America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 2 weeks ago by Brewha. 515 replies replies.
11 Pages«<7891011
bgz Offline
#501 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,736
BuckyB93 wrote:
Why would you voluntarily get a Chihuahua? If you have an urge to do so, text me and I'll talk you off the ledge.

I can see if it's a dog that a friend had and they can't take it with them if they moved or something and the rat dog needed someplace to go other than a shelter... other than that or something similar, I'd never be in the market to buy a Chihuahua or any small ankle biting dog. I'd pick a cat first.

I sure as hell wouldn't take a Pomeranian bowling

Ok... if I ever get a runt dog (which is unlikely)... I'll name it Ray... even if it's just a wiener dog.

And that clip... ya, we had Lebowskis team with Walter on the back with the caption "Mark it Zero".

RayR Offline
#502 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,929
I am doing here what the SCOTUS is supposed to be under federalism, a constant irritant to untrammeled power and BS.
If Frank and Ben have to shake their legs and feet when I post, like I'm biting their ankles...then I'm doing good things.
MACS Offline
#503 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 75,480
This is very interesting.

More studies showing that natural immunity is more effective than the shots.
Sunoverbeach Online
#504 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 11,826
And some people say Jesus wasn't Jewish. Of course he was Jewish! 30yrs old, single, lives with his parents, come on! He works in his father's business, his mom thought he was God's gift, he's Jewish! Give it up!
- RW
DrMaddVibe Offline
#505 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 52,214
When you're following the Science, don't forget to turn on the GPS to Follow The Money!

Nonprofit Watchdog Uncovers $350 Million In Secret Payments To Fauci, Collins, Others At NIH

An estimated $350 million in undisclosed royalties were paid to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and hundreds of its scientists, including the agency’s recently departed director, Dr. Francis Collins, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, according to a nonprofit government watchdog.

“We estimate that up to $350 million in royalties from third parties were paid to NIH scientists during the fiscal years between 2010 and 2020,” Open the Books CEO Adam Andrzejewski told reporters in a telephone news conference on May 9.

“We draw that conclusion because, in the first five years, there has been $134 million that we have been able to quantify of top-line numbers that flowed from third-party payers, meaning pharmaceutical companies or other payers, to NIH scientists.”

The first five years, from 2010 to 2014, constitute 40 percent of the total, he said.

“We now know that there are 1,675 scientists that received payments during that period, at least one payment. In fiscal year 2014, for instance, $36 million was paid out and that is on average $21,100 per scientist,” Andrzejewski said.

“We also find that during this period, leadership at NIH was involved in receiving third-party payments. For instance, Francis Collins, the immediate past director of NIH, received 14 payments. Dr. Anthony Fauci received 23 payments and his deputy, Clifford Lane, received eight payments.”

Collins resigned as NIH director in December 2021 after 12 years of leading the world’s largest public health agency. Fauci is the longtime head of NIH’s National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), as well as chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden. Lane is the deputy director of NIAID, under Fauci.

NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins holds up a model of the coronavirus as he testifies before a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee looking into the budget estimates for the National Institute of Health (NIH) and the state of medical research, on Capitol Hill on May 26, 2021. (Sarah Silbiger/Pool via AP)

The top five NIH employees measured in terms of the number of royalty payments that they received while on the government payroll, according to a fact sheet published by Open the Books, include Robert Gallo, National Cancer Institute, 271 payments; Ira Pastan, National Cancer Institute, 250 payments; Mikulas Popovic, National Cancer Institute, 191 payments; Flossie Wong-Staal, National Cancer Institute, 190 payments; and Mangalasseril Sarngadharan, National Cancer Institute, 188 payments.

Only Pastan continues to be employed by NIH, according to Open the Books.

“When an NIH employee makes a discovery in their official capacity, the NIH owns the rights to any resulting patent. These patents are then licensed for commercial use to companies that could use them to bring products to market,” the fact sheet reads.

“Employees are listed as inventors on the patents and receive a share of the royalties obtained through any licensing, or ‘technology transfer,’ of their inventions. Essentially, taxpayer money funding NIH research benefits researchers employed by NIH because they are listed as patent inventors and therefore receive royalty payments from licensees.”

An NIH spokesman didn’t respond by press time to a request for comment.

Andrzejewski told reporters that the Associated Press reported extensively on the NIH royalty payments in 2005, including specific details about who got how much from which payers for what work, that the agency is denying to Open the Books in 2022.

“At that time, we knew there were 918 scientists, and each year, they were receiving approximately $9 million, on average with each scientist receiving $9,700. But today, the numbers are a lot larger with the United States still in a declared national health emergency. It’s quite obvious the stakes in health care are a lot larger,” Andrzejewski said.

He said the files Open the Books is receiving—300 pages of line-by-line data—are “heavily redacted.”

“These are not the files the AP received in 2005 where everything was disclosed—the scientist’s name, the name of the third-party payer, the amount of the royalty paid by the payer to the scientist,” Andrzejewski said. “Today, NIH is producing a heavily redacted database; we don’t know the payment amount to the scientist, and we don’t know the name of the third-party payer, all of that is being redacted.”

Federal officials are allowed to redact information from responses to FOIA requests if the release of the data would harm a firm’s commercial privilege.

The undisclosed royalty payments are inherent conflicts of interest, Andrzejewski said.

“We believe there is an unholy conflict of interest inherent at NIH,” he said. “Consider the fact that each year, NIH doles out $32 billion in grants to approximately 56,000 grantees. Now we know that over an 11-year period, there is going to be approximately $350 million flowing the other way from third-party payers, many of which receive NIH grants, and those payments are flowing back to NIH scientists and leadership.”

Fauci and Lane told AP that they agreed there was an appearance of a conflict of interest in getting the royalties, with Fauci saying that he contributed his royalties to charity. Lane didn’t do that, according to Andrzejewski.

The governing ethics financial disclosure form in the past defined the royalty payments as income recipients received from NIH, which meant the recipients weren’t required to list their payments on the form.

But Andrzejewski said NIH has refused to respond to his request for clarification on the disclosure issue.

“If they are not, none of these payments are receiving any scrutiny whatsoever and to the extent that a company making payments to either leadership or scientists, while also receiving grants … then that just on its face is a conflict of interest,” he said.

Open the Books is a Chicago-based nonprofit government watchdog that uses the federal and state freedom of information laws to obtain and then post on the internet trillions of dollars in spending at all levels of government.

The nonprofit filed a federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit seeking documentation of all payments by outside firms to NIH and/or current and former NIH employees.

NIH declined to respond to the FOIA, so Open the Books is taking the agency to court, suing it for noncompliance with the FOIA. Open the Books is represented in federal court in the case by another nonprofit government watchdog, Judicial Watch.

Booster up!

Fauci bucks depend on it!
RayR Offline
#506 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,929
Collusion! Fascism! Dirty Deeds! Corruption! Graft!

Some people are OK with it. Blink
Stogie1020 Offline
#507 Posted:
Joined: 12-19-2019
Posts: 3,314
Brandon is wondering how he get's his 10%...
Sunoverbeach Online
#508 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 11,826
In politics, absurdity is not a handicap.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#509 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 52,214
Acting NIH Director Admits Appearance Of Conflict Of Interest In Secret Royalty Payments To Fauci, Scientists

Undisclosed royalty payments estimated at $350 million from pharmaceutical and other firms to Dr. Anthony Fauci and hundreds of National Institutes for Health (NIH) scientists do present “an appearance of a conflict of interest,” according to the agency’s acting director.

Dr. Lawrence Tabak, who took over as NIH Director following the December 2021 resignation of the agency’s long-time leader, Dr. Francis Collins, told a House Appropriations Committee subcommittee that federal law allows the royalty payments but he conceded they don’t look ethical.

Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.) told Tabak that “right now, I think the NIH has a credibility problem and this only feeds into this, and I’m only just learning about this. People in my district say ‘well, so-and-so has a financial interest, or they don’t like Ivermectin because they aren’t benefitting from that royalty …

“You may have very sound scientific reasons for recommending a medicine or not, but the idea that people get a financial benefit from certain research that’s been done and grants that were awarded, that is to me the height of the appearance of a conflict of interest.”

In response, Tabak said NIH does not endorse particular medicines, but rather “we support the science that validates whether an invention is or is not efficacious, we don’t say this is good or this is bad … I certainly can understand that it might seem as a conflict of interest.”

Moolenaar seemed taken aback by Tabak’s response and, while pointing to Fauci, who was also testifying, said “truthfully, I would say you’ve had leaders of NIH saying certain medicines are not good.”

Tabak said such statements by NIH are based on clinical trials that are supported by the agency.

Puzzled, Moolenaar then asked Tabak, “but if the agency is awarding who is the beneficiary of the grant, who is doing the trial, and there is somehow finances involved, that there is a financial benefit that could be accrued if someone’s patent or invention is considered validated, do you not see that as a conflict or at least the appearance of a conflict of interest?”

After conceding that there is an appearance of a conflict of interest, Tabak suggested to Moolenaar that “maybe this is the sort of thing that we can work together on so that we can explain to you the firewalls that we do have, because they are substantial and significant.”

Moolenaar’s reference to Fauci was in regard to his telling the Associated Press in a 2005 article that first brought the NIH royalties issues into the headlines that he had donated his royalties to charity.

But the issue faded from the headlines after 2005, and is only now getting renewed attention as a result of revelations first reported on May 9 by The Epoch Times that documents obtained in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by a nonprofit government watchdog show an estimated $350 million in undisclosed royalty payments from pharmaceutical and other private firms to top NIH executives, as well as to hundreds of the agency’s health scientists and researchers.

The $350 million in royalty payments were made between 2010 and 2020, according to Open the Books, the nonprofit that took the NIH to court when it refused to acknowledge the group’s FOIA request for documents.

Collins received 14 payments, Fauci received 23 payments and his deputy, Clifford Lane, received eight payments, according to Open the Books.

Adam Andrzejewski, the founder and president of Open the Books, told The Epoch Times Wednesday that NIH continues to withhold important information about the royalty payments, including the names of particular payers and the specific amounts to individuals at NIH.

“With tens of billions of dollars in grant-making at NIH and tens of millions of royalty dollars from third-party payors flowing back into the agency each year, NIH needs to come clean with the American people and open the books. We need to be able to follow the money,” Andrzejewski said.

“We believe transparency will revolutionize U.S. public policy. There is no better example of this than the third-party (think pharmaceutical companies) payments to NIH scientists. Every single outside payment to a government scientist could be a conflict of interest,” he added.

The Moolenaar-Tabak exchange took place during a hearing on the Biden administration’s 2023 budget request.

Rep. Neal Dunn (R-Fla.), who is also a surgeon, told The Epoch Times that “it’s no secret that the agency needs reform. Their many issues were exacerbated and highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Providing the public with transparent access to how the NIH is spending taxpayer dollars and reaching their decisions is a basic responsibility, and they must be held accountable. Now more than ever, we must commit to reforming our federal health agencies and restoring America’s trust in public health.”

But it's totally cool to completely shut down a nation's economy, and follow the Science.

LOL! Weird.
Sunoverbeach Online
#510 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 11,826
The problem with political jokes is that they get elected.
- Henry Cate
DrMaddVibe Offline
#511 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 52,214

Fauci Suffers "Much Worse" COVID Symptoms After 'Paxlovid Rebound'

Fully-vaxx'd and double-boosted mask-admirer Anthony Fauci is suffering.

The 81-year-old reportedly had 'mild symptoms' and of course he 'said the words'...

Of course, Fauci followed the CDC guidelines and ingested the government-blessed treatment - Paxlovid - due to his age and possible risks from the virus.

So, that should have been it right?

But no. During an event at Foreign Policy’s Global Health Forum, Fauci admitted he had not had a good experience:

“After I finished the five days of Paxlovid, I reverted to negative on an antigen test for three days in a row,” Fauci said Tuesday .

“And then on the fourth day, just to be absolutely certain, I tested myself again. I reverted back to positive.”

Interestingly, Fauci admitted:

"...this is becoming more and more typical based on more clinical studies..."

As Bloomberg reports, large numbers of patients have reported the phenomenon, often called Covid rebound or Paxlovid rebound, of returning symptoms after taking a full course of Pfizer’s drug.

While Pfizer Chief Executive Officer Albert Bourlasaid in May that doctors could prescribe a second course of treatment to such patients, US drug regulators have said there’s no evidence that a repeat will help.

However, Fauci said he started taking a second course of Paxlovid after experiencing symptoms “much worse than in the first go around.”

Now near completion of the five-day oral treatment, he said he was still enduring symptoms but felt “reasonably good.”

Finally, as we reported less than two weeks ago, Pfizer stopped enrolling in a clinical trial for Paxlovid for standard-risk COVID-19 patients after the latest results suggested the drug did not reduce symptoms or hospitalizations and deaths to a statistically significant degree.

Watch the full interview below: (forward to around 5:26:00):

Not exactly encouraging news...

Get boosted...weird.
Sunoverbeach Online
#512 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 11,826
Aging gracefully is like the nice way of saying you're slowly looking worse.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#513 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 52,214

Biden tests positive for COVID in 'rebound' case, doctor says

President Biden tested positive for COVID-19 in a "rebound" case on Saturday, according to the White House.

"As described last week, acknowledging the potential for so-called ‘rebound’ COVID positivity observed in a small percentage of patients treated with PAXLOVID the President increased his testing cadence, both to protect people around him and to assure early detection of any return of viral replication," White House Doctor Dr. Kevin O'Connor said.

O'Connor said in the letter that Biden tested negative for COVID-19 on Tuesday evening, Wednesday morning, Thursday morning, and Friday morning, but tested positive on Saturday morning by an antigen test.

The doctor says that the re-infection represents "rebound positivity" and said that Biden has not experienced a reemergence of symptoms, and there's no need to restart treatment.

Biden will, however, begin "strict isolation procedures," according to O'Connor.

Biden tweeted on Saturday afternoon that he will continue working.

"Folks, today I tested positive for COVID again. This happens with a small minority of folks. I’ve got no symptoms but I am going to isolate for the safety of everyone around me. I’m still at work, and will be back on the road soon," Biden said.

Biden tested negative for COVID-19 on Wednesday after contracting the virus last week, prior to the announcement on Saturday afternoon.

A White House official told Fox News that contact tracing is now underway since Biden tested positive for COVID-19 again.

Previously, White House press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said that it didn't matter where Biden contracted the coronavirus.

"Look, I don't think that matters, right? I think what matters is we prepared for this moment," Jean-Pierre said on July 21.

He was previously seen at several White House events without a mask since testing negative for COVID-19 on Wednesday, including at a roundtable discussing the economy on Thursday.

Dr. Marc Siegel, Fox News medical analyst and professor of medicine at New York University Langone Medical Center said it's not a good look for President Biden.

"Not a good look for a president who talks about mandates. He has played too loose with this," Siegel said.

Double vaxxed, double boosted...contracts Covid...goes on what Fauci says is the silver bullet with Paxlovid and comes down with Covid days later.

And Pedo Joe does what Pope Fauci says after that?

Still being played. Please tell me how great this "vaccine" is again. If I give my dog a rabies shot...duh...I took the vax for polio and to polio. Oh, the Biden regime changed the definition?
J&K11 Offline
#514 Posted:
Joined: 08-20-2021
Posts: 19
Stop thinking and just get in line for your 5th booster with a side of monkeypox vax. Im with the government and I'm here to help.
Brewha Offline
#515 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,780
Wait - he was thinking???
Users browsing this topic
11 Pages«<7891011