Last week, a Florida great jury released its next interim report detailing its investigation into possible “wrongdoing” by Covid picture companies and organizations that promoted them.
Requested , by Gov. Ron DeSantis and , authorized , by the Florida Supreme Court in December 2022, the grand jury was  , tasked , with determining whether “pharmaceutical companies ( and their executive officers ) and other medical associations or organizations” participated in” criminal activity or wrong” concerning” their role in the creation, approval or promotion of COVID- 19 vaccines”. The judge released its first interim statement in February, in which people confirmed the accuracy of some states wellness “experts” and press apparatchiks dismissed as “misinformation”.
The next time statement from the grand jury, which was submitted to the Florida Supreme Court on May 21, details a number of issues that were not covered in the first, such as the occurrence of natural resistance among Covid-positive individuals and the treatment options available to them. Much like the first review, this novel study contains damning details about how the “expert” course did not, in truth, “follow the science”.
1. Patients invid get biological immunity from infections.
Disease- derived resistance ( IDI), or “natural immunity”, is hardly a new trend. The human body acquiring natural protection from dangerous proteins via disease is a strategy that has been around for” thousands of years,” the grand jury noted.
Prior to the outbreak in later 2019 and first 2020, no person had previously been infected with Covid-19, but it became clear in the months and years that those who developed the disease and recovered from it had greater natural defenses against disease. According to the report,” ]m ] ost studies show that, on average, IDI lowered chances of reinfection from the Ancestral, Alpha and Delta variants of SARS- CoV- 2 in the unvaccinated by roughly 80 %”, with such “immunity generally ]starting ] to decline around 40 weeks after infection but level]ing ] off to what appeared to be a roughly stable 50 % that lasted from 60 to 80 weeks after infection”.
These promising IDI numbers did n’t just show up in 2024. They were found in a number of reports produced at various times over the course of the past four years,” the report states.
For example, according to a 2021 Jewish study that the grand jurors cited, “unvaccinated people with IDI had an overall effective security level of about 86 % against the Delta variation.” However, a 2021 study of people in New York and California” showed that infection per 1, 000 uninsured people were almost 129 for those with no IDI, and just 5 among the IDI, a 96 % relative risk lowering rate”.
The grand jury remarked that” n]one of these figures should have surprised anyone in care” and that such fundamental scientific “is therefore well understood that its broad stroke could be found in practically any high school textbook.” Additionally, according to the Journal’s members, “people with IDI in 2020 and 2021 had little to nothing to obtain” from nonpharmaceutical interventions like lockdowns and masking, which their initial interim report claimed had little to no medical benefit. Additionally, they criticized inconsistent public policy recommendations and government health organizations for ignoring natural reality.
This Grand Jury believes it was reckless of government agencies to not have advised tailoring their mitigation measures to break those at decreased risk according to IDI in the same way they would eventually divide the vaccinated, particularly those of lower age with fewer comorbidities who were already at reduced risk, given that there were testing modalities that were available that could quickly confirm whether a person had IDI,” the report reads. “… officials should absolutely communicate and deter certain behaviors where there are concerns about them, but not at the expense of suppressing or dissecting the science.”
2. Government ‘ Experts’ Attacked Potential Covid Treatments
The grand jury lamented how some government health officials “made mistakes” when it came to “messaging and communication” with the American public about potential early treatment options while noting how difficult it was to find effective treatments for a new virus amid a global outbreak. Among the most notable was the “expert” class’s war against hydroxychloroquine, a commonly used drug often prescribed to treat malaria.
The jury noted that some “well-credentialed scientists and clinicians” were “dissatisfied” with the information used by the Food and Drug Administration to justify its decision to revoke” Emergency Use Authorization” of hydroxychloroquine for treating Covid patients and that they made the decision to prescribe the drug to patients based on the information they were looking at. The medication’s proponents argued the data cited by the FDA “focused on using the drug in hospitalized patients as opposed to outpatients, contained large numbers of low- risk individuals”, and had other issues undercutting its reliability.
The grand jury said it does” not believe it was unreasonable]for doctors ] to include hydroxychloroquine in an early outpatient treatment regimen for Covid- 19″ given the drug’s “long history” of relatively safe use and the ever- changing nature of” the science”.
Government agencies and their media allies did not believe the grand jury’s findings that clinicians used the drug to treat Covid patients were reasonable. The grand jury noted that” [p]rominent government public health officials, of course, did not concur, widely stigmatizing the drug, denigrating the doctors who prescribed it, the researchers who advocated for it, and the people who took it.”
A well-known newspaper described interviews with hydroxychloroquine proponents as” a big dose of dumb [, ]” and noted that” c]lo-lo-c] laims about hydroxychloroquine to treat Covid- 19 have gained traction despite a lack of scientific evidence,” according to the report. ” From there, the information war was on. Even after the Guidelines changed hydroxychloroquine’s status to ‘ Not Recommended,’ news agencies continued to criticize those who researched the drug, calling hydroxychloroquine’ the most disappointing, disavowed drug that researchers keep studying for Covid- 19.'”
The grand jury also examined the “bizarre” information warfare versus the 1987 drug Ivermectin, a Nobel Prize-winning antiparasitic. While researchers published studies both supporting and refuting the drug’s efficacy against Covid, the same government and media figures engaged in a “pointless, ugly war of words over a proven-safe drug with questionable effectiveness” ( ) ).
Public health officials were criticized by the grand jury for issuing childish and dismissive messages, particularly for an FDA tweet about ivermectin that read,” You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it”. The jury also criticized the media for calling the drug a “horse paste” and criticized how some state licensing boards “began to threaten the livelihoods of doctors who prescribed Ivermectin to their patients for Covid- 19 .”
None of these opponents were able to effectively explain why they treated Ivermectin badly, the report states.
3. ‘ Experts and media rumor put lives at risk
The grand jury’s attention was drawn in particular to how efforts made by legacy media and government health “experts” to stifle debate about the efficacy of drugs like ivermectin led to an avoidable situation where people who felt they were being defrauded took matters into their own hands.
Some people began using doses and formulations of the drug intended for animals because they were so desperate to get this alleged miracle drug, and they were so sure they were being defrauded, leading to a number of well-known Ivermectin overdoses, according to the report. ” Once again, opponents looked down their noses at the foolishness of these desperate, misguided fools. Everyone who knew how to “follow the science” laughed at the late-night comedians’ jokes that were made at their expense. This Grand Jury is not laughing”.
” This was a profound failure of public health messaging. We place every overdose that has happened at the hands of those responsible for this demonization campaign, the grand jury continued.
Shawn Fleetwood is a University of Mary Washington graduate and a staff writer for The Federalist. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClear Health, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
