symptomatic person to symptomatic person.
• Natural immunity is robust and durable. Omicron breaks through both natural immunity and vaccine immunity.
• COVID is very treatable if started early, within the first 3 days.
• NONE of the Vaccines are safe. Drop the mandates across the board and vaccines should be taken off the market.

But this is not as much about health as it is government control. Dr. Meryl Nass, M.D. broke a story in The Defender recently which shows that the top health officials, including Dr. Fauci, were all involved in a conspiracy against treatments such as hydroxychloroquine.

Documents stored on the computers of the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) prove that the medicines Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine were proven ‘Curative’ for COVID-19 on April, 2020, but the cures were buried as ‘Top Secret.’

“Despite the science, Dr. Fauci and the medical elites have blocked the use of these effective treatments for coronavirus patients.” “Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA vaccines, accused Dr. Fauci and others of lying and causing the death of over 500,000 Americans by preventing HCQ ad Ivermectin, and other treatments from COVID-19 patients.”

This is exactly what documentation shows. This has been a conspiracy to “disqualify and condemn hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 treatment.”

Falling in line with this is the Nazi-style totalitarian control favored by Democrats. Two new surveys by the Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports show that 59% of Democrat voters would support “requiring that citizens remain confined to their homes at all times, except for emergencies, if they refuse the shot.”

Forty-five percent of Democrats would favor placing the unvaccinated in “designated facilities.” Forty-eight percent of Democrats believe that both federal and state governments should be able to fine or imprison individuals who publicly question the efficacy of the existing COVID-19 vaccines on social media, television, radio, or in online or digital publications.

Nearly a third (29%) of Democrats even support “temporarily removing parents’ custody of their children if parents refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccine.”

This is what it is all about. The door into totalitarian control—which Democrats have favored for years—is the VAX DOOR. Science and free debate be hanged.

 

Jack C. Askins, M.D.: Vaccine Status or Immune Status? 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Jack C. Askins, M.D.

What is more important, vaccine status or immune status? Most people believe a vaccine is to establish immunity to a pathogen. Prior infection has resulted in immunity throughout human history. If a person is immune to a virus, clinical infection is avoided and replication and transmission of the virus is prevented. Simple question with a straightforward simple answer based upon known science. With the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the answer is not quite so simple. Natural immunity has always been the gold standard to which vaccine development has been compared….. until the past 18 months. There has been a full-court press to promote the mRNA inoculations, unlike anything I have ever seen. Government and big business have taken over what has always been the responsibility of known science, researchers, and physicians.

Prior infection by the SARS-CoV-2 virus results in natural immunity. At least 75 years of virology and immunology has established the fact that natural immunity is at least as good and usually better than vaccine immunity; true in the past and true now. Natural immunity is broad, robust, and durable and usually will last years to a lifetime. Conversely, the mRNA vaccines appear to wane after 5-6 months. Even the CDC and the NIH agree they do not know how long the mRNA vaccines will provide “protection”. The CDC even went so far as to redefine a vaccine as a drug that provides “protection” but not immunity in the historic and traditional meaning of the word.

I compiled bullet point facts with references on natural immunity and that provided by the “vaccines”.

Bullet point facts concerning what is known about natural immunity:

• Natural immunity recognizes the full complement of SARS-CoV-2 proteins and thus provides protection against a broad array of variants. [1-4]
• Studies have demonstrated prolonged immunity with respect to memory T and B cells, bone marrow plasma cells, spike-specific neutralizing antibodies, and IgG+ memory B cells following naturally acquired immunity. [1-4]
• People who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 typically generate T cells that target at least 15-20 different fragments of coronavirus proteins. [12]
• The current vaccines result in the creation of antibodies against one specific virus spike protein programmed by the mRNA injection. [12]
• The spike protein on the virus is prone to mutate to escape the vaccine; the other myriad proteins targeted by T cells in natural immunity patients do not appear to be involved in the rapid mutation into the variants that are reducing vaccine effectiveness. [12]
• Multiple studies have confirmed that reinfections are rare in patients with natural immunity and are less severe than first-time infections. [5,6]
• Recent Israeli study included 187,549 unvaccinated persons with natural immunity: only 0.48% were reinfected; 0.02% were hospitalized; 0.008%were hospitalized with severe disease; only one died and he was over 80 years of age. [7]
• Based upon such evidence, many scientists and clinicians have concluded natural immunity and protection against COVID following recovery from infection is long-lasting. [8, 38]
• 1359 Cleveland Clinic employees previously infected, unvaccinated: no occurrence of re-infection in a 10 month follow-up from time of infection. [20]
• There is a growing body of literature supporting the conclusion that natural immunity not only confers robust, durable, and high-level protection against COVID-19, but also better than vaccine induced immunity. [13-17,19, 39]
• 23 patients who had recovered from SARS-CoV-1 still possess CD4 and CD8 T cells 17 years after infection during the 2003 epidemic. [9]
• A paper in Nature from 2008 found that 32 people born in 1915 or earlier still retained some level of immunity against the 1918 flu strain – 90 years later. [10]
• Robust durability of natural immunity is well established. Narrowly focused vaccine immunity appears to be waning at 6 months. [11]
• Natural immunity is the gold standard for effectiveness and durability to which researchers compare during vaccine development. [11]

Bullet point facts concerning what is known about the mRNA injections:

• The mRNA vaccines cause our cells to produce a specific Covid virus spike protein to which our immune system produces IgG and IgM humoral antibodies.
• IgA mucosal defense antibodies are not produced and durable T cell immunity is questionable following vaccination.
• Antibody Dependent Enhancement can increase the lethality of the Covid infection when non-neutralizing antibodies are produced by the vaccine and as the virus mutates to variants. [26]
• Although initial claims of Pfizer efficacy was 90-95%, that is down to 39% in the Israel study and 42% in the Mayo Clinic data. [27, 36]
• Approximately 30% of people who receive the mRNA shot may not develop adequate protection against the Covid-19 virus. [31]
• Duration of effectiveness appears to be 5-8 months.
• Necessity for boosters has been claimed by the CDC.
• Both Pfizer and Moderna vaccines currently appear to reduce the severity of illness and mortality rate but not prevent replication within the body or reduce viral nasal load and transmission (infectivity). [CDC declarations, multiple news reports]
• Vaccine immunity only targets the spike-protein of the original Wuhan variant, whereas natural immunity recognizes the full complement of SARS-CoV-2 proteins and thus provides protection against a greater array of variants. [Hooman Noorchasm noorchasm.medium.com]
• Canadian study reported 9/16/2021 the “incidence of myopericarditis overall was approximately 10 cases for every 10,000 inoculations with mRNA vaccine. [22]
• This year’s Covid surge numbers are larger than last year due to emergence of variants defeating the current mRNA vaccines.
• Israel and the UK were highly vaccinated and their recent hospitalizations and deaths have been mostly in the vaccinated population.
• UK Public Health data from 9/23/2021: Current Covid-19 deaths are over 3,000% higher than this time last year. 80% of those dying had the Covid vaccine. [21]
• Mass vaccination in the midst of a pandemic has not been recommended by virologists and immunologists due to the promotion of variants as the virus works to escape the vaccine and replicate within the vaccinated host.
• A recent large Japanese study predicts the virus will mutate itself to be completely immune to the vaccine and will likely become more virulent. [24]
• None of the vaccines in current application have been systematically or adequately tested for safety or efficacy in individuals who have previously been infected and recovered from SARS-CoV-2. In fact, Covid survivors have overall been largely excluded from Phase III vaccine clinical trials. [37]
• People with natural immunity are at increased risk for vaccine injury to include thrombosis and multisystem imflammatory syndrome. [25, 28, 29, 32]
• Mandated vaccination represents baseless DISCRIMINATION against already immune but unvaccinated persons being treated as inferior to the “fully vaccinated”. [30]

REFERENCES

[1] Jennifer M. Dan, et al., Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection, SCIENCE (Feb. 5, 2021) (finding that memory T and B and B cells were present up to eight months after infection, noting that “durable immunity against secondary COVID-19 disease is a possibility for most individuals”).

[2] Jackson S. Turner, et al., SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans, NATURE (May 24, 2021) (study analyzing bone marrow plasma cells of recovered COVID-19 patients reported durable evidence of antibodies for at least 11 months after infection, describing “robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune response in humans”); Ewen Callaway, Had COVID? You’ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime, NATURE (May 26, 2021), https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01442- 9 (“The study provides evidence that immunity triggered by SARS-CoV-2 infection will be extraordinarily long-lasting” and “people who recover from mild COVID-19 have bone-marrow cells that can churn out antibodies for decades”).

[3] Tyler J. Ripperger, et al., Orthogonal SARS-Cov-2 Serological Assays Enable Surveillance of Low-Prevalence Communities and Reveal Durable Humoral Immunity, 53 IMMUNITY, Issue 5, pp. 925-933 E4 (Nov. 17, 2020) (study finding that spike and neutralizing antibodies remained detectable 5-7 months after recovering from infection).

[4] Kristen W. Cohen, et al., Longitudinal analysis shows durable and broad immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection with persisting antibody responses and memory B and T cells, MEDRXIV (Apr. 27, 2021), https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.19.21255739v1 (study of 254 recovered COVID patients over 8 months “found a predominant broad-based immune memory response” and “sustained IgG+ memory B cell response, which bodes well for rapid antibody response upon virus re-exposure.” “Taken together, these results suggest that broad and effective immunity may persist long-term in recovered COVID-19 patients”)

[5] Nabin K. Shrestha, et al., Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals, MEDRXIV (preprint), https://www.medrxiv.org/content
10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v3. (“not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study “and concluded that those with natural immunity are “unlikely to benefit from covid-19 vaccination”).

[6] Laith J. Abu-Raddad, et al., SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in a cohort of 43,000 antibody-positive individuals followed for up to 35 weeks, MEDRXIV (Feb. 8, 2021), https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.15.21249731v2 (finding that of 129 reinfections from a cohort of 43,044, only one reinfection was severe, two were moderate, and none were critical or fatal); Victoria Jane Hall, et al., SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: a large, multicentre, prospective cohort study, 397 LANCET: 1459- 69 (Apr. 9, 2021), https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33844963/ (finding “a 93% lower risk of COVID-19 symptomatic infection… [which] show[s] equal or higher protection from natural infection, both for symptomatic and asymptomatic infection”); Aidan T. Hanrah, et al., Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with protection against symptomatic reinfection, 82 JOURNAL OF INFECTION, Issue 4, E29-E30 (Apr. 1, 2021), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7832116/ (Apr. 1, 2021) (examined reinfection rates in a cohort of healthcare workers and found “no symptomatic reinfections” among those examined and that protection lasted for at least 6 months).

[7] Yair Goldberg, et al., Protection of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is similar to that of BNT162b2. vaccine protection: A three-month nationwide experience from Israel, MEDRXIV (pre-print), https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.20.21255670v1

[8] Chris Baranjuk, How long does covid-19 immunity last? 373 BMJ (2021)

[9] Nina Le Bert, SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell immunity in cases of COVID-19 and SARS, and uninfected control, NATURE (Aug. 2020).

[10] Xiaocong Yu, et al., Neutralizing antibodies derived form the B cells of 1918 influenze pandemic survivors, NATURE (2008)
[11] Heidi Ledford, Six months of COVID vaccines: what 1.7 billion doses hove taught scientists, 594 NATURE 164 (June 10, 2021), https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01505-x (study notes that “Six months is not much time to collect data on how durable vaccine responses will be…. In the meantime some researchers are looking to natural immunity as a guide.”

[12] Tarke, A. et al. Cell Rep. Med. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100204 (2021).

[13] Sivan Gazit, Roei Shlezinger, Galit Perez et al. Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections
medRxiv 2021.08.24.21262415; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415

[14] Hall VJ, Foulkes S, Charlett A et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: large, multicentre, prospective cohort study (SIREN). Lancet. 2021

[15]Harvey RA, Rassen JA, Kabelac CA, et al. Association of SARS-CoV-2 Seropositive Antibody Test With Risk of Future Infection. JAMA Intern Med.

[16] Turner, J.S., Kim, W., Kalaidina, E. et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans. Nature 2021

[17] Wang, Z., Yang, X., Zhong, J. et al. Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 generates T-cell memory in the absence of a detectable viral infection. Nat Commun 12, 1724 (2021).

[18] CDC.gov/mmWave/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm

[19] BMJ 2021; 374 doi: VACCINATING PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD COVID-19: WHY DOESN’T NATURAL IMMUNITY COUNT IN THE U.S.? BMJ 2021;374:n2101

[20] Nabin K. Shrestha, et al. NECESSITY OF COVID-19 VACCINATION IN PREVIOUSLY INFECTED INDIVIDUALS. MedRxiv June 19,2021. CLEVELAND CLINIC STUDY OF 1359 UNVAXXED AND PREVIOUSLY INFECTED EMPLOYEES REVEALING NO RE-INFECTION DURING 10 MOS FROM TIME OF INFECTION.

[21] theexpose.uk. Sept. 23, 2021. British publication reporting on data from British and Scotland Public Health

[22] Kafil, Lamacie, Chenier, et al. mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination and Development of CMR-confirmed Myopericarditis. MedRxiv September 16, 2021

[23] Gazit, Shlezinger, Perez, et al. COMPARING SARS-CoV-2 NATURAL IMMUNITY TO VACCINE-INDUCED IMMUNITY: REINFECTIONS VERSUS BREAKTHROUGH INFECTIONS August 24, 2021

[24] The SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant is poised to acquire complete resistance to wild-type spike vaccines.
BioRxiv. August 23,2021. Very detailed Japanese study showing how the Covid virus is mutating toward complete resistance to current mRNA vaccines.

[25] Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome after SARS-CoV-2 Infection and COVID-19 Vaccination
Mark B. Salzman, Cheng-Wei Huang, Christopher M. O’Brien, Rhina D. Castill
Emerging Infectious Diseases • http://www.cdc.gov/eid • Vol. 27, No. 7, July 2021

[26] ANTIBODY-DEPENDENT ENHANNCEMENT SCIENCE 18 DEC. 2020. Good review of ADE, mechanism and history of its occurrence in other infections (Dengue fever, HIV, Ebola).

[27] COMPARISON OF TWO HIGHLY-EFFECTIVE mRNA VACCINES FOR COVID-19 DURING PERIODS OF ALPHA AND DELTA VARIANT PREVALENCE. medRxiv. August, 08, 2021
This is the Mayo Clinic study revealing the Pfizer vaccine effectiveness against the Delta variant at 42%.

[28] A LETTER OF WARNING TO THE PENNSBURY SCHOOL BOARD IN PENNSYLVANIA: MANDATING VACCINATION OF COVID-RECOVERED AND ALREADY IMMUNE PERSONS IS HAZARDOUS. Hooman Noorchasm noorchasm.medium.com

[29] Krammer, et al, ROBUST SPIKE ANTIBODY RESPONSES AND INCREASED REACTOGENICITY IN SEROPOSITIVE INDIVIDUALS AFTER A SINGLE DOSE OF SARS-COV-2 mRNA VACCINE,
medRx (Feb 1, 2021)

[30] WHY I BELIEVE SCOTUS SHOULD ADJUDICATE ZYWICKI VS. GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY: ITS NOT ABOUT INDIVIDUAL AUTONOMY, ITS ABOUT BASELESS DISCRIMINATION AND EXECUTIVE OVERREACH! Hooman Noorchasm noorchasm.medium.com

[31] A SEVERE ERROR IN FEDERAL PUBLIC HEALTH POLICY: ANTIBODY TESTING IS CRITICAL FOR DETERMINATION OF COVID-19 VACCINE NECESSITY AND EFFICACY IN EVERY AMERICAN.
Hooman Noorchasm noorchasm.medium.com

[32] Fabio Angell, SARS-CoV-2 VACCINES: LIGHTS AND SHADOWS, 88 European J. Of Internal Medicine 1-8 (2021)

[33] James f. Childress, et al., Public Health Ethics: Mapping the Terrain, 30(2) J. Law & Med. Ethics 170 (2002).

[34] N. Kojima, NK Shrestha, JD Klausner. A Systematic Review of the Protective Effect of Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection on Repeat Infection. medRxiv 8/27/21 Dept of Medicine, UCLA.
Findings: Weighted average risk reduction against reinfection was 90.4% and observed for up to 10 months.

[35] N. Kojima, A Roshani, M Brubeck, A Baca, JD Klausner. Incidence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Infection Among Previously Infected or Vaccinated Employees. Dept of Medicine, UCLA.
Findings: No difference in the infection incidence between vaccinated individuals and individuals with previous infection.

[36] newsnetwork.MayoClinic.org

[37] VACCINE INFORMATION FACT SHEET FOR RECIPIENTS AND CAREGIVERS ABOUT COMIRNATY (COVID-19 VACCINE, mRNA) AND PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE TO PREVENT CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 (COVID-19). 9/22/2021 fda.gov55

[38] LASTING IMMUNITY FOUND AFTER RECOVERY FROM COVID-19. NIH January 26, 2021

[39] REINFECTION RATES AMONG PATIENTS WHO PREVIOUSLY TESTED POSITIVE FOR COVD-19: A RETROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY. Sheehan, Reddy, Rothberg CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES 3/15/2021
Six months after infection, protection against symptomatic disease exceeded 90%.

“Dr. Jack Askins is a cardiologist in Wichita Falls, TX. This is the first article in a series of four he has authored that we intend to publish here. His reasoned scientific voice needs to be heard during these times as the COVID-19 Vaccines have become politicized through government mandates. We are encouraged by his boldness and expertise that he brings to the subject.” 

Jack C. Askins, M.D.: Back to the Future-1905 Mandates 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Jack C. Askins, M.D.

“History for most people starts the day they were born”. “If we do not know history, we are doomed to repeat it”. It can be amusing, but more often, frightening to observe our political, medical, and educational elites arrogantly and with unconstrained hubris making decisions for the rest of us that history predicts will not turn out well. These thoughts and quotes were coming to mind as I recently went back in time and reviewed the history of medication and vaccine development leading to FDA approvals. This review was inspired by all the chaos and rancor brought about by vaccine mandates and the pushback by all those who have so much to lose if they choose not to take the mRNA shot. It should not be overlooked that vaccine mandates in earlier times of our history have taken place with an FDA and CDC that seemed to be less political and more vigilant in regards to adverse events from administration of drugs. The threshold for stopping the production and marketing of a vaccine was very low if there was evidence for injury or death.

However, they did not always get it right and the history of safety pronouncements by health authorities, including the FDA and CDC, is not a sterling example of accuracy and truth. Thousands of lives have been lost and many more thousands adversely affected as a result of implicitly trusting the so-called health experts. Think of all the chemicals and substances that have been pronounced safe during the past 100 years: lead pipes, lead in paint, cigarettes, asbestos, glyphosates, heroin, thalidomide. The list goes on. The Yale School of Medicine did a study and found that approximately 30% of drugs approved between 2001 and 2010 were found to have major safety issues that were discovered at a median of 4.2 years after they were made widely available to patients. Problems were more common among drugs that were granted “accelerated approval”.

The CDC has published a report titled Historical Vaccine Safety Concerns and in it mentions contaminated polio vaccine led to 40,000 cases of polio caused by the vaccine. 200 children were left paralyzed and 10 died (“Cutter Incident”, 1955). In the 1970’s, swine flu vaccine had been administered to 40 million people when the mass vaccination was stopped as it became apparent 1 person for every 100,000 vaccinated developed Gillian-Barre Syndrome (GBS). They stopped the mass vaccination for swine flu due to a 0.001% increased risk for GBS. Compare that with the estimated risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in people under age 40 who received either the Moderna, Pfizer, or J&J shots.

In a recent Canadian study, the risk for myocarditis following mRNA shots was between 0.1% and 1.0%, i.e. between 100 and 1000 times higher than the swine flu GBS experience. Myocarditis in a young person is not a benign process! Why is the CDC frantically pushing for young Americans, including children, to be “vaccinated” with these mRNA shots when their risk of dying from the Covid virus is much less than the risk of the shots? Johnson and Johnson now acknowledges their “vaccine” can cause GBS but the drug has not been withdrawn and, in fact, they are promoting their booster.

How The Mandates Began

So this now brings us to the vaccine mandates and how all this got started. Early last year (2020), governor Newsom of California placed gathering restrictions on houses of worship. A lawsuit ensued (South Bay Pentecostal Church v. Newsom) and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to enjoin (prohibit) California’s restrictions on churches in a 5-4 vote. No reasoning was given in the unsigned majority opinion. However, Justice John Roberts wrote a brief opinion that counseled deference (obedience) to the government (Newsom) during this public health crisis. Roberts cited the 1905 smallpox mandate case (Jacobson v. Massachusetts) once during that opinion piece. Soon, the South Bay concurrence (opinion piece) would become a “super-precedent” and in the following 6 months was cited in 140 cases. Now, it is difficult to read or understand the legal basis for vaccine mandates without understanding Jacobson.

The 1905 Supreme Court decision mandating smallpox vaccination (Jacobson v. Massachusetts) is often cited as the precedent to justify a federal mandate requiring Covid-19 vaccination. The ruling in that case was very narrow and stated that Mr. Jacobson could either take the smallpox vaccine or pay a $5.00 fine (equivalent to approximately $140.00 today). One cannot read about vaccine mandates, including the current intrusive Covid mandates, without citation back to the 1905 Supreme Court decision. Jacobson has been referred to and cited numerous times over the past 100 years in cases as diverse as forced saluting of the American flag, limiting religious exemptions, gun control, voting rights, abortion (Roe v. Wade) and restrictions on church gatherings. Jacobson is everywhere!

Perhaps most notorious and objectionable, Jacobson’s reasoning was the basis for Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’ 1927 decision in Buck v. Bell, which allowed compulsory sterilization of intellectually impaired individuals. The 1905 Jacobson ruling is the only case cited as precedent in that opinion. In Buck v. Bell, Justice Holmes and the Supreme Court upheld Virginia’s eugenics law which mandated involuntary sterilization of cognitive challenged people referred to as “imbeciles”. The vote was 7-2. Holmes equated government-compelled sterilization to government-compelled vaccination. Holmes wrote: “the principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.” Thus, in this single sentence, Holmes expanded the scope of Jacobson beyond its narrow boundaries to support forcible intrusions onto body autonomy.

The current coercion for mandatory vaccination is equally as disgusting and objectionable as the Holmes ruling was for sterilization. In the current iteration of the legal interpretation of the 1905 Jacobson case, our government and corporate “leaders” have cast the unvaccinated as the “imbeciles” and rather than castration or cutting of Fallopian tubes, they have stipulated the dystopian choice of either loss of employment or involuntarily taking an “accelerated approval” novel drug. (As an aside, rather than financial devastation, some might prefer the Justice Holmes legal remedy.)

Jacobson reasoned that vaccine mandates are a part of the general power of states to protect public health, safety and morals, powers that were only limited (at that time) by a constitutional prohibition against “arbitrary” action. If a governmental enactment bore a “real and substantial” relationship, to use Jacobson’s terms, to the end it sought to achieve, the enactment (of the mandate) would survive review. This current mandate does not and will not achieve the ends sought by government. Those ends, as required by previous vaccines and mandates, are to stop infection and transmission of the virus and achieve herd immunity and ultimately eradication of the disease. That was true for smallpox, measles, mumps, and rubella as the effectiveness of those vaccines approach 100% in reaching those goals. The mRNA “vaccines” have not kept the promises of 90-95% effective made last December. Effectiveness of the Pfizer shots are down to 18-39% after 6 months in various studies. The Pfizer drug was “approved” faster than any prior vaccine and was based on 6 months of data rather than 2 years as was the trial design. There was no formal and customary FDA advisory committee meeting prior to approval and the control group was eliminated by offering the shots to the control group participants.

Furthermore, in the Jacobson court ruling, Justice Harlan recognized that a vaccine mandate could not be enacted based on pretextual motivations and the mandate could not be enforced in an arbitrary fashion against particular persons. In regards to the “pretextual motivations,” Harlan explained the courts would need to disallow the mandate if the effect of the mandate did not protect the public health. It is now widely known as a result of observational data, clinical trials, and admission by the CDC that the mRNA shots do not prevent infection or transmission of the Covid-19 virus. The pretext for the Covid mandate is not fulfilled by the means to achieve the ends. The proponents of these inoculations are only left with advocating for a reduced severity of disease and perhaps less death. But even that is debatable. Israel is 80% “vaccinated” with Pfizer and in September, 2021, they had 130% more cases and 56% more deaths than they had the previous year (2020). Reducing severity of disease without preventing infection or transmission of the virus fits the definition of a treatment and not the historical definition of a vaccine.

Regarding the “arbitrary” fashion of applying the mandate against particular persons, Justice Harlan wrote: the enforcement power of the state cannot be “exercised in particular circumstances and in reference to particular persons in such an arbitrary, unreasonable manner.” Hospital workers are “particular persons” and enforcement of the mandate against them will not protect the public health or the public safety. As the CEO of United Regional Hospital (Wichita Falls, TX) stated in her mandate announcement video, there has been no confirmed case of hospital staff infecting a patient with Covid-19 since the start of the pandemic last year. Paradoxically, the mandate may well result in worsening of public health and public safety due to the loss of well-trained and experienced ER and critical care hospital staff who may resign or be fired due to refusing the mRNA injections. The hospital has already been replacing nurses and other staff with out-of-town “travelers” – expensive replacements, often less experienced and less skilled with no connection to our community. All of this has been imposed upon nursing and other staff shortages that existed prior to the pandemic. Thus, enforcing the mandate against these employees should be considered arbitrary and unreasonable.

But mandating that a person take a vaccine is only half of the issue. The other half is what happens if a person refuses the vaccine and what alternatives are there to the vaccine? Mr. Jacobson had to pay a $5.00 fine. In the case of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination mandates, the CDC allows diagnostic testing for antibodies to the virus (IgG) or proof of prior infection as an alternative to vaccination (CDC.gov, 2013). Prior to the 2020 politicization of the CDC, natural immunity was recognized for the immunity gold standard that it represents. In the Jacobson majority opinion, Justice John Marshal Harlan wrote “so long as there was a reasonable fit” between the measure adopted, and the government’s interest to promote public health, the law was valid. A choice between a coerced unconventional and poorly effective “vaccination” or the loss of one’s life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness does not appear to be a “reasonable fit”. There is no proportionality in the legal remedy being considered. By the standard expressed in the often quoted Jacobson case, the current vaccine mandate would not be held valid.

During the past 100 years, the Jacobson ruling has been tortured and contorted and applied to many diverse legal conflicts, the net result of which is to justify an expanded view of federal and state government power. It has been described as an “escape hatch” from the Constitution. During 2020 and 2021 we have seen and experienced the effect of Jacobson’s assault (and its contemporary amplification by Justice Roberts) upon our Constitutional rights and protections in the realm of lockdowns, mandates, masks, church gatherings and other freedoms of association. With the replacement of Justice Ginsburg with Justice Barrett on the Supreme Court last year, we appear to be returning to a more Constitutional interpretation of the Free Exercise and Due Process laws (Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo). Federal and state governments, local health departments, corporate and physician leadership will hopefully soon understand that the occasion of a pandemic or other health crisis does not suspend Constitutional rights, freedoms, and liberties.

“Dr. Jack Askins is a cardiologist in Wichita Falls, TX. This is the first article in a series of four he has authored that we intend to publish here. His reasoned scientific voice needs to be heard during these times as the COVID-19 Vaccines have become politicized through government mandates. We are encouraged by his boldness and expertise that he brings to the subject.” 

Jack C. Askins, M.D. : IMMUNITY, VACCINES, AND MANDATE CONSIDERATIONS-Part 1 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Jack C. Askins, M.D.

The purpose of a vaccine is to prevent an infection, or lessen the severity of an infection if a person were to become infected. From a public health standpoint, the purpose of a vaccine is to reduce and hopefully prevent the spread of a virus within a given population. It was concern for public health that resulted in a Supreme Court ruling in favor of a mandate for inoculation with the vaccine for smallpox in 1905 (Jacobson v Massachusetts). Subsequently, 100 years of Supreme Court and state case law have solidified vaccine mandates in the American public health arena.
It is worth noting smallpox was highly contagious, had a 30% mortality rate, and was disfiguring in survivors due to the skin lesions. Prior to the landmark 1905 decision, the smallpox vaccine had been found to be highly effective in preventing infection. Scientific discovery of a smallpox vaccine began in 1796 when Edward Jenner used material from a skin lesion on a cow (cowpox) to inoculate people and prevent smallpox. Cowpox was used until a more modern vaccine was created in the mid 1900’s.

The historical precedence and success of vaccines for smallpox, measles, mumps, rubella, polio, and hepatitis has been highly referenced to support mandates for the inoculation of the mRNA drugs for Covid-19. However, there are important differences in the development and effectiveness of the drugs. The MMR, hepatitis, smallpox, and polio vaccines had much longer development times and phase 3 clinical trials typically lasted years. The overall effectiveness of these vaccines approach 100%. Durability of immunity is measured in years, and often last a lifetime. By comparison to the mRNA drugs, there was minimal reporting of complications in the CDC VAERS data for the vaccines over the past 30 years Vaccine hesitancy and opposition to the mandates most often focuses on the following: liberty and freedom to choose (“my body, my choice”), the abbreviated clinical trials and FDA approval schedule which is unprecedented, the lack of long-term complications data for the injections, the average 98-99% survival rate of the virus (nearly 100% survival in children), the emerging poor efficacy and durability of the mRNA drug, and the CDC VAERS data of complications and deaths following administration of the mRNA drugs. The frantic coercion now being applied in the enforcement of the mandates is also leading to resistance.

But here is the important point in regards to the current mandates: the mRNA vaccines we currently have, unfortunately, do not meet the standards set by previous vaccines,upon which rests 100 years of Supreme Court and state case law now being referenced to support “vaccine” mandates. The effectiveness of the Pfizer shots are down to 39-41% to prevent infection and the CDC admits the mRNA shots do not prevent viral spread by infected, vaccinated people. The CDC found it necessary to redefine “vaccine” as providing “protection” but not necessarily “immunity”.
The nasal viral loads of the vaccinated with a breakthrough infection is the same, if not higher, than the unvaccinated with a Covid infection. The poor effectiveness and inability of the mRNA drugs to prevent viral spread, negates the public health reasons for the mandates. The supporters of the mandates cite less severe infection and a lower death rate in the mRNA “vaccinated” but the Israeli and UK data argue against that as their current surge and hospitalizations have become a pandemic of the vaccinated.

Throughout all of this discourse, there has been a glaring omission of a very important question and fact. To not discuss this fact must be by design as it is a core fundamental in all of virology, immunology, and is the gold standard to which successful vaccine development has been compared. The question is, “what is more important, vaccine status or immune status?” The answer, of course, is immune status. Vaccines strive to attain immunity. Vaccine status does not guarantee immunity. As stated above, historical and traditional vaccines attain immunity with a very high degree of effectiveness in order to achieve FDA approval for mass vaccination. These mRNA drugs would not have achieved FDA approval using those historical standards.

There are interesting recommendations within the CDC vaccine recommendations at CDC.gov. I have enclosed “Table 3” that deals with “acceptable presumptive evidence of immunity” regarding the viruses responsible for measles, mumps, and rubella. Referring to “medical personnel”, the recommendations state “laboratory evidence of immunity” and “laboratory evidence of disease” are both identified as alternatives to “documentation of vaccination”. I have enclosed a copy of Table 3 (see link below) at the end of this document.

Laboratory evidence of immunity to the Covid-19 virus has advanced from these older MMR recommendations and include qualitative IgG and IgM antibodies against the spike protein, a semi-quantitative antibody test against the spike protein, and antibodies against the nucleocapsid of the virus (mRNA inoculation recipients do not form antibodies against the nucleocapsid). Additionally, there is a T cell test (T-Detect) which determines the presence of T cell immunity against the Covid virus and is reported as positive or negative.

I had a Covid infection in November, 2020, and did the T cell test 2 months ago and it was positive for T cell immunity. I did the other antibody tests this week and I have IgG and IgM antibodies against Covid-19, antibodies to the nucleocapsid, and my semiquantitative antibody result is 148.0 U/ml (negative is <0.8). In context with
available data and studies referenced in my fact sheet with references enclosed with this document, immunity against

Covid-19 that is robust, broad, and durable is demonstrated. There is mounting evidence the mRNA shots are not safe for the Covid-recovered person with natural immunity. Systemic inflammatory reactions (cytokine storm) and venous and arterial thrombosis have been shown to occur following the immunization. Thus, for the natural immunity person, there is no compelling reason to take the shot for immunity and there is a small risk of a significant vaccine injury.

Hooman Noorchasm, M.D., PhD is an internationally known and respected immunologist and immunology consultant. He recently stated “any move to mandate Americans who had recovered from the virus to get vaccinated was unscientific, unethical and illegal”. He has advocated for diagnostic testing for antibodies to Covid-19 prior to vaccination to see if there is established immunity present and determine need for the shots. He also states up to 30% of those who receive the mRNA inoculations do not establish adequate immunity. He goes on to say patients who receive the shots should be tested later for antibodies to ensure adequate immunization.

The unvaccinated are being presented as a monolithic group with no mention that it is a binary group comprised of Covid-naive and Covid-recovered people. This fact is not being acknowledged by the CDC in their zeal to promote the mRNA inoculations. Consequently, the media and senior leadership at United Regional Hospital are ignoring the established science related to natural immunity that has been shown to be superior to vaccine “protection”. A high percentage of our health care workers are Covid-recovered and would have measurable immunity to the virus. These are the same health care workers that worked all last year and so far this year at URH to provide care for sick, Covid-infected people in our community. To now take a one-size-fits-all approach and mandate these poorly effective drugs of limited durability with the coercion of loss of employment (or staff privileges) is nothing less than unethical, immoral, and possibly unconstitutional.

Note! Click the link and scroll down near the bottom of the page to Table #3.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6204a1.htm

“Dr. Jack Askins is a cardiologist in Wichita Falls, TX. This is the first article in a series of four he has authored that we intend to publish here. His reasoned scientific voice needs to be heard during these times as the COVID-19 Vaccines have become politicized through government mandates. We are encouraged by his boldness and expertise that he brings to the subject.”