My Invitation to Speak Got Rescinded, But I Went Anyway (PART TWO)
The Conference schedule and what I would have corrected the speakers on had they let me participate.
Schedule
Schedule and Speakers
Friday, December 6
6:15-6:45 Opening Remarks
Charles (Charly) Lockwood, MD, Executive Vice President of USF Health, Dean of USF Health Morsani College of Medicine
Amber Gum, PhD, Professor, Department of Mental Health Law & Policy and Department of Internal Medicine, Co-Chair of USF HxA Campus Community, USF
USF Health Executive Vice President Lockwood will provide an overview of the importance of the topics and goals of the conference. Dr. Gum will orient participants to the HxA Way and Heterodox Conversations™ format.
I sure wish I had been there for the last part. It took place during my 8 hour trip down I-95 and I-4 from Jacksonville Beach to Tampa where two car accidents caused a four hour delay.
6:45-8:15 Opening Panel: “COVID-19 Conversations: Setting the Stage”
Speaker 1: Sten Vermund, MD, PhD, Anne M. R. Lauder Professor of Public Health, Yale University, incoming Dean of the USF College of Public Health
Speaker 2: Jay Wolfson, DrPH, JD, Distinguished Service Professor, Public Health, Medicine, Pharmacy, and Industrial Engineering; Interim Dean, USF COPH; Senior Associate Vice President, USF Health; Senior Associate Dean, Morsani College of Medicine, USF Health
Moderator: Charles (Charly) Lockwood, MD, Executive Vice President of USF Health, Dean of USF Health Morsani College of Medicine
Drs. Vermund and Wolfson will set the stage for the conference, discussing key topics from their perspectives regarding COVID-19 science, application of science to health policy and decision-making, impacts of past decisions, and important considerations for the future.
Incoming Dean of the School of Public Health, Dr. Vermund disclosed that he believed masking in the community worked, that lockdowns were helpful, and that he believed hospital personnel should be mandated to take the COVID-19 mod RNA vaccines and boosters, “just as we require doctors to wash their hands between patients.” He actually said that. He equated requiring doctors to wash their hands between patients to requiring people to receive an injection that we knew before its release was neither safe nor effective and has turned out to damage the human immune system.
If they had called on me, I would have told them I could prove three completely different ways ways that community masking does not, has not, and cannot work. I would have explained why lockdowns were actually the OPPOSITE of what needed to be done and explained how we knew the vaccines could never be safe nor effective and how they damage the human immune system.
Dr. Wolfson is not a medical person. He is a lawyer, and spoke on legal issues mostly. I had no questions and since I am not an expert in that field, I did not raise my hand.
Saturday, December 7
8:00-8:15 Welcome
Jay Wolfson, DrPH, JD, Distinguished Service Professor, Public Health, Medicine, Pharmacy, and Industrial Engineering; Interim Dean, USF COPH; Senior Associate Vice President, USF Health; Senior Associate Dean, Morsani College of Medicine, USF Health
8:15-9:30 Panel 1: “SARS-COV2 Origins: Lab Leak or Natural Origins?”
Speaker 1: Alina Chan, PhD, Scientific Advisor, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard
Speaker 2: Andrew Dobson, PhD, Professor, Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University
Panelist: Christian Bréchot, MD, PhD, Assistant Vice President, Senior Associate Dean for Research, Morsani College of Medicine, USF Health; President, Global Virus Network
Panelist: Thomas Unnasch, PhD, Director, WHO Collaborating Center for Onchocerciasis Diagnostics, Emeritus Professor, USF COPH
Moderator: Lynn (Marty) Martin, PhD, Professor, USF COPH
SARS-COV2, as with most and perhaps all other human pathogens, very likely derives from some animal source. The question endures, however: was that source an animal held for food in a wet market in Wuhan, China, or an accidental release from a research lab?
SARS-CoV-2 does not “very likely derive from some animal source.” It clearly has been manipulated in a lab. Here is a list, without explanation, of the points that show it didn’t become what it is (if it is even a real thing and not just a meta-genomic construct. You will know these are relevant if you are familiar with the language. If not, it will be explained in Volume Two of my book:
1. It has a Furin Cleavage site.
Its arginine dimer is coded for by CGG-CGG codons.
It is the only Sarbecovirus with a FCS.
The five virologists that lied, esp Anderson, Holmes, and Garry. said it looked engineered until their grant money was on the line (Anderson’s)
Anderson lied to congress about whether he had a grant proposal on Fauci’s desk when he wrote the “Proximal Origins of SARS-CoV-2”.
The restriction endonuclease sites were equally-spaced
The RE sites surrounded important modules that could easily be switched in and out in the lab (compare to MERS)
RE sites are used to construct genomes in the lab
No evidence of intermediate host. With SARS-1 and MERS, the intermediate host was found in months. It’s coming up on 5 years for SARS-2.
Checked 80,000 animals. None were the intermediate host.
Physical proximity to the WIV.
The WIV housed and genetically modified coronaviruses closely related to SARS-CoV-2. (their GOF research, for example, spelled out in Daszak’s grant proposal to DARPA.
The WHO lied about the virus being transmissible from Human to human
Suspicious behavior at the WIV. De Shi took down the largest coronavirus database in the world on or around September 12, 2019.
Two WIV lab workers got sick from what they were working with sometime in September2019.
Comparison with the known synthetic constructs.
and lots of others.
9:30-10:45 Panel 2: “Modeling and Mitigation Measures”
Speaker 1: Tracy Beth Høeg, MD, PhD, Physician and Epidemiologist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Associate Professor, University of Southern Denmark
Speaker 2: Kami Kim, MD, Professor and Director, Infectious Disease and International Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, USF Health, and Medical Director of infectious Disease, Tampa General Hospital
Panelist: Edwin Michael, PhD, Professor, College of Public Health, USF Health
Panelist: Michael Teng, PhD, Associate Professor, Allergy and Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, USF Health
Moderator: Kristopher Kaliebe, MD, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences, USF Health
Since the emergence of SARS-COV2, there has been scientific and public policy debate on how to mitigate its impact. With the advantage of hindsight and data gathered, experts will discuss and critique the medical and epidemiological response to the pandemic. What were and are the most prudent approaches to mitigating disease? What have we learned to manage COVID as a now endemic pathogen?
The medical and epidemiological responses were were disgraceful . Hindsight? No… The people who understood the principles surrounding this disease talked about the dangers of lockdowns of healthy, working-age people, school closures, mask usage in the community, mandating a “vaccine” that could not be safe or effective before these policies were enacted and data was gathered. No hindsight was necessary.
11:15-12:30 Panel 3: “Policy Decisions and Implications”
Speaker 1: Martin Kulldorff, PhD, Drhc, Epidemiologist, Biostatistician, Founding Fellow, Academy for Science and Freedom, Hillsdale College
Speaker 2: Donna Petersen, ScD, MHS, CPH, FAAAS, Professor, College of Public Health, USF Health
Panelist: Sten Vermund, MD, PhD, Anne M. R. Lauder Professor of Public Health, Yale University, incoming Dean of the USF College of Public Health
Panelist: Jay Wolfson, DrPH, JD, Distinguished Service Professor, Public Health, Medicine, Pharmacy, and Industrial Engineering; Interim Dean, USF COPH; Senior Associate Vice President, USF Health; Senior Associate Dean, Morsani College of Medicine, USF Health
Moderator: Amber Gum, PhD, Professor, Department of Mental Health Law & Policy and Department of Internal Medicine, Co-Chair of USF HxA Campus Community, USF
Again, the policymakers and epidemiologists performed abysmally. Locking down healthy people, paying hospitals extra for testing for and diagnosing covid to run up the numbers, closing down schools and keeping them closed way too long, bribing doctors to inject anyone, let alone babies down to six months of age concoctions that never should have been approved and were unsafe and ineffective by design should have landed some people in prison by now considering the damage they caused.
You go Doc. Retired MD totally with you.
If a "contagious" virus was spreading in Wuhan (a city with a population as big as NYC) by September 2019, this virus would have undoubtedly spread to every community in the world by December 2019 or January 2020 (if not earlier).
The birth date of "virus spread" has always been wrong (and probably covered up by officials).
The real start date, if confirmed, would prove that while this might have been a very contagious virus that made millions of people sick, it was not a "deadly virus." The IFR was probably the same or even lower than the IFI for the flu, said to be 1 death in every 1,000 "cases" (0.1 percent).
Someone should have asked the panelists when they thought this virus really began to "spread?"
Also, why do they discount the illnesses of millions of people with Covid-like symptoms in the weeks and months before Covid officially began to spread?