{"id":8998,"date":"2024-01-01T06:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-01-01T11:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cov19longhaulfoundation.org\/?p=8998"},"modified":"2023-12-31T16:49:32","modified_gmt":"2023-12-31T21:49:32","slug":"top-10-covid-events-of-the-year-revealing-the-facts-unspoken-and-unknown","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cov19longhaulfoundation.org\/?p=8998","title":{"rendered":"Top 10 COVID Events of the Year: Revealing the Facts Unspoken and Unknown"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Here are the top 10 major events that took place in relation to COVID in 2023 according to Epic Health..<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Marina Zhang<\/a>, Dec 26, 2023 Epic Health<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Dec 29, 2023<\/p>\n\n\n\n

COVID-19 in 2023 has been full of revelations and controversy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most health leaders involved in the U.S. pandemic response have resigned or been replaced, with one leaving his agency with a study that received much fanfare for a somewhat controversial take on vaccines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Compared to 2022, the science on the effectiveness and risks of masking and vaccinations has become increasingly clear with the release of highly authoritative studies this year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let us review the top 10 major events that took place in relation to COVID in 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1. FDA and CDC Find More COVID Vaccine Adverse Events, Including Stroke<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Beginning in January, documents released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) found that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) detected hundreds of safety signals<\/a> for Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. This included adverse reactions of myocarditis, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), ventricle dysfunctions in the heart, and many more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On Jan. 13, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the CDC released a joint statement<\/a> declaring they detected stroke as a new safety signal in older people who took the Pfizer bivalent boosters. Researchers from Kaiser Permanente also reported in October that people who took the COVID boosters with the influenza vaccine were at a greater risk of stroke.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The FDA and the CDC released a joint statement declaring they detected stroke as a new safety signal in older people who took the Pfizer bivalent boosters. They later said the current evidence is insufficient. Days later, researchers affiliated with the FDA published a preprint finding that older people who received the Pfizer booster shot had a higher rate<\/a> of Bell\u2019s palsy, a type of facial paralysis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a statement released in May, the FDA determined that \u201cthe current evidence does not support the existence of a safety issue,\u201d as findings of stroke among the elderly decreased. They added that agencies will continue to evaluate new data as they become available.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2. Vaccines Cannot \u2018Effectively\u2019 Control COVID: Fauci After Resigning<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The resignation of Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), was noteworthy given his role in leading the United States pandemic response and his actions soon after resigning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr. Fauci was very vocal in encouraging vaccine uptake and regularly appeared on television programs motivating people to get vaccinated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt\u2019s as simple as black and white. You\u2019re vaccinated, you\u2019re safe. You\u2019re unvaccinated, you\u2019re at risk. Simple as that,\u201d Dr. Fauci said on an MSNBC program<\/a> during the Delta wave.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before the Delta wave in the United States, Dr. Fauci compared vaccinated people to \u201cdead ends\u201d for the virus on CBS\u2019s Face the Nation<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, on Jan. 11, weeks after his resignation at the end of 2022, Dr. Fauci and two other researchers published a paper<\/a> in Cell Host & Microbe that gained traction due to their comments on the effectiveness of vaccines in controlling respiratory viruses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cSARS-CoV-2, endemic coronaviruses, RSV, and many other \u2018common cold\u2019 viruses \u2026 have not to date been effectively controlled by licensed or experimental vaccines,\u201d the authors wrote in their introduction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr. Fauci and two other researchers published a paper in Cell Host and Microbe. In the paper, they wrote, \u201cSARS-CoV-2 [and other \u2018common cold\u2019 viruses] \u2026 have not to date been effectively controlled by licensed or experimental vaccines.\u201d (Stefani Reynolds-Pool\/Getty Images, The Epoch Times)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They then addressed some basic immune principles, expressing that the current vaccines induce immunity in the body but not in the airways, yet current respiratory viruses primarily infect the airways.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe vaccines for these two very different viruses (influenza and SARS-CoV-2 viruses) … have common characteristics: they elicit incomplete and short-lived protection against evolving virus variants that escape population immunity,\u201d the authors wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While some fact-checkers argue that the study does not contradict Dr. Fauci\u2019s stance during the pandemic, others interpret this<\/a> as his \u201ccoming clean.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3. Gold Standard Review Finds Evidence of Masking \u2018Uncertain\u2019<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The Cochrane Library<\/a>, widely considered the gold standard for systematic reviews, published a review on Jan. 30<\/a> stating there was \u201cuncertainty about the effects of face masks.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect,\u201d the authors concluded, adding that \u201cpooled results of [randomized controlled trials] did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical\/surgical masks.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The review\u2019s findings drew widespread criticism from mainstream media. Several articles soon followed, highlighting the effectiveness of masking. The Cochrane editor-in-chief, Dr. Karla Soares-Weiser, also released a statement in March<\/a> claiming that the review did not show masks don\u2019t work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMany commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that \u2018masks don\u2019t work\u2019, which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation,\u201d Dr. Soares-Weiser wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt would be accurate to say that … the results were inconclusive.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Currently, the CDC still recommends masking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMasks have become political,\u201d said an author<\/a> of the review on CNN. \u201cI can only tell you what the science is….I can\u2019t tell you whether they work or don\u2019t work. But it\u2019s more likely than not that they don\u2019t work.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4. Repeated Vaccination Weakens the Immune System, Studies Suggest<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Multiple doses of the Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines lead to higher levels of antibodies called IgG4. A growing body of research suggests that these antibodies can make the immune system less reactive to COVID-19 spike proteins and more susceptible to potential spike protein damage and infections.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first of these studies was published in the January issue of Science Immunology<\/a>. The authors found that a third dose of the mRNA vaccine was linked to an increase in IgG4 subtypes<\/a> in mice. IgG4 antibodies are responsible for tuning down the immune system to prevent immune overactivation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, in the context of COVID-19 and its vaccines, where the immune system<\/a> must be ready to fight, this may promote \u201cunopposed SARS-CoV2 infection and replication by suppressing natural antiviral responses,\u201d another study published in May<\/a> reported.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These findings align with other studies that found repeat vaccinations to be associated with increased risks of infections, as reported by a study by the Cleveland Clinic<\/a>. The team\u2019s earlier study<\/a> also showed that the more doses a person receives, the more likely they are to get infected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A medical assistant holds a tray of syringes filled with doses of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine at a vaccination site in Los Angeles on Feb. 16, 2021. (Apu Gomes\/AFP via Getty Images)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5. DNA Contamination Detected in mRNA Vaccines, and FDA\u2019s Response<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In the spring of 2023, researchers found that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines contain DNA fragments, including controversial SV40 genes, previously undisclosed to the public.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Genetic scientist Kevin McKernan initially discovered that DNA fragments were packaged into lipid nanoparticles with the mRNA vaccine segments so that the DNA could enter cells. However, this means the fragments pose a risk of being integrated into the cell\u2019s genome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a preprint<\/a> published in April, Mr. McKernan and his team found DNA fragments in both Moderna and Pfizer vaccines that exceeded the European Medicines Agency\u2019s (EMA) 330 nanograms (ng) per milligram requirement and the FDA\u2019s 10 ng\/dose requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Furthermore, Pfizer\u2019s mRNA vaccines contained genes from the simian vacuolating virus 40, also known as SV40. The full SV40 virus had a controversial link to cancer stemming from the time when early polio vaccines were accidentally contaminated with the SV40 virus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cPfizer never disclosed the SV40 information to the EMA. They gave them a plasmid map of what the plasmid consisted of, with all of the features labeled, with the exception of the SV40 site,\u201d Mr. McKernan said on EpochTV\u2019s American Thought Leaders<\/a> program.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Apart from being a safety concern, the DNA fragments also indicated potential problems with drug regulation, Mr. McKernan said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Initially, Pfizer intended to make its vaccines using a PCR machine, which would have been more expensive and time-consuming. However, the company later switched to using bacteria, likely because that method is faster and more efficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pfizer never tested for the safety implications this change would have.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThey never ran the clinical trials on that material [bacteria]. Clinical trials were run on this PCR process, and then they switched to a new process after the clinical trials,\u201d Mr. McKernan said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Health practitioners, researchers, and journalists have expressed concern about the unknown risks that DNA contamination may present to the public. Some have called for the recall of Pfizer vaccines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, in the FDA\u2019s response to investigative journalist Maryanne Demasi, the agency did not indicate<\/a> that it intended to recall the vaccines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Health Canada confirmed<\/a> its knowledge of the SV40 contamination in the Pfizer vaccines but added that \u201cthe sponsor did not specifically identify the SV40 sequence.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The EMA echoed the statement with a similar response<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the spring of 2023, researchers found that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines contain DNA fragments, including controversial SV40 genes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

6. COVID Vaccine-Injured People Compensated<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In April, the U.S. government compensated people injured by the COVID-19 vaccines for the first time<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Three people received compensation for their injuries through the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), run by an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services, officials said in a statement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two developed myocarditis, while one suffered from a severe allergic reaction. The total compensation added up to over $4,600.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under the CICP, people who survive their vaccine-induced injury can receive money for unreimbursed medical expenses and lost employment income.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As of Dec. 1<\/a>, 10 people have been compensated for their injuries from the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Around $37,000 has been paid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

7. Doctors Can Prescribe Ivermectin: FDA Lawyer<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Two years after health authorities criticized the use of ivermectin for treating COVID-19, with some doctors\u2019 medical licenses suspended<\/a> for prescribing it, a lawsuit revealed that doctors actually could prescribe ivermectin as a therapeutic for COVID.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cFDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority<\/a> to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,\u201d Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA, said during oral arguments on Aug. 8 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court case against the FDA was brought by physicians who alleged the FDA\u2019s social media posts in 2021 discouraging ivermectin use interfered with their ability to practice medicine. The plaintiffs are Drs. Paul Marik, Mary Bowden, and Robert Apter. They claimed they were professionally harmed by the FDA\u2019s statements, including being terminated over efforts to prescribe ivermectin to patients.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr. Marik also noted that a number of studies<\/a> support using ivermectin against COVID-19, as the FDA itself has acknowledged. Some other studies show little to no effect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

8. Mask Mandates Return in August, New COVID Vaccines Approved<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

While no federal agencies have reinstated masking mandates, some workplaces, schools, and hospitals started bringing back mask mandates<\/a> in August due to rising COVID-19 hospitalizations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This prompted a renewed discussion on the effectiveness of masking, with some people pushing back against the mandates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some of these workplaces, like Lionsgate and some hospitals, later reversed their mandates<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Soon after, on Sept. 11, the FDA approved the new COVID-19 Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. These vaccines contained mRNA sequences of the omicron variant XBB.1.5, which was no longer the active variant<\/a> by the time of approval.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite the CDC\u2019s advisory board recommending the vaccine for children and adults, in a report posted on Sept. 27<\/a>, it acknowledged that certainty about the vaccine\u2019s ability to prevent severe COVID, hospitalization, and death from COVID was \u201clow\u201d for adults and \u201cvery low\u201d for children and infants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The risks of specified severe adverse reactions and reactogenicity were also low.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A month later<\/a>, the FDA approved the Novavax protein-based COVID vaccine to protect against COVID-19.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

9. Final Batch of Pfizer Vaccine Documents Released by the FDA<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Under FOIA, the FDA released the final 51,000 pages of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine document.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2021, a FOIA was filed against the FDA for all of its documents related to the licensing of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines. This then progressed into a lawsuit, as the FDA proposed to release 500 pages per month, meaning it would take 75 years<\/a> for all of the Pfizer documents to be released. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2021, a nonprofit group composed of medical practitioners and officers called Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency filed a lawsuit against the FDA due to this request. The judge ordered the FDA to produce 55,000 pages per month instead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As of November 2023, all of the FDA\u2019s documents in relation to Pfizer\u2019s COVID-19 vaccines for ages 16 and up have been released.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The following several things came to light with the release of these 51,893 pages:<\/p>\n\n\n\n