Deborah Birx Lied...And Is Still Lying
Why Blow Up The Narrative To Defend Paxlovid?
Deborah Birx dropped the Mother Of All Truth Bombs last Friday in her interview with Fox News’ Neil Cavuto—and she did it while managing to tell still more lies. Give the not-so-good doctor credit for this much: she has some mad doublespeak skillz. Orwell would be quite impressed.
What did Birx say that set cyberspace ablaze? In short, she said the quiet parts about the mRNA inoculations out loud (emphasis mine).
DR. BIRX: I knew these vaccines were not going to protect against infection. And I think we overplayed the vaccines, and it made people then worry that it's not going to protect against severe disease and hospitalization. It will. But let's be very clear: 50% of the people who died from the Omicron surge were older, vaccinated. So that's why I'm saying even if you're vaccinated and boosted, if you're unvaccinated right now, the key is testing and Paxlovid. It's effective. It's a great antiviral. And really, that is what's going to save your lives right now if you're over 70, which if you look at the hospitalizations, hospitalizations are rising steadily with new admissions, particularly in those over 70. And so if you live in the South - I know people keep talking about the fall - I'm worried about the South.
The full video interview is available here. The transcript quoted above begins at 6:21 of the interview.
So much mendacity in one short interview, one hardly knows where to begin.
She Admitted She Lied
By far the most sensational bit of this interview is her cavalier admission “I knew these vaccines were not going to protect against infection.”
She knew this? She knew this all along and said….nothing?
It would be difficult to overstate the significance of this tidbit of knowledge she claims to have had. With that one sentence she confirms what innumerable commentators across the alternative media landscape (including me) have said for months: the mRNA inoculations have never stopped infections.
That failure was evident from the epidemiological data from around the world. Vaccination rates not only did not slow down the rate of spread for COVID-19, but in country after country that rate actually increased—which can only happen if the inoculations are not stopping infections.
Yet even as Birx confirmed what many already know, it necessariliy follows that everyone else at the CDC, the FDA, the White House, as well as in Big Pharma and the corporate media knew that the inoculations were ineffective—and all repeatedly and explicitly spouted the “Big Lie” that the inoculations would prevent infection.
If Birx knew the inoculations would not work, everyone from the President of the United States on down had to have known as well. They knew the inoculations were ineffective even as they were claiming again and again the exact opposite.
Birx bolsters her claim by pointing out something that has to be making some folk mighty twitchy: at least half of the deaths attributed to Omicron were among the inoculated.
Keep in mind that even before Omicron took the stage clinical research was establishing that the inoculations’ dubious efficacy was seen mainly in younger, healthier patients.
Given this predicate, her acknowledgement that 50% at least of Omicron deaths were among the inoculated is not a dramatic truth bomb, but it does further shred the narrative on the inoculations by pointing out the persistent lie within the narrative that the inoculations prevent severe disease and death from COVID-19. As Alex Berenson has recently pointed out, data from the Netherlands shows the inoculations actually contribute to both.
Birx is telegraphing to the world that she has long known this to be true. She knows, and has always known, that the inoculation are toxic, poisonous, garbage. These statements of hers, quoted verbatim, admit of no other interpretation.
Moreover, Birx not only confirms that “the Big Lie” was and is, in fact, a lie, she also indicts everyone who has ever uttered it. If she knew better—and she claims she does—then they had to know better as well. It is inconceivable that Birx would have knowledge or access to data that Anthony Fauci, Rochelle Walensky, and other “experts” would not. She knows, therefore they know.
After The Truth, Lying About Paxlovid
What makes the Birx interview truly remarkable, however, is her capacity to tell outright lies even as she is shredding the narrative on the mRNA inoculations. She drops two whoppers right after admitting to one and all that she—and therefore everyone—knew from the outset the inoculations were snake oil: that Paxlovid is “key” to dealing with COVID, and that there is a “wave” of hospitalizations sweeping across the southern United States.
Is Paxlovid “key” to dealing with COVID?
The data on Paxlovid rebound infections argues otherwise—and the data has always been out there for everyone to see. While the media at first staked the same claim that Birx is persisting in peddling today, the reality has always been otherwise.
Birx would do well to acquaint herself with Igor Chudov’s excellent research on this topic, as he brings receipts in proving that Paxlovid not only is not a “great antiviral”, but is more Pfizer snake oil.
Yet, just as she knew the inoculations were also snake oil, it is inconceivable that she is unaware of the uselessness of Paxlovid. As one of the anointed “experts” and public health insiders, she cannot be unaware that even Pfizer recognized that Paxlovid doesn’t really do much.
Even the CDC has backed off from Paxlovid, apparently unwilling to expend what little credibility it has left defending Pfizer’s monument to pharmaceutical futility.
Again, it is inconceivable Birx is unaware of any of this. If the data on Paxlovid is so weak that even the CDC is not willing to stand behind the drug, Birx is either illiterate on the topic, or is simply lying. Her fluency with COVID-19 data generally is a damning signal that she is simply lying.
A Southern “Wave” That Already Ended
The final falsehood in her triple salchow of media mendacity is the notion that the southern United States is being inundated with a “wave” of COVID hospitalizations thanks to Omicron/BA.5. While there have been hospitalization increases among confirmed COVID patients, with the over-70 demographic most represented, those increases even nationally have largely peaked and are declining. Across the south, that the CDC’s own tracking data shows this to be clearly the case.
In Hinds County, Mississippi, for example, hospitalizations peaked in mid-July.
The same is true for Bexar County, Texas.
When I pick a random county in the south—e.g., Autauga County, Alabama—the CDC’s own data shows the same thing: hospitalizations are declining.
Birx is going on about an healthcare “crisis” that even by the “experts” own data sets no longer exists. She is making a claim that is demonstrably false. She is, in other words, lying through her teeth on hospitalizations.
All The Lies Add Up To One Truth: COVID-19 Really Is A “Scamdemic”
The ethical obscenity of medical doctors blatantly lying about infectious disease is itself blatant and obvious. One need not be familiar with the WMA ethical declarations of Lisbon and Geneva to understand that a dishonest doctor is a disgrace to the healing arts. As with all professions, dishonesty is the acme of ethical bankruptcy in medicine.
Yet dishonesty has been part and parcel of the medical profession’s position regarding COVID-19 almost from the beginning. They lied—and we know they lied—even about the utility of face masks, they lied—and we know they lied—about the inoculations, they lied—and we know they lied—about the lockdowns. At every turn, doctors have lied to everyone about COVID-19.
Calling the pandemic a “scamdemic” is hardly an exaggeration, even though the disease itself is real (the volume of scientific research material detailing the structure of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is impossible to explain as mere fiction). Without diving into motivation (chiefly for reasons of brevity), the one clear point that has been made time and again—by Igor Chudov, by Alex Berenson, by myself, and by numerous others—is that the doctors and the “experts” have not told the truth about COVID-19.
The “experts” have lied. They have cost people their lives, their fortunes, and their jobs by their lies. They have shredded basic civil liberties and even the fabric of society with their lies. They have debased what should be a noble calling—healing the sick—with their self-serving mendacities.
Birx’ “truth bomb plus more lies” on Neil Cavuto stands not only as an admission that the “experts” have repeatedly lied, but as yet more proof that the “experts” are continuing to lie about COVID-19. They are lying constantly. They are lying shamelessly. They are lying demonstrably. Their own data convicts them of their lies even before the words can leave their mouths.
Deborah Birx told the truth about the “experts” and their lies—and then went on to tell still more lies. In so doing, she perversly proved yet again the ultimate truth about the Pandemic Panic Narrative: it is nothing but a tissue of lies.
If it doesn’t stop transmission. Then it doesn’t qualify for an EUA - right?
Definitely you can’t mandate something to “mitigate symptoms”...
I've had a morbid curiosity about the current vaccine predicament. Part of me wonders if many of the vaccine manufacturers knew that the vaccines weren't sterilizing because we have never created a sterilizing vaccine against a respiratory infection. The flu and cold should have clued us into the fruitlessness of such an argument. However, I wonder if the arrogant nature of the likes of Fauci and the CDC/NIH actually led to public messaging that undermined such concerns. So maybe Fauci and his incessant need to tout out these vaccines may have led us down this rabbit hole that we should have otherwise known not to go down. I've made these remarks when I refer to reinfection from respiratory infections which we know are common. Somehow this type of thinking leeched into the anti-vaccine community as well, with remarks that natural immunity is sterilizing- again, we should have known better than to have made such an argument.
So this really just seems like a consequence of improper messaging leading to the downstream events and false pretenses the public was provided. At least that's my general thought.