Rat Out Your Doctor: Biden's Surgeon General Calls on Informants to Report Use of Generic Drugs
In a startling "Request for Information" reminiscent of Soviet totalitarianism, the Surgeon General asks the public and big tech to turn in doctors and neighbors for covid "misinformation."
While the pandemic—after two horrific years of death, isolation, economic chaos, mandates, and restrictions on basic freedoms—might finally appear to be winding down, don’t be fooled. As President Biden has now made clear, Big Pharma has Big Plans in the works for the development and dissemination of both vaccines and new patent meds in perpetuity.
And the last thing that it and its political and bureaucratic stewards want to hear right now are dissenting voices telling the public that, according to the “best available evidence,” there are far safer and more effective ways of dealing with any relapses than anything it may have in that pipeline.
Covid may be disappearing, but Covid Big Brother is here to stay unless the rest of us get informed and do something about it.
In a government proclamation that should be setting off alarm bells for anyone who values the rights guaranteed to Americans under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—which unequivocally states that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”—the Biden Administration is now apparently endeavoring to sidestep that Constitutional safeguard via an official request from the Office of the Surgeon General for anyone who feels they have been impacted in any manner by “misinformation” regarding the pandemic to report it in detail to the authorities. It would also like this effort to be aided and abetted by “major tech platforms,” according to The New York Times.
Ironically enough, the announcement came on the same day that administration officials were said to be deeply concerned about Russia’s crackdown on what that country was calling “fake news” regarding its brutal war on Ukraine by threatening journalists with fifteen-year prison sentences simply for using the word “invasion.” While we’re nowhere near that point, there has been an ongoing and concerted effort by U.S. health agencies to make the use of another “I” word—ivermectin—all but verboten in establishment media.
The surveillance request has been described by major media as all part of the administration’s National Covid-19 Preparedness Plan, the purported purpose of which is to address the pandemic in the coming months with “minimal disruption.” The plan also includes proposed spending on new treatments, developing vaccines for new variants and vaccinating the parts of the world that have so far been relying—extremely successfully—on inexpensive repurposed drugs.
But while that plan, which was first announced in President Biden’s State of the Union Address and detailed the following day in a ninety-seven-page document, was put on hold after the money to pay for it was stripped out of a major $1.5 trillion funding bill this week in order to get it passed, collecting the “misinformation” that is being sought by the Office of Surgeon General Vivek Murthy will only require compliance from members of the public and the executives of Big Tech who might want to remain in the good graces of government regulators.
The stage for this was initially set last July when Murthy first came out with a twenty-two-page booklet called Confronting Health Misinformation that referred to such alleged “misinformation” as a “serious threat to public health” and limiting its spread “a moral and civic imperative that will require a whole-of-society effort,” and calling on tech and social media companies to take steps to censor it (which has been going on throughout the pandemic, most recently reflected in investigative journalist and RESCUE writer Mary Beth Pfeiffer’s Twitter account having been permanently suspended after she linked to an article by Steve Phillips, M.D., on the evidence of ivermectin’s benefits in treating illnesses from covid to cancer and commented that “Pharma is afraid of ivermectin” and “should be”).
That booklet defined “misinformation” as “health information that is false, inaccurate, or misleading according to the best available evidence at the time.” In a section labeled “References,” however, the surgeon general acknowledged that“defining ‘misinformation’ is a challenging task, and any definition has limitations.” He further noted that “what counts as misinformation can change over time with new evidence and scientific consensus” and “it is important to be careful and avoid conflating controversial or unorthodox claims with misinformation. Transparency, humility, and a commitment to open scientific inquiry are critical.”
But that was then, and now, eight months later, it seems the campaign against what the U.S. health bureaucracy considers “misinformation” has entered a new, more aggressive phase.
An Invitation to Informants
“As the next step in this work, and as part of an ongoing dialogue with the American public, the Surgeon General is now putting out a Request for Information (RFI) on the Impact of Health Misinformation in the Digital Information Environment in the United States Throughout the Covid-19 Pandemic,” reads an official document dated March 2 that was officially entered into the Federal Register five days later.
The purpose of the RFI is described as being to help the authorities understand the effect of pandemic “misinformation” on such areas as “health decisions and outcomes, direct and indirect costs, trust in the healthcare system and providers, and healthcare worker morale and safety.” It is also intended to help them ascertain its impact on “access to trusted and credible health information, particularly during a public health emergency” and on “lifesaving health decisions such as an individual’s likelihood to vaccinate, and to “prepare for and respond to future public health crises.”
The RFI, which covers a period extending from January 2020 to the present, applies to general search engines, content sharing platforms, social media platforms, e-commerce platforms, crowd-sourced platforms, and instant messaging systems, and includes “research, case studies, data sets, images, data visualizations, interviews, and personal testimonies.”
The request also notes that Health and Human Services “will consider the usability, applicability, and rigor of submissions in response to this RFI and share learnings from these responses with the public, and that “public comments and submissions will also be made available to the public and can be used for research purposes.” For more information, Max Lesko, Murthy’s chief of staff, whose signature appears on the document, provides his phone number along with a special email address containing the words COVIDMisinfo.
Instructions on the RFI note that it will be collecting submissions until May 2 via email or a form linked to on the document, which includes a place for “information about how important a role COVID-19 misinformation played in patient decisions not to vaccinate, including the types of misinformation that influenced decisions.”
Might such “misinformation,” for example, include a story that appeared March 10 on the mainstream MedPage Today? It relates how Gregory Poland, MD, director of the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group, developed a case of “life-altering tinnitus” after getting his second covid shot, and subsequently discovered that many other vaccine recipients around the country and the world were similarly afflicted, to the point where some were considering suicide. Poland also believes that tens of thousands of Americans might have developed this particular side effect, which he thinks should be the subject of more research.
The RFI, however, doesn’t attempt to distinguish between fact and rumor. Instead, among other things, it claims that “recent research shows that most Americans believe or are unsure of at least one Covid-19 vaccine falsehood,” and links to “common examples of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation documented by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).”
But the examples of what such “vaccine falsehood” might consist of, contained in a CDC document entitled “Myths and Facts about Covid-19 Vaccines” have been carefully crafted to camouflage what people’s concerns about these shots actually are.
One of these “myths,” for instance, is worded as follows: “All events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) are caused by vaccination,” with a counteracting “fact” noting that since “anyone” can report an event to VAERS, the ones logged into the system are unreliable and do “not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem.”
This “fact” establishes a false premise that since VAERS reporting is voluntary, it is invalid, when in fact it is the federal government’s official early-warning system for vaccine dangers that the FDA and CDC are supposed to monitor to investigate troubling trends. And it fails to address the fact that in the U.S. alone, there were 12,775 preliminary reports of death among people who received a vaccine for covid as of February 22, 2022, and over 700,000 adverse reactions by December 24 of last year (and more than one million adverse events up to now), alarming numbers federal officials have dismissed or covered up. Nor does it take into account that these reports are considered to be only a fraction of the actual numbers of such events, many of which are not reported to VAERS.
The point is, you don’t have to believe, as the “fact” implies, that every one of the thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of serious injuries documented in these reports were necessarily caused by the shots to be genuinely concerned by these statistics.
Another of the oddly worded “myths” listed by the CDC has to do with many thousands of reports of vaccine-related menstrual cycle abnormalities, with one recent study being covered by the Wall Street Journal under the headline “Covid-19 Vaccines Linked to Menstrual Cycle Changes.”
But here’s how the agency evaded that emerging issue, phrasing the “myth”: “Being near someone who received a covid-19 vaccine will affect my menstrual cycle.”
While this official “Request for Information” from Murthy and his minions includes a variety of seemingly soft topics, such as the morale and safety of healthcare workers and the “demographics on groups or populations” exposed to such misinformation, the main messaging from the nation’s top doc appears to be intended to inspire an army of informants.
In an apparent bid to revive the local vigilance committees that the government relied on to protect American communities from subversive influences during World War I, Murthy is hoping some public-spirited domestic spies can be motivated to research and report back to him how misinformation has “impacted organizations that serve communities directly through service,” such as libraries and food banks, as well as faith-based and fraternal groups.
But what the surgeon general and his staff would perhaps like to develop most of all is a list of “specific, public actors that are providing misinformation” as well as “sources engaged in the sale of unproven Covid-19 products or services…or other money-making models.”
In other words, the people who run our Ministry of Medicine want names. They want sources and details about who says what and who’s providing patients with repurposed generic drugs such as ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, and fluvoxamine, or recommending supplements like zinc, quercetin, and Vitamin D.
But then, their tenacity in attempting to determine that is most likely due to their desire to make sure that patented and highly profitable fast-track vaccines remain the only “money-making models” in circulation.
RESCUE with Michael Capuzzo is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.