MOHAWK STANDARDBREAD HARNESS RACEWAY 2022 - RESULTS AS OF MON FEB-28, 2022 - DAY-034
MOHAWK PICKS
01-1-6-10-3 W-6.40, 4TH (19-1), MTRI-61.40, MSUP-157.50 - 225.30
02-2-3-5-6 S-2.70, MEX-10.60, MTRI-11.40 - 250.00
03-4-7-5-1
04-6-9-10-4
05-2-3-5-4 S-2.50, MEX-23.80, MTRI-28.55 - 304.85
06-5-3-1-2 W-3.70, P-3.10, S-2.90, SEX-12.60, STRI-12.75 - 339.90
07-8-9-4-7
08-7-1-5-2 W-5.00 - 344.90
09-7-6-4-5 4TH WBP (5-1)
10-7-9-8-5-4 P-3.90, S-5.90, 4TH (6.5), HI-5-976.00 - 1,330.70
MOHAWKS TONIGHTS TOTAL $1,330.70 OVERALL TOTAL $8,840.20
STANS PICKS
01-6-10-4-9-1 P-8.30 - 8.30
02-2-1-3-5-6 4TH WBP (8-1), MSUP-78.50 - 86.80
03-6-1-3-7-5 W-5.30, S-6.60, 4TH WBP (4-1) - 98.70
04-4-6-5-3-1
05-4-5-2-3-6 4TH WBP (5.2)
06-1-5-3-2-6 MTRI-12.75 - 111.45
07-3-9-8-5-4
08-6-5-7-1-3 4TH WBP (4-1), MSUP-68.35 - 179.80
09-1-5-8-6-7 P-4.40, 4TH WBP (1-1) - 184.20
10-6-8-9-4-1 4TH WBP (9.2)
HI-5 MONEY BEFORE TONIGHT = $289,680.99
STANS TONIGHTS TOTAL $184.20 OVERALL TOTAL $17,052.10
ACTUAL RACE RESULTS
01-1 (2-1)-10 (11-1)-6 (6.5)-3 (19-1)DH-4 (16-1)DH
02-3 (9.5)-2 (3.5)-5 (8-1)-1 (52-1)
03-6 (8.5)-7 (4-1)-3 (14-1)-2 (20-1)
04-9 (7-1)-1 (9.2)-8 (78-1)-6 (8.5)
05-3 (5.2)-2 (8.5)-5 (5.2)-1 (21-1) (8-SCR)
06-5 (4.5)-3 (7.2)-1 (6-1)-6 (12-1)
07-9 (7.5)-4 (7.2)-3 (30-1)-1 (57-1)
08-7 (3.2)-6 (5.2)-1 (4-1)-5 (4-1)
09-6 (1-1)-5 (5-1)-7 (3-1)-1 (30-1) (2-SCR)
10-4 (9.2)-9 (3-1)-8 (17-1)-5 (6.5)-7 (5-1)
(MOHAWK PREDICTIONS)-RECORD 2022
01-110-BIG-$18.20 (JAN 29-8TH) (8-1), 17.20 (FEB 24-1ST) (7-1), $17.10 (FEB 19-11TH) (8-1),
02-055-BIG-$7.40 (JAN 28-3RD) (9-1), $$7.00 (FEB 24-5TH) (7-1), $5.90 (JAN 21-5TH) (6-1),
03-061-BIG-$16.60 (JAN 27-2ND) (17-1), $6.60 (FEB 03-8TH) (32-1), $5.90 (FEB 28-10TH) (17-1),
04-044-BIG-34-1 (FEB 21-2ND), 25-1 (JAN 31-1ST), 23-1 (JAN 21-3RD), 23-1 (FEB 11-3RD), 19-1 (JAN 07-6TH),
04-113-W B P-BIG-17-1 (FEB 11-11TH), 17-1 (FEB 18-10TH), 16-1 (JAN 03-2ND), 16-1 (FEB 24-09),
DD-1,2-07-BIG-$36.00 (FEB 24-2ND)
DD-2,3-05-BIG-$10.70 (FEB 10-3RD)
DD-3,4-02-BIG-$21.00 (FEB 10-4TH)
DD-4,5-02-BIG-$30.50 (FEB 19-5TH)
DD-5,6-02-BIG-$07.60 (JAN 14-6TH)
DD-6,7-02-BIG-$36.40 (JAN 03-7TH)
DD-7,8-07-BIG-$27.90 (JAN 29-8TH)
DD-8,9-02-BIG-$06.10 (JAN 28-9TH)
DD-9,10-04-BIG-$21.30 (FEB 10-10TH)
DD-10,11-02-BIG-$15.70 (FEB 18-11TH)
DD-11,12-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-12TH)
DD-12,13-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-13TH)
S EX-28-BIG-$44.10 (JAN 01-1ST)
M EX-26-BIG-$34.50 (JAN 06-10TH)
S TRI-05-BIG-$49.50 (JAN 01-1ST)
M TRI-34-BIG-$75.60 (FEB 12-12TH)
S SUP-01-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-0RD)
M SUP-22-BIG-$528.75 (FEB 05-6TH)
P3 (1-3)-03-BIG-$25.40 (FEB 24-3RD)
P3 (2-4)-01-BIG-$11.40 (FEB 10-4TH)
P3 (3-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P3 (4-6)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-6TH)
P3 (5-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P3 (6-8)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-8TH)
P3 (7-9)-02-BIG-$26.60 (JAN 28-9TH)
P3 (8-10)-01-BIG-$08.45 (JAN 13-10TH)
P3 (9-11)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (10-12)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (11-13)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P4 (4-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P4 (7-10)-01-BIG-$19.35 (JAN 13-10TH)
P5 (1-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P5 (6-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-M-03-BIG-$976.00 (FEB 28-10TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-11TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-11TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
5-1+ LONG-(05)-124
5-1+ LONG TOT-(09)-461-26.9%
LONGEST LONG-32-1 (FEB O3-8TH), 19-1 (JAN 08-9TH)
LONGS THIS NIGHT T3-0-19-1 (JAN 08-9TH),
4TH PLACE PICKED CORRECT-0
4TH PLACE WRONG BUT PICKED 5-1+ ONLY-0
PICK 4 PLACINGS-27-40
OA PICK 4 PLAC TOT-834-1,316-63.4%
TOTAL RACES-(10)-329
TOP 4 PICKS EACH RACE-01-04,02-03,03-01,04-02,05-03,06-03,07-02,08-03,09-03,10-03,11-00,12-00,13-00=27-40-OATOT-834-1,316-63.4%
(STANS PREDICTIONS)-RECORD AT MOHAWK 2022
01-077-BIG-$20.60 (FEB 14-3RD) (9-1), $17.80 (JAN 24-3RD) (7-1), $14.20 (JAN 27-9TH) (6-1),
02-055-BIG-$28.70 (JAN 20-7TH) (31-1), $21.30 (FEB 19-12TH) (28-1), $16.60 (FEB 24-1ST) (16-1),
03-057-BIG-$18.40 (JAN 20-1ST) (55-1), $10.00 (JAN 24-1ST) (22-1), $9.30 (JAN 07-7TH) (21-1),
04-054-BIG-71-1 (FEB 12-3RD), 54-1 (FEB 14-2ND), 35-1 (JAN 24-2ND), 34-1 (FEB 21-2ND),
04-124-W B P-BIG-71-1 (FEB 12-4TH), 43-1 (FEB 07-2ND), 37-1 (JAN 07-5TH), 28-1 (JAN 20-10TH),
DD-1,2-02-BIG-$42.10 (FEB 19-2ND)
DD-2,3-01-BIG-$63.20 (FEB 14-3RD)
DD-3,4-02-BIG-$11.90 (JAN 31-4TH)
DD-4,5-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-5TH)
DD-5,6-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-6TH)
DD-6,7-01-BIG-$7.00 (FEB 26-7TH)
DD-7,8-01-BIG-$17.10 (FEB 05-8TH)
DD-8,9-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-9TH)
DD-9,10-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-10TH)
DD-10,11-01-BIG-$4.80 (JAN 01-11TH)
DD-11,12-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-12TH)
DD-12,13-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-13TH)
S EX-19-BIG-$91.50 (JAN 10-10TH)
M EX-19-BIG-$223.90 (FEB 07-10TH)
S TRI-04-BIG-$27.50 (JAN 01-10TH)
M TRI-24-BIG-$532.30 (JAN 20-7TH)
S SUP-01-BIG-$71.10 (JAN 01-10TH)
M SUP-22-BIG-$4,176.70 (JAN 20-7TH)
P3 (1-3)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-3RD)
P3 (2-4)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-4TH)
P3 (3-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P3 (4-6)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-6TH)
P3 (5-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P3 (6-8)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-8TH)
P3 (7-9)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-9TH)
P3 (8-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (9-11)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (10-12)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (11-13)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P4 (4-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P4 (7-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P5 (1-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P5 (6-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-11TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-M-01-BIG-$99.60 (JAN 10-11TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
5-1+ LONG-(06)-171
5-1+ LONG TOT-(09)-461-37.1%
LONGEST LONG-67-1 (FEB 12-7TH), 55-1 (JAN 20-1ST), 30-1 (JAN 10-1ST)
LONGS THIS NIGHT T3-90-1 (JAN 31,3RD), 55-1 (JAN 20-1ST), 48-1 (JAN 21-7TH), 35-1 (JAN 20-9TH),
4TH PLACE PICKED CORRECT-0
4TH PLACE WRONG BUT PICKED 5-1+ ONLY-0
PICK 4 PLACINGS-29-40
OA PICK 4 PLAC TOT-810-1,316-61.2%
TOTAL RACES-(10)-329
TOP 4 PICKS EACH RACE-01-03,02-04,03-03,04-01,05-03,06-03,07-02,08-04,09-03,10-03,11-00,12-00,13-00=29-40-OATOT-810-1,316-61.6%
Monday, February 28, 2022
Saturday, February 26, 2022
BREAKING NEWS-CNN PROPAGANDISES BIGTIME OVER A AIRPORT LIGHT.COVID 19 WAS MADE BY MODERNA IN A LAB IN 2016 ALREADY
JEWISH KING JESUS IS COMING AT THE RAPTURE FOR US IN THE CLOUDS-DON'T MISS IT FOR THE WORLD.THE BIBLE TAKEN LITERALLY- WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE MAKES GOOD SENSE-SEEK NO OTHER SENSE-LEST YOU END UP IN NONSENSE.GET SAVED NOW- CALL ON JESUS TODAY.THE ONLY SAVIOR OF THE WHOLE EARTH - NO OTHER. 1 COR 15:23-JESUS THE FIRST FRUITS-CHRISTIANS RAPTURED TO JESUS-FIRST FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT-23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.ROMANS 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.(THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE)
BREAKING NEWS-CNN PROPAGANDISES BIGTIME OVER A AIRPORT LIGHT.
CNN CLAIMES THERES BOMBS GOING OFF IN KVIV LEFT RIGHT AND CENTER. THEY HAD THEIR PROPAGANDA BULL SHITTERS SO CALLED REPORTERS. MILES AWAY FROM AN AIRPORT. WITH CLOUDS LIGHTING UP EVERY FEW SECONDS. AND THE PROPAGANDA BULLSHITTER REPORTER HAD AN ARMY HELMET ON WHILE REPORTING THE SCAM TO CRAP HEAD WOLFF BLITZER. AND THEN FROM THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AIRPORT. CNN HAD THIS 2ND PROPAGANDIST CLARIISSA WARD SAYING OH BEHIND ME THE CLOUDS ARE LIGHTED UP FROM ALL THE BOMBS GOING OFF FROM RUSSIA. SHE WAS FARTHER AWAY. FROM THE AIRPORT THEN THAT ARMY BOY BRAIN DEAD PUPPET ON THE OTHER SIDE. AND NOW HERES THE KICKER. THEM SO CALLED BOMBS GOING OFF IN KVIV-ARE NOTHING BUT THE LIGHT AT THE AIRPORT GOING AROUND EVERY FEW SECONDS. SEE HOW THESE BULL SHIT PEOPHILE NETWORK CNN TRYS TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE. RUSSIA IS SHOOTING BOMBS ON KVIV. WHEN ALL IT IS-IS THE LIGHT FROM THE AIRPORT HITTING THE CLOUDS AND LIGHTING IT UP. COMPLETE PROPAGANDA BULL SHIT. AND DON'T BELIEVE A WORD OR PICTURE CNN DOES FROM UKLRAINE. ITS ALL PROPAGANDA LIES AND BULL CRAP. AND I HOPE RUSSIA READS THIS AND NUKES THE HOTEL WERE THE PROPAGANDA BULL SHITTERS CNN ARE STAYING IN KVIV.
BREAKING NEWS-CNN TONIGHT SUN FEB 27 IS DOING A HIT PIECE ATTACK AGAINST ALEX JONES.AND ALL HIS FOLLOWERS.
WELL LAST NIGHT I CAUGHT CNN FAKING RUSSIAN BOMBS ON UKRAINE. AND TONIGHT THE PROPAGANDA PEDOPHILE COMMUNIST-NAZI LIBERAL WHORE MEDIA CNN. WILL BE DOING A DOMESTIC TERRORIST HIT PIECE AGAINST ALEX JONES AND HIS LISTENERS AT 10PM TONIGHT. YOU JUST READ HOW CNN PEDOPHILE NETWORK FAKED THE BOMBS LAST NIGHT. WELL DON'T BELIEVE A THING THIS LEG SPREADER WHORE OF PROPAGANDA CNN SAYS OR DOES. IT IS JUST TO DIVIDE, TO PROMOTE RACIST-BIGOTED-CHRISTIANPHOBES HATE AGAINST EVERYBODY. WHILE SITTING AS THE QUEEN WHORE HITLARY CLINTON AND SODOMITE MUSLIM OBAMA AS THE OWNERS OF CNN. MIGHT AS WELL BE.
COVID 19 WAS MADE UP IN A LAB BY MODERNA IN 2016 ALREADY.
https://www.banned.video/watch?id=62195fa680e6a52c84a0a376
SMOKING GUN: Genetic sequence in COVID-19 spike protein was patented by Moderna three years earlier-02/25/2022 / By Mary Villareal
New evidence shows that the Wuhan coronavirus may have been tinkered with in a lab when scientists found genetic material owned by Moderna in the spike protein of the virus.The group of scientists detected a small snippet of code identical to the gene they patented three years before the pandemic even hit. They discovered the unique furin cleavage site of the virus, which makes it easier to infect people and separate it from other coronaviruses.Furin is a protease enzyme encoded in the FURIN gene. Some proteins are inactive when synthesized, but they may become active when sections are removed. This gene is responsible for proteolytic cleavage of HIV prior to viral assembly and is also thought to play a role in tumor progression.The structure of the virus has been one of the focal points of debate about its origin, as some scientists claimed that it could not have been acquired naturally. An international team of researchers suggested that the virus may have mutated to have a furin cleavage site during experiments on human cells in a lab.The team said there is a one-in-three trillion chance that Moderna’s sequence randomly appeared through natural evolution. There is also some debate about whether or not the match is as rare as the study claims, as other experts described it as a “quirky coincidence” rather than a “smoking gun.” (Related: If the spike protein facilitates entry of a gain-of-function coronavirus into cells, then why are we coerced to submit to spike protein-generating vaccines?) The SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID, has all the information it needs to spread in around 30,000 letters of the RNA (genetic code). The virus shares a sequence of 19 specific letters with a genetic section that is owned by Moderna, and 12 of the shared letters make up the structure of the virus’s furin cleavage site. The rest match with nucleotides in a nearby part of the genome sequence.-Moderna filed a patent similar to virus genetic material in 2016 - What makes this interesting, however, is that Moderna filed a patent in February 2016 as part of its cancer research. The patented sequence is part of a gene called MSH3, which is known to influence the repair of damaged cells in the body. The patent was approved in March the following year. (Related: Vaccine researcher admits ‘big mistake,’ says spike protein is dangerous ‘toxin.’) In a new study, researchers compared the COVID-19 makeup to millions of sequenced proteins on an online database, and of the 30,000 letters of genetic code that made the virus, it is the only one of its type to carry 12 unique letters that allow its spike protein to be activated by the common furin enzyme, which made it easier to spread between human cells.Analysis of the original COVID genome also found that the virus shares a sequence of 19 specific letters with a genetic section owned by Moderna.Dr. Balamurali Ambati of the University of Oregon and one of the authors of the paper said the matching code may have originally been introduced to the COVID genome through infected human cells expressing the MSH3 gene.Professor Lawrence Young, a virologist from the University of Warwick, admitted that while the finding was interesting, it is not significant enough to suggest lab manipulation.“We’re talking about a very, very, very small piece made up of 19 nucleotides. So it doesn’t mean very much to be frank, if you do these types of searches you can always find matches,” he said.However, a microbiologist at the University of Reading, Dr. Simone Clarke, questioned whether the find was as rare as the study claims. He said there can only be a certain number of genetic combinations within furin cleavage sites, and they do so like a lock and key in the cell. “The two only fit together in a limited number of combinations.”He also said that while it is an interesting coincidence, it is surely not entirely coincidental.
Chinese whistleblower warns the CCP has several virus bioweapons ready to be released at any time-02/25/2022 / By Arsenio Toledo
A Chinese virologist and whistleblower claims the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has engineered weaponized versions of several viruses that it is prepared to release at a moment’s notice to start the next global pandemic.This information was revealed during the Feb. 22 episode of “Brighteon Conversations” with Mike Adams and his guest Dr. Yan Li-Meng.Yan, a virologist from Hong Kong, fled to the United States in 2020 after she became a whistleblower and began accusing Beijing of actively withholding research critical to the understanding of the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19).According to Yan, the CCP’s bioweapons program is working on overdrive to release a new bioweapon that will cripple the world. While she has not been able to confirm it, stories have recently come out that the People’s Liberation Army, China’s armed forces, may have released a hemorrhagic fever virus during the recently concluded Beijing Winter Olympics. (Related: The next plandemic? China’s People’s Liberation Army launches hemorrhagic fever viral attack during Olympics, says source.) Yan was able to confirm through her team’s investigation that the CCP believed the Winter Olympics is the ideal event to release a bioweapon, as thousands of athletes from around the world converged in Beijing. According to Yan’s sources, the CCP was prepared to launch the bioweapon.However, they were unable to confirm if the CCP pushed through with its bioterror attack.Chinese bioweapons pose a great threat to the world-Even if the CCP did not release a bioweapon during the Winter Olympics, Yan warned that China is still “fully prepared” to launch an attack at any time.But there is still a lot of mystery surrounding these bioweapons, Yan pointed out. She is still not sure what specific pathogen the CCP will release. She mentioned the bioweapon will most likely cause hemorrhagic fever, but that only narrows it down slightly as the CCP has several types of engineered viruses that can cause hemorrhagic fever.“I cannot tell you what kind of pathogens they have already used and what haven’t … and I cannot tell you what exactly changed, gain-of-function or not, they have done in their labs,” said Yan.She then pointed out that the CCP has been experimenting with different kinds of viruses, including parvoviruses, hantaviruses, the measles virus and even the Ebola virus.Without treatment, Yan warned that the CCP’s engineered viruses could cause death rates of up to 90 percent.Fortunately, according to Yan, there is already a cure for most of these viruses. It is a drug known as daratumumab, which is sold by Johnson & Johnson under the brand name Darzalex. The CCP is trying to procure as much of this drug as possible because the communist party’s experiments on its people found that it is effective against the engineered viruses.In a parting statement, Yan said the only way the CCP’s aggression can be countered is for people to wake up and stand together against the threat it poses.She said: “We face the Chinese Communist Party and their worldwide allies. They are very rich, they are very powerful… So we must work together, and at this moment, I think the biggest power is when people wake up, when people understood the importance of their rights and their freedom. And what we can do is we need to stand up to protect our future and our kids future. That’s the most important thing.”
Fully vaccinated individuals are SHEDDING GRAPHENE and infecting the unvaccinated, causing serious health complications-02/25/2022 / By Arsenio Toledo
A physician has warned the public that the graphene in Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines is transforming within people’s bodies. Worse yet, the fully vaccinated are now starting to infect the unvaccinated with vaccine toxins through shedding.Dr. Philippe Van Welbergen, medical director of Biomedics Clinic in the United Kingdom, recently demonstrated that the graphene in the COVID-19 vaccines is organizing and growing into large fibers and structures, gaining magnetic properties and becoming more complex.In mid-2021, Van Welbergen first noticed a problem when he started receiving more and more patients who exhibited an unusual array of symptoms. He explained in an interview with a South African media outlet that his patients started complaining about chronic fatigue, dizziness, memory issues, paralysis and even late-onset of heavy menstruation for women in their 60s.Van Welbergen was concerned that it may have something to do with structural changes in their blood, and so he took blood samples from all of them.Upon examining the blood samples under a microscope, he found that their blood was clumping up and forming strange shapes not typically seen in healthy blood. The shape of individual red blood cells was also not round, but more “crumpled.”Van Welbergen also found that the nuclei of the cells were destroyed and many of them were starting to form large gold tubular structures.All of his patients were vaccinated with Moderna’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. They all reported feeling extreme fatigue, dizziness, tiredness, a general aura of “not feeling well” and mental confusion.Thick graphene fibers found in the blood of vaccinated individuals-Van Welbergen explained that the gold tube-like structures resemble the graphene oxide samples found by Spanish researchers. He described them as resembling “folded over toilet paper under paint.” (Related: Researcher sounds alarm after finding PARASITES, nanobots and graphene in COVID-19 vaccines.) During another interview with the same media outlet, Van Welbergen presented images of his latest blood slides and explained what happened to the blood of his vaccinated patients.In one image of a blood sample Van Welbergen shared, he pointed out that the vaccinated individual’s blood was coagulated, the red blood cells were badly misshapen and clumped together and the blood was filled with graphene fibers which dwarfed the red blood cells in size. He warned that graphene fibers these massive could block small blood vessels and cause serious health complications.Van Welbergen also warned that he was starting to notice a magnetic or electric polarity effect on different sides of the graphene fibers. This behavior was not present when he first started examining the blood of his vaccinated patients, but they were now popping up out of nowhere.“These things have changed,” he said. “Their reaction with surrounding blood cells has changed … and I don’t know what triggered it.”-The vaccinated are “shedding” and infecting the unvaccinated-Worse yet, during one interview Van Welbergen showed a blood sample from an unvaccinated three-year-old patient. He examined the blood and found thin shards of clear material that resemble smaller versions of the graphene fibers he found in the blood of his vaccinated patients.The three-year-old’s parents were both fully vaccinated. This led Van Welbergen to speculate that the unvaccinated are now being contaminated by fully vaccinated individuals who were “shedding” graphene.Van Welbergen also had another unvaccinated patient – an eight-year-old child – who came to him because of serious health concerns. The child’s right arm and upper right leg were paralyzed and the child was unable to properly move the affected limbs.When he examined the child’s blood, he found a large mass of graphene that was forcing the red blood cells around it to clump together and get squished. This large mass of graphene is most likely preventing the child from properly using the affected limbs.What this shows is that not only are the fully vaccinated in danger of experiencing severe health complications due to the material in the COVID-19 vaccines, but they are now clear threats to the health of unvaccinated individuals as well.
More Evidence Covid Originated in a Chinese Lab-23 Feb 2022
BUCK: There is more evidence covid was tinkered with in a lab now as scientists find virus contained a tiny chunk of DNA that matches a sequence patented by Moderna three years before the pandemic actually began. This is leading to fresh suspicion that this was a manipulated virus. So China may have been responsible, Clay, through its recklessness and perhaps even worse, and we had to find out exactly what happened here.Fresh lab leak fears as study finds genetic code in Covid’s spike protein linked to Moderna patent | Daily Mail Online https://t.co/uQTsnitu3s— lucy johnston (@thelucyjohnston) February 23, 2022-Unleashing a plague on the world that did take millions of lives and shut down billions of people’s day-to-day lives. But you’ll notice the media cannot summon the same kind of outrage or anger about China no matter what the storyline, whether we’re talking about Uyghurs in concentration camps or anything else. “Russia, Russia, Russia” as a media issue has long-lasting consequences.CLAY: Well, a big reason why — and we had a big discussion surrounding this — is there’s so much feeding at the Chinese trough when it comes to American Big Business. The interaction between Russia and the United States from an economic perspective is relatively small, whereas just think about use as an example Apple or Nike or the NBA and their relationships that exist right now in China, NBC with their acquiring of the Olympic Games when they virtually uttered no criticism whatsoever of anything surrounding China.There is such economic might, such economic power that exists surrounding China that they won’t even pick Asian bad guys now for movies out of Hollywood. You noticed James Bond movies, every villain remains Eastern European. The Russian bad guys were going all the way back to the sixties, the seventies, the eighties, the Cold War era. They won’t even make a bad guy Asian for fear that they might offend their bosses in China.And, Buck, this is where we talk about, we need rigorous investigations of Dr. Fauci because, in addition to this virus escaping from a Chinese lab, it may well have partially been funded by our own tax dollars, and we don’t know because it appears that Dr. Fauci and all of his cohorts have helped to cover up all of the early lineage of this story. That’s why we think that Fauci’s gonna retire sometime in the summer and try to ride off into the sunset and claim victory over covid rather than be held accountable in the Senate and in the House.Which is what he should be for this entire mess, not only the response to covid, but the fact that we may well have funded this through gain-of-function research helped to create covid. And, by the way, Buck, do you feel comfortable, the fact that Moderna, who we have try to mandate you get a Moderna or a Pfizer vaccine that, according to this story out of England, that there is a part of a Moderna DNA code or whatever you want to call it…? Again, I’m not an expert when it comes to how we craft unique viruses — but that that could be included in the genome of this covid virus? I mean, this is, I believe, such a monumentally huge story. And we have, I feel like, still only touched the very outskirts of this story for fear from so many big companies out there of what China will say if we really figure out what happened here.BUCK: The implications of the virus being engineered by what is a very often in communication and even tightly knit international health apparatus of sorts, state health apparatus of these different countries, is tremendous. You mentioned the funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology lab, receiving some funding U.S. based sources or a third party intermediary and what that would mean. But also I think that there’s gonna be enormous pressure brought to bear all over the world, but particularly — and let’s focus in on America for a second here at home — to just move past all of this, to move on.CLAY: Pretend this didn’t happen.BUCK: Pretend like they didn’t put us through all this.CLAY: “It doesn’t matter how it got out. It happened. Let’s move on.”BUCK: And also what we did in response to it. I mean, the first country to lockdown was China, and somehow we looked at that and said, “You know what? Let’s mirror image the Chinese Communist Party’s authoritarianism here to protect people from an aerosolized virus.” That was the thinking of the supposed smartest health and medical minds in the world. This is a stunning failure, and people aren’t going to have faith going forward.And they shouldn’t have faith going forward in public health authorities not being deeply politicized. What a lot of folks found out was the same way that over time you’ve seen journalists are basically second-tier gender studies and social studies majors or socialism majors, maybe, from Northeastern colleges for the most part — and we’re talking about the major national news outlets — and so they’re incredibly left wing.The people that work at the top of the CDC and NIAID, the NIH, they’re also very Democrat aligned and left wing in their thinking. And what’s worse is that this ties into — and you can go back a hundred years, and there were certainly in earlier times in the federal bureaucracy in this country there was a sense that if you only put them in charge, right? The statist, authoritarian left has always wanted greater authority in the bureaucracy with the experts because how can you argue with “experts,” Clay? How can you argue with the people that are supposed to be making these scientists for everybody else? They’re the super smart ones. Look at this. They got the pandemic’s origins wrong, they got lockdown wrong, they got masks wrong, they certainly got components of the vaccine and how well it would work wrong. And all the while, they promised us that they were keeping us so safe.And there were all these benefits from it, and I think people that look at the data and really take a moment of reflection to realize, Clay, they just made it all worse, really. I mean, we should have just worked on therapeutics, protecting the elderly. The Great Barrington Declaration — which they buried online after it came out — was right and the people that slandered it were wrong.CLAY: They were 100% right on the Great Barrington Declaration. But, Buck, even leaving aside the Great Barrington Declaration, how much attention did you see given to the Johns Hopkins study that actually looked at specifically whether lockdowns had in any way been beneficial? Because early on you and I were some of the first people who said this, that every choice you make in a public policy setting has a balancing act. In other words, remember when there were so many people early in the covid situation where they said, “Well, if we can save just one life”? How many times did you hear or see people say, “Well, if we can save just one life,” and if you said something very honest and straightforward, which would have been like, “Well if we made the speed limits on cars 5 miles an hour, nobody would ever die in a car accident. You would have to be a moron to kill yourself driving 5 miles an hour.” I guess you could drive off a cliff but, by and large, in an accident setting it would be virtual impossible.We make balancing decisions all the time based on living life and analyzing risk and not putting everybody in bubble wrap all day. But, Buck, when you or I back in March or April say, “Hey, you know what? Let’s consider the economic impacts of this shutdown.” Nobody was even allowed to have that conversation.
Opinions-The Plandemic Is Imploding And The Rats Who Committed Crimes Against Humanity Are Panicking-by Ethan Huff | Natural News-February 25th 2022, 12:29 pm
A lot is happening these days with the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) plandemic, which is rapidly unraveling amid escalating civil unrest and continued revelations about the crimes against humanity that have been perpetrated on the world.The Freedom Convoy trucker convergence on Ottawa, for example, continues to grow, which prompted Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to invoke the Emergencies Act, giving him new dictatorial powers.Trudeau has already used these powers to terrorize the protesters by arresting some of them and even stripping them of their banking rights.The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has also been forced to admit that the Operation Warp Speed “vaccines” create negative efficacy, meaning they damage the immune system and render it less able to ward off disease.Figure 3 in this study by the CDC that was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) corroborates a study out of Denmark, both of which show that covid jabs make a person more prone to infection, not less.Pfizer whistleblower Brooke Jackson also revealed recently that the drug giant committed massive fraud with its covid jab clinical trials. This revelation dovetailed with an announcement by government authorities in Scotland that covid jab injury and death data will no longer be published because it shows undeniably that the injections are killing people.They can try to flee, but the plandemic rats will eventually pay for their crimes against humanityThe corporate-controlled media, in a desperate attempt to deter people from protesting against covid jab mandates, is now harassing Freedom Convoy protesters by doxing their identities in fake news articles.Since it is now obvious that the plandemic sham is falling apart as people wake up to the truth, the lying media has resorted to bullying people who engage in free speech against the government’s dictates.Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), one of the leading congressional voices against the covid sham, has still not heard back from the Department of Defense (DoD) about a letter he sent to the agency about the massive spike in injuries and deaths being seen in the U.S. military due to its jab mandates.The Pentagon’s highly accurate and credible Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) clearly shows that heart problems, neurological damage and other conditions are skyrocketing among fully vaccinated servicemen, and yet the DoD refuses to acknowledge this, let alone provide any explanation for it.The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is also overflowing with jab injury cases, but you will not hear a peep about it from the government or from the media because it rips to shreds the Biden regime’s continued false claim that the injections are “safe and effective.”Excess deaths are also up at least 40 percent, according to the latest life insurance data. This revelation comes as Democrats are suddenly starting to backtrack on their beloved face mask mandates, and possibly soon the jab mandates as well.A mass awakening is happening, and the perpetrators behind this global hoax are starting to bail. Those fleeing are hoping to exit stage left unnoticed, but it will not be that easy for them once the culmination of their lies catches up with them.On the other hand, there are many who are now doubling down even as the ship sinks. History will be especially unkind to them, and rightfully so once they are forced to face the music for their crimes against humanity.“There’s a mind boggling number of guilty people; but fear not, there are people who know what you’ve done and the world community will get the justice it deserves,” is how one of Steve Kirsch’s followers so beautifully put it.
Original Investigation-January 21, 2022-Association Between 3 Doses of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine and Symptomatic Infection Caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron and Delta Variants-Emma K. Accorsi, PhD1,2; Amadea Britton, MD1,2; Katherine E. Fleming-Dutra, MD1; et al Zachary R. Smith, MA1; Nong Shang, PhD1; Gordana Derado, PhD1; Joseph Miller, PhD1; Stephanie J. Schrag, DPhil1; Jennifer R. Verani, MD, MPH1
Author Affiliations Article Information-JAMA. 2022;327(7):639-651. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.0470
Question What is the association between 3 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Omicron and Delta variants? Findings In this test-negative case-control analysis that included 70 155 tests from symptomatic adults, the likelihood of vaccination with 3 mRNA vaccine doses (vs unvaccinated) was significantly lower among both Omicron (odds ratio, 0.33) and Delta (odds ratio, 0.065) cases than SARS-CoV-2–negative controls; a similar pattern was observed with 3 vaccine doses vs 2 doses (Omicron odds ratio, 0.34; Delta odds ratio, 0.16). Meaning These findings suggest that vaccination with 3 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, compared with being unvaccinated and with receipt of 2 doses, was associated with protection against both the Omicron and Delta variants, although higher odds ratios for the association with Omicron infection suggest less protection for Omicron than for Delta.Abstract-Importance Assessing COVID-19 vaccine performance against the rapidly spreading SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is critical to inform public health guidance.Objective To estimate the association between receipt of 3 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 or Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccine and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, stratified by variant (Omicron and Delta).Design, Setting, and Participants A test-negative case-control analysis among adults 18 years or older with COVID-like illness tested December 10, 2021, through January 1, 2022, by a national pharmacy-based testing program (4666 COVID-19 testing sites across 49 US states).Exposures Three doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (third dose ≥14 days before test and ≥6 months after second dose) vs unvaccinated and vs 2 doses 6 months or more before test (ie, eligible for a booster dose).Main Outcomes and Measures Association between symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (stratified by Omicron or Delta variants defined using S-gene target failure) and vaccination (3 doses vs unvaccinated and 3 doses vs 2 doses). Associations were measured with multivariable multinomial regression. Among cases, a secondary outcome was median cycle threshold values (inversely proportional to the amount of target nucleic acid present) for 3 viral genes, stratified by variant and vaccination status.Results Overall, 23 391 cases (13 098 Omicron; 10 293 Delta) and 46 764 controls were included (mean age, 40.3 [SD, 15.6] years; 42 050 [60.1%] women). Prior receipt of 3 mRNA vaccine doses was reported for 18.6% (n = 2441) of Omicron cases, 6.6% (n = 679) of Delta cases, and 39.7% (n = 18 587) of controls; prior receipt of 2 mRNA vaccine doses was reported for 55.3% (n = 7245), 44.4% (n = 4570), and 41.6% (n = 19 456), respectively; and being unvaccinated was reported for 26.0% (n = 3412), 49.0% (n = 5044), and 18.6% (n = 8721), respectively. The adjusted odds ratio for 3 doses vs unvaccinated was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.31-0.35) for Omicron and 0.065 (95% CI, 0.059-0.071) for Delta; for 3 vaccine doses vs 2 doses the adjusted odds ratio was 0.34 (95% CI, 0.32-0.36) for Omicron and 0.16 (95% CI, 0.14-0.17) for Delta. Median cycle threshold values were significantly higher in cases with 3 doses vs 2 doses for both Omicron and Delta (Omicron N gene: 19.35 vs 18.52; Omicron ORF1ab gene: 19.25 vs 18.40; Delta N gene: 19.07 vs 17.52; Delta ORF1ab gene: 18.70 vs 17.28; Delta S gene: 23.62 vs 20.24).Conclusions and Relevance Among individuals seeking testing for COVID-like illness in the US in December 2021, receipt of 3 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (compared with unvaccinated and with receipt of 2 doses) was less likely among cases with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with test-negative controls. These findings suggest that receipt of 3 doses of mRNA vaccine, relative to being unvaccinated and to receipt of 2 doses, was associated with protection against both the Omicron and Delta variants, although the higher odds ratios for Omicron suggest less protection for Omicron than for Delta.
Introduction-On November 24, 2021, health authorities in South Africa reported the emergence of a new SARS-CoV-2 variant, B.1.1.529 (Omicron).1 Omicron has spread rapidly, and as of January 6, 2022, was identified in 149 countries across all 6 World Health Organization regions.2 Omicron was first detected in the US on December 1, 2021, and by January 1, 2022, was estimated to be responsible for 95% of sequenced new cases.3,4Sequencing of early Omicron strains documented more than 30 mutations in the spike protein, including in the receptor binding domain.5,6 These mutations, combined with observed exponential growth in case counts, even in settings with substantial rates of COVID-19 vaccination or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, raised concerns about potential for increased transmissibility and immune escape.2,7-10 There is an urgent need to understand the protection provided by current vaccination regimens against Omicron, including any additional protection derived from booster doses.In this analysis, a subset of data from the national Increasing Community Access to Testing (ICATT) platform was used to estimate the association of receipt of 3 doses of a mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (vs unvaccinated and vs 2 doses) with symptomatic infection with the Omicron and Delta variants, using an internally validated genetic proxy for variant identification.Methods-Study Protocol Approval-The human subjects advisor for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases determined that this analysis met the requirements for public health surveillance as outlined in 45 CFR §46.102(l)(2). Because data were collected during routine operational procedures, this secondary data analysis did not require informed consent and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy.Data Source-Data from the ICATT platform11—a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) partnership facilitating no-cost, drive-through SARS-CoV-2 testing at pharmacies across all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico—were analyzed. Testing sites were selected by HHS to prioritize access in racially and ethnically diverse communities and areas with moderate-to-high social vulnerability. Data for this analysis were limited to tests occurring between December 10, 2021, and January 1, 2022, at testing sites that collected booster vaccination history and sent specimens to a single laboratory chain (Aegis Sciences Corp) for processing. The laboratory used the TaqPath COVID-19 Combo Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific), which identifies SARS-CoV-2 infections by detecting 3 targets from the viral ORF1ab, S, and N gene regions. The laboratory reported overall test results and cycle threshold (Ct) values for each of these targets for SARS-CoV-2–positive specimens.Individuals registered online for testing at drive-through sites where nasal swabs were collected. During registration, individuals self-reported symptom status (asymptomatic or symptomatic with ≥1 COVID-like symptom), race, ethnicity, sex, age, state of residence, history of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and underlying conditions. Fixed categories were used to capture data for symptoms, race, ethnicity, and underlying chronic conditions including the presence of an immunocompromising condition (defined in the questionnaire as “such as from immunocompromising medications, solid organ or blood stem cell transplant, HIV, or other immunocompromising conditions”). Race and ethnicity were collected as required data elements under HHS COVID-19 laboratory reporting requirements.12 The testing program geocoded testing sites to identify their census tract Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) score.13 Patients also self-reported COVID-19 vaccination status, including the number of doses (up to 4), product, and month and year of receipt for each dose. For doses received in the same month or the month prior to testing, an additional question was asked to specify whether the dose was received 14 days or more before testing. Vaccination reporting was not mandatory, and information was not verified. Data were reported to HHS with an estimated 3-day lag and were deidentified to remove any personally identifying information.Study Design-A retrospective test-negative case-control analysis was conducted on samples collected from December 10, 2021, to January 1, 2022, from adults 18 years or older with symptomatic COVID-like illness. The test-negative design is a commonly used observational method for evaluating the performance of vaccines in which participants are enrolled based on a clinical case definition, tested for the vaccine-preventable outcome of interest, and classified as cases or controls based on that testing; the odds of prior vaccination among cases and controls are compared as an estimate of the association between vaccination and the outcome.14,15 A strength of the test-negative design is that all participants seek care (or testing) for a common clinical case definition, which can help reduce bias resulting from confounding by differential care-seeking behavior.16,17-The unit of analysis for this study was tests; positive results were classified as cases, and negative results as controls. The short study period and restriction to symptomatic individuals limited the probability of individuals contributing more than 1 test.Because protection from mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is substantially lower in immunocompromised individuals18 and the recommended vaccine dosing regimen is different from that of immunocompetent individuals,19 tests from individuals reporting an immunocompromising condition were excluded. Tests from persons reporting a positive COVID-19 test result within the previous 90 days were excluded to reduce potential misclassification. Tests with unknown vaccination status or incomplete vaccination data (ie, missing vaccination dates or products), from individuals reporting prior receipt of 1 or 4 mRNA vaccine doses or of non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, or from persons with improbable ages (defined as >100 years) were also excluded.Additionally, among tests with positive results, Ct values were described by variant and by vaccination status (3 doses, 2 doses, and unvaccinated). Ct values reflect the number of cycles during polymerase chain reaction amplification needed to detect viral genetic material and are inversely proportional to the amount of target nucleic acid in the tested sample.20 Ct values were examined to better understand the relative amounts of genetic material present in positive samples by variant and vaccination status.Exposure-The exposure of interest was self-report of any 3 doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine (including mixed-product regimens) vs unvaccinated and vs any 2 doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine. For individuals reporting 2 vaccine doses, tests were excluded if the second dose was received less than 6 months prior to test date to ensure eligibility for a booster dose. For those reporting 3 doses, tests were excluded if the interval between second and third doses was less than 6 months, as per recommendations during the analysis period for booster doses among immunocompetent individuals,19 or if the most recent dose was received less than 14 days before testing. Another exposure examined was any 2 doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine, with the second dose received 14 days or more before testing vs unvaccinated; assessment of this exposure did not limit to those eligible for a booster dose (ie, did not limit to those with 6 or more months elapsed between the second dose and date of testing).Outcomes-The primary outcome was symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Omicron or Delta variant. For this analysis, an Omicron case was defined as presence of S-gene target failure (SGTF) in the test sample and a Delta case as absence of SGTF in the test sample. All samples that were determined by the processing laboratory to be SARS-CoV-2 positive had Ct values for at least 2 of the N, ORF1ab, and S genes. SARS-CoV-2–positive samples were considered to have SGTF if they had Ct values for the N and ORF1ab genes but not for the S gene; otherwise, samples were considered not to have SGTF.SGTF may serve as a proxy for the presence of the Omicron variant in samples tested with the TaqPath COVID-19 Combo Kit assay because of the presence of deletions in the S-gene region for Omicron that are not present in Delta2,21; the deletions lead to S-gene–negative results in Omicron lineages BA.1 and B.1.1.529 but not the majority of Delta samples. While levels of non-Delta circulating variants other than Omicron remain low, samples with SGTF may be presumed to be Omicron.22 At the time of this analysis 99.9% of sequenced samples in the US prior to the emergence of Omicron were Delta.4 To validate the use of SGTF as a proxy for Omicron in the ICATT data, the frequency of SGTF was examined in a randomly selected subset of tests with positive results that were sequenced during the same period as the analysis. The sequenced subset was drawn from the complete database of test results from the laboratory, including tests not eligible for the main analysis. Sequencing data were not available for most cases included in the main analysis, which is why SGTF was used as a proxy. The sensitivity of SGTF for detecting Omicron (B.1.1.529 or BA.1 lineage) was 83.4% and the specificity was 99.2% (eTable 1 in the Supplement).Secondary outcome measures included Ct values for the N and ORF1ab genes among Omicron and Delta cases and S gene among Delta cases.Statistical Analysis-The association between symptomatic infection with the Omicron or Delta variants and vaccination was estimated by comparing the odds of prior 3-dose vaccination vs unvaccinated and the odds of prior 3-dose vaccination vs 2-dose vaccination in cases vs controls using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. The odds ratio (OR) for 3 doses vs unvaccinated was used as an estimate of 3-dose vaccine effectiveness (effectiveness = [1 – OR] × 100%), with lower ORs suggesting more protection. The OR for 3 doses vs 2 doses was used as an estimate of relative vaccine effectiveness, reflecting additional protection from a booster dose relative to 2 doses. ORs were estimated for any combination of mRNA vaccine and separately for BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273.Models included the number of days between the start of the analysis period and test date (as a continuous variable), age group, sex, race, ethnicity, testing site HHS region, testing site census tract SVI (dichotomized as 0 to <0.5 and ≥0.5-1), and number of underlying chronic conditions (0, 1, or ≥2) as covariates to adjust for potential confounding bias. Unknown race and ethnicity were coded as categories of their respective variables instead of null values to retain these records in regression models. Data with missing values for other model covariates (specifically, sex and SVI) were coded as null values and therefore dropped from adjusted regression models.Two-sided 95% CIs were calculated for each reported OR, with 95% CIs that excluded 1 considered statistically significant. Two-sided P values for the association between vaccination and symptomatic infection with Omicron compared with Delta were corrected for false-discovery rate (FDR) using the Benjamini-Hochberg method (to account for type I error due to multiple comparisons), and results with Q values (ie, P values adjusted for the FDR) less than .001 were considered statistically significant.To aid in the interpretation of associations of 3 vaccine doses vs unvaccinated and vs 2 vaccine doses, a secondary analysis was performed examining the association between 2 doses vs unvaccinated by time since receipt of second dose. The association between infection and 2 mRNA vaccine doses vs unvaccinated was examined separately for each product-variant combination by logistic regression incorporating the same covariates as above as well as month (0-11) since second dose using a 2-knot spline at months 3.5 and 7.5.For comparison of Ct values among cases by variant and exposure status (3 doses vs unvaccinated, 3 doses vs 2 doses, and 2 doses vs unvaccinated), the 2-sided Mann-Whitney U test was used to identify significant differences in median Ct values. Correction for FDR was applied for each comparison of exposure status, and results with Q < .001 were considered statistically significant.Statistical analyses were performed in RStudio and R, version 4.0.3 (R Foundation). Multinomial logistic regression was performed using the nnet R package, version 7.3-16.-Results-A total of 70 155 tests from 4666 sites on samples collected between December 10 and January 1 across 49 states met inclusion criteria (Figure 1), including 23 391 cases (13 098 Omicron; 10 293 Delta) and 46 764 controls (Table 1) (mean age, 40.3 [SD, 15.6] years; 42 050 [60.1%] women). Included tests were most frequently performed on persons aged 25 to 34 years (30.4%), followed by those aged 35 to 44 years (19.3%), and on persons who reported being of White race (75.5%). More than one-third of tests (36.4%) were from people with reported underlying health conditions, with high blood pressure most common, followed by overweight. Compared with controls, cases were more frequently tests from persons aged 25 to 34 years (Omicron 35.1% and Delta 31.0% vs controls 28.9%), of Black/African American race (Omicron 24.4% and Delta 14.9% vs controls 11.9%), and of Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (Omicron 22.5% and Delta 17.7% vs controls 17.4%) (Table 1).For vaccination history, the most common combination of 2 doses was BNT162b2/BNT162b2 (63.4% of 2-dose regimens), followed by mRNA-1273/mRNA-1273 (36.4%); the most common 3-dose combination was BNT162b2/BNT162b2/BNT162b2 (57.5% of 3-dose regimens) (Table 1). Among individuals receiving 2 doses only, the median time between the second dose and test date was 8 months. Among those receiving 3 doses, the median time between the second dose and test date was 8 months, between the second and third dose was 7 months, and between the third dose and test date was 1 month. Prior receipt of 3 vaccine doses was reported for 18.6% (2441/13 098) of Omicron cases, 6.6% (679/10 293) of Delta cases, and 39.7% (18 587/46 764) of controls (Table 1).Comparison of 3 Doses vs Unvaccinated-Among Omicron cases and controls, the adjusted OR for prior receipt of 3 mRNA vaccine doses vs unvaccinated was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.31-0.35); among Delta cases and controls, the adjusted OR was 0.065 (95% CI, 0.059-0.071; Q < .001 for comparison of ORs for Omicron and Delta) (Table 2). When models were stratified by mRNA product, the adjusted ORs for Omicron were 0.35 (95% CI, 0.32-0.38) for 3 doses of BNT162b2 vs unvaccinated and 0.28 (95% CI, 0.26-0.31) for 3 doses of mRNA-1273 vs unvaccinated. For Delta, the adjusted ORs were 0.077 (95% CI, 0.070-0.086) for 3 doses of BNT162b2 vs unvaccinated and 0.045 (95% CI, 0.038-0.053) for 3 doses of mRNA-1273 vs unvaccinated. Q values for all comparisons (Omicron vs Delta) of product-specific ORs were less than .001 (Table 2). An adjusted OR less than 1 indicates that relatively fewer test-positive cases had prior receipt of 3 doses (vs unvaccinated), with values closer to 0 representing a stronger magnitude of association.Comparison of 3 Doses vs 2 Doses-Among Omicron cases and controls, the adjusted OR for prior receipt of 3 mRNA vaccine doses vs 2 doses was 0.34 (95% CI, 0.32-0.36); among Delta cases and controls, the adjusted OR was 0.16 (95% CI, 0.14-0.17; Q < .001) (Table 2). When models were stratified by mRNA product, the adjusted ORs for Omicron were 0.35 (95% CI, 0.32-0.37) for 3 doses of BNT162b2 vs 2 doses and 0.31 (95% CI, 0.28-0.34) for 3 doses of mRNA-1273 vs 2 doses. For Delta, the adjusted ORs were 0.17 (95% CI, 0.16-0.19) for 3 doses of BNT162b2 vs 2 doses and 0.13 (95% CI, 0.11-0.15) for 3 doses of mRNA-1273 vs 2 doses. Q values for all comparisons (Omicron vs Delta) of product-specific ORs were less than .001 (Table 2). An adjusted OR less than 1 indicates that relatively fewer test-positive cases had prior receipt of 3 doses (vs 2 doses), with values closer to 0 representing a stronger magnitude of association.Comparison of 2 Doses vs Unvaccinated by Time Since Vaccination-Among Omicron cases and controls, the adjusted OR for prior receipt of any 2 mRNA vaccine doses vs unvaccinated was lowest soon after the second dose and generally increased over time since vaccination (Figure 2). The upper bound of the 95% CI was consistently greater than 1 starting at 3 months after second dose for BNT162b2 and at 6 months after second dose for mRNA-1273. For Delta, the OR for any 2 doses vs unvaccinated was also lowest soon after receipt of second dose; however, the ORs remained less than 0.46 for BNT162b2 and less than 0.40 for mRNA-1273, with 95% CIs that did not include 1 (Figure 2).Comparison of Ct Values-Among Omicron cases, median Ct values were significantly higher in samples from persons reporting 3 mRNA vaccine doses vs unvaccinated for the ORF1ab gene (19.25 vs 18.58; Q < .001) but not for the N gene (19.35 vs 18.71; Q = .002) (eTable 2 in the Supplement). Among Delta cases, median Ct values of the N, ORF1ab, and S genes were significantly higher in samples from persons receiving 3 doses vs unvaccinated (N gene: 19.07 vs 18.28; ORF1ab gene: 18.70 vs 17.84; S gene: 23.62 vs 19.58; Q < .001 for all comparisons) (Figure 3; eTable 2 in the Supplement). In comparing median Ct values in samples from persons reporting 3 mRNA vaccine doses vs 2 doses, all were significantly higher (Omicron N gene, 19.35 vs 18.52; Omicron ORF1ab gene, 19.25 vs 18.40; Delta N gene, 19.07 vs 17.52; Delta ORF1ab gene, 18.70 vs 17.28; Delta S gene, 23.62 vs 20.24; Q < .001 for all comparisons) (Figure 3; eTable 2 in the Supplement).Discussion-In this analysis of SARS-CoV-2 tests performed at sites across the US during a 23-day period when incidence of Omicron was rapidly increasing, vaccination with a third dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was significantly less common among individuals infected with either the Omicron or Delta variants compared with uninfected individuals. Because of the timing of booster recommendations in the US, most booster recipients had recent vaccination (median of 1 month since booster).The magnitude of the association between vaccination and infection depended on the referent group and variant. For 3 doses vs unvaccinated, the ORs corresponded to an estimated effectiveness (1 – OR) of 67.3% (95% CI, 65.0%-69.4%) for Omicron and 93.5% (95% CI, 92.9%-94.1%) for Delta. For 3 doses vs 2 doses, the ORs corresponded to an estimated relative effectiveness of 66.3% (95% CI, 64.3%-68.1%) for Omicron and 84.5% (95% CI, 83.1%-85.7%) for Delta. For Omicron, the similarity between ORs for 3 doses using the unvaccinated referent group and the 2-dose referent group is consistent with the attenuation of the OR for 2 doses vs unvaccinated with time since second dose, which reflected no significant association by 6 months after second dose for both products. For Delta, the association between infection and 2 doses vs unvaccinated also attenuated over time since second dose, which is consistent with previous reports23-26; however, the ORs were statistically significant even up to 11 months after the second dose.Although these findings provide evidence supporting that 3-dose schedules are protective and that booster doses are more protective than primary series alone, the significantly higher OR for Omicron suggests that booster doses are less protective against Omicron than against Delta. These results are consistent with in-vitro neutralization assays that suggested the potential for immune evasion with Omicron.27-30 They also highlight that, in the setting of Omicron, higher booster coverage rates may be needed to achieve the same public health benefit as during Delta predominance. Additionally, nonpharmaceutical interventions may provide an important adjunct to slow the spread of Omicron.Among both Omicron and Delta variant cases, Ct values were generally higher (reflecting less genetic material detected) among those with 3 vaccine doses compared with unvaccinated or to 2 doses; with 1 exception (N gene for Omicron, 3 doses vs unvaccinated), all comparisons were statistically significant. Ct values are not a direct measure of viral load or infectiousness and can vary for a range of reasons including timing of sample collection relative to infection onset, specimen transport times, and laboratory assays and conditions. However, they have previously been used as a crude indicator of transmission potential, with higher values representing decreased likelihood of a case being infectious.31-37 In this analysis, the Ct values were based on 2 targets from a single assay, performed at a single laboratory chain, increasing their comparability. The significantly higher Ct values found in individuals reporting receipt of 3 doses vs unvaccinated or 2 doses, for both the Omicron and Delta variants, may suggest decreased infectiousness in those receiving an mRNA booster dose. However, caution should be taken in interpreting these differences between groups as epidemiologically meaningful because all differences were less than 1 unit on the log scale.-Limitations-This study has several limitations. First, vaccination status and symptoms were based on patient self-reported data, potentially leading to misclassification. Second, because the testing data do not include identifiers, tests rather than persons were used as the unit of analysis, and individuals may have been included more than once. However, the analysis was restricted to symptomatic individuals to reduce inclusion of individuals serially testing for reasons other than symptomatic disease, and the short study period (23 days) reduces the probability of individuals contributing multiple test results.Third, individuals remaining unvaccinated or unboosted may differ from individuals with 3 doses in ways that cannot be adjusted for with the variables in this data set. Fourth, some factors that could potentially be associated with both vaccination and risk of infection and thus confound the observed associations (eg, masking and social distancing) were not measured. Fifth, US adults were recommended to receive booster doses at different dates depending on age, underlying conditions, and occupation; therefore, some subgroups may have had greater access to boosters before broader recommendations were made.Sixth, sequencing data were limited for tests included in this analysis so SGTF was used as a proxy for Omicron infection; however, sensitivity of 83.4% and specificity of 99.2% in internal validation suggest that samples classified as Omicron by SGTF were almost always Omicron. Although some Omicron samples may have been misclassified as Delta, this would not affect the association between Omicron and vaccination status and would bias the association of Delta and vaccination toward that of Omicron such that the reported differences between Omicron and Delta are conservative.Seventh, the analysis of the association between symptomatic infection and 3 vs 2 doses did not directly account for waning of the primary series, although all tests were performed at least 6 months after receipt of a primary series, at which point protection from 2 doses was quite reduced, particularly for the Omicron variant. Eighth, associations between infection and vaccination are not constant and will likely continue to change with time since last dose.-Conclusions-Among individuals seeking testing for COVID-like illness in the US in December 2021, receipt of 3 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (compared with unvaccinated and with receipt of 2 doses) was less likely among cases with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with test-negative controls. These findings suggest that receipt of 3 doses of mRNA vaccine, relative to being unvaccinated and to receipt of 2 doses, was associated with protection against both the Omicron and Delta variants, although the higher odds ratios for Omicron suggest less protection for Omicron than for Delta.Corresponding Author: Emma K. Accorsi, PhD, COVID-19 Response, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd Mailstop H24-6, Atlanta, GA 30329 (vgi0@cdc.gov).Accepted for Publication: January 13, 2022.Published Online: January 21, 2022. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.0470Author Contributions: Drs Accorsi and Britton had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Drs Accorsi and Britton contributed equally as co–first authors; Drs Verani and Schrag contributed equally as co–senior authors.Concept and design: Accorsi, Britton, Fleming-Dutra, Shang, Miller, Schrag, Verani.Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Accorsi, Britton, Fleming-Dutra, Smith, Shang, Derado, Schrag, Verani.Drafting of the manuscript: Accorsi, Britton, Schrag, Verani.Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.Statistical analysis: Accorsi, Britton, Shang, Derado.Obtained funding: Miller.Administrative, technical, or material support: Britton, Smith, Miller, Verani.Supervision: Miller, Schrag, Verani.Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.Funding/Support: Funding for the Increasing Community Access to Testing platform was provided by the US Department of Health and Human Services. Funding for this analysis was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The CDC was involved in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, and approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. CDC controlled publication decisions.Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC.References-World Health Organization. Classification of Omicron (B.1.1.529): SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern. Updated November 26, 2021. Accessed December 23, 2021. https://www.who.int/news/item/26-11-2021-classification-of-omicron-(b.1.1.529)-sars-cov-2-variant-of-concern 2.World Health Organization. Enhancing response to OMICRON (COVID-19 variant B.1.1.529): Technical brief and priority actions for Member States. January 7, 2022. Accessed January 11, 2022. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/enhancing-readiness-for-omicron-(b.1.1.529)-technical-brief-and-priority-actions-for-member-states-3-CDC COVID-19 Response Team. SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant—United States, December 1-8, 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021;70(50):1731-1734. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm7050e1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref-4.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. COVID Data Tracker. Accessed January 7, 2021. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#variant-proportions 5.Wang L, Cheng G. Sequence analysis of the emerging SARS-CoV-2 variant Omicron in South Africa. J Med Virol. 2021;1-6. doi:10.1002/jmv.27516PubMedGoogle Scholar-6.GISAID. Tracking of variants. Accessed December 23, 2021. https://www.gisaid.org/hcov19-variants/ 7.National Institute for Communicable Diseases. COVID-19 weekly epidemiology brief, South Africa: week 47 2021. November 27, 2021. https://www.nicd.ac.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/COVID-19-Weekly-Epidemiology-Brief-week-47-2021.pdf-8.UK Health Security Agency. SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England. Technical briefing 33. December 23, 2021. Accessed December 23, 2021. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043807/technical-briefing-33.pdf-9.European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Implications of the further emergence and spread of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 variant of concern (Omicron) for the EU/EEA—first update. Updated December 2, 2021. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/threat-assessment-covid-19-emergence-sars-cov-2-variant-omicron-december-2021.pdf-10.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Potential Rapid increase of Omicron variant infections in the United States. Updated December 20, 2021. Accessed December 23, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/forecasting/mathematical-modeling-outbreak.html-11.Miller MF, Shi M, Motsinger-Reif A, Weinberg CR, Miller JD, Nichols E. Community-based testing sites for SARS-CoV-2—United States, March 2020-November 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021;70(49):1706-1711. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm7049a3PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref-12.US Department of Health and Human Services. COVID-19 Pandemic Response, Laboratory Data Reporting: CARES Act Section 18115. Updated January 8, 2021. Accessed
MY MOHAWK RACEWAY PREDICTIONS 2022 RD 33 SAT FEB 26, 2022
MOHAWK STANDARDBREAD HARNESS RACEWAY 2022 - RESULTS AS OF SAT FEB-26, 2022 - DAY-033
MOHAWK PICKS
01-6-7-2-8 W-3.40 - 3.40
02-8-7-6-0 W-5.10, DD-10.90 - 19.40
03-1-6-4-5 S-2.10, MEX-13.70, MTRI-15.95 - 51.15
04-3-2-7-1 W-4.10, P-3.20, 4TH WBP (10-1), SEX-12.30 - 70.75
05-1-4-5-3 4TH WBP (12-1)
06-6-3-7-5 W-2.60, P-4.80, S-2.50, SEX-6.80, STRI-8.50 - 95.95
07-7-8-9-2 W-4.90, DD-7.00 - 107.85
08-1-5-3-4 P-5.60 - 113.45
09-7-3-4-2 4TH WBP (8-1)
10-1-4-3-8 4TH WBP (6-1)
11-8-3-7-4 4TH WBP (2-1)
12-8-6-3-2-1
MOHAWKS TONIGHTS TOTAL $113.45 OVERALL TOTAL $7,509.50
STANS PICKS
01-6-1-7-8-2 W-3.40, S-3.50 - 6.90
02-6-7-8-3-4
03-5-6-1-4-2 4TH WBP (5.2)
04-7-6-3-2-1 4TH WBP (5.2)
05-5-8-1-9-10 4TH (14-1)
06-6-3-5-1-7 W-2.60, P-4.80, 4TH (21-1), SEX-6.80 - 21.10
07-7-8-4-1-9 W-4.90, S-6.20, DD-7.00 - 39.20
08-1-4-3-2-5 4TH WBP (10-1)
09-3-8-7-5-4 W-8.90, S-2.30 - 50.40
10-4-3-1-7-8 P-12.70 - 63.10
11-3-5-4-8-7 S-2.60 - 65.70
12-7-4-5-8-6 4TH WBP (6.5)
HI-5 MONEY BEFORE TONIGHT = $275,986.55
STANS TONIGHTS TOTAL $65.70 OVERALL TOTAL $16,867.90
ACTUAL RACE RESULTS
01-6 (3.5)-4 (4-1)-7 (9-1)-1 (8-1) (5-SCR)
02-8 (3.2)-6 (3-1)-4 (7-1)-2 (38-1) (5-SCR)
03-6 (8.5)-1 (9.5)-4 (5.2)-3 (26-1)
04-3 (1-1)-2 (5.2)-1 (10-1)-6 (9-1)
05-8 (9-1)-2 (27-1)-3 (12-1)-9 (14-1) (6-SCR)
06-6 (1.5)-3 (7-1)-7 (6-1)-1 (21-1)
07-7 (7.5)-5 (19-1)-4 (15-1)-6 (31-1)
08-2 (10-1)-5 (4-1)-1 (9.5)-3 (4-1)
09-3 (3-1)-2 (8-1)-7 (9.5)-1 (6-1)
10-8 (6-1)-3 (13-1)-6 (13-1)-1 (5.2)
11-7 (7-1 )-6 (7.2)-4 (2-1)-5 (56-1)
12-3 (9.2)-8 (6.5)-1 (7-1)-4 (11-1)-7 (67-1) (9-SCR) (6-4P9 NOT LOSING GROUND ON A BREAK)
(MOHAWK PREDICTIONS)-RECORD 2022
01-108-BIG-$18.20 (JAN 29-8TH) (8-1), 17.20 (FEB 24-1ST) (7-1), $17.10 (FEB 19-11TH) (8-1),
02-055-BIG-$7.40 (JAN 28-3RD) (9-1), $5.90 (JAN 21-5TH) (6-1), $5.60 (JAN 10-6TH) (7.2),
03-057-BIG-$16.60 (JAN 27-2ND) (17-1), $6.60 (FEB 03-8TH) (32-1), $5.20 (FEB 04-4TH) (15-1),
04-042-BIG-34-1 (FEB 21-2ND), 25-1 (JAN 31-1ST), 23-1 (JAN 21-3RD), 23-1 (FEB 11-3RD), 19-1 (JAN 07-6TH),
04-112-W B P-BIG-17-1 (FEB 11-11TH), 17-1 (FEB 18-10TH), 16-1 (JAN 03-2ND), 15-1 (FEB 05-10),
DD-1,2-07-BIG-$36.00 (FEB 24-2ND)
DD-2,3-05-BIG-$10.70 (FEB 10-3RD)
DD-3,4-02-BIG-$21.00 (FEB 10-4TH)
DD-4,5-02-BIG-$30.50 (FEB 19-5TH)
DD-5,6-02-BIG-$07.60 (JAN 14-6TH)
DD-6,7-02-BIG-$36.40 (JAN 03-7TH)
DD-7,8-07-BIG-$27.90 (JAN 29-8TH)
DD-8,9-02-BIG-$06.10 (JAN 28-9TH)
DD-9,10-04-BIG-$21.30 (FEB 10-10TH)
DD-10,11-02-BIG-$15.70 (FEB 18-11TH)
DD-11,12-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-12TH)
DD-12,13-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-13TH)
S EX-27-BIG-$44.10 (JAN 01-1ST)
M EX-24-BIG-$34.50 (JAN 06-10TH)
S TRI-04-BIG-$49.50 (JAN 01-1ST)
M TRI-31-BIG-$75.60 (FEB 12-12TH)
S SUP-01-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-0RD)
M SUP-21-BIG-$528.75 (FEB 05-6TH)
P3 (1-3)-03-BIG-$25.40 (FEB 24-3RD)
P3 (2-4)-01-BIG-$11.40 (FEB 10-4TH)
P3 (3-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P3 (4-6)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-6TH)
P3 (5-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P3 (6-8)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-8TH)
P3 (7-9)-02-BIG-$26.60 (JAN 28-9TH)
P3 (8-10)-01-BIG-$08.45 (JAN 13-10TH)
P3 (9-11)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (10-12)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (11-13)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P4 (4-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P4 (7-10)-01-BIG-$19.35 (JAN 13-10TH)
P5 (1-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P5 (6-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-M-02-BIG-$256.75 (FEB 10-10TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-11TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-11TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
5-1+ LONG-(05)-119
5-1+ LONG TOT-(17)-452-26.3%
LONGEST LONG-32-1 (FEB O3-8TH), 19-1 (JAN 08-9TH)
LONGS THIS NIGHT T3-0-19-1 (JAN 08-9TH),
4TH PLACE PICKED CORRECT-0
4TH PLACE WRONG BUT PICKED 5-1+ ONLY-0
PICK 4 PLACINGS-27-48
OA PICK 4 PLAC TOT-807-1,276-63.2%
TOTAL RACES-(12)-319
TOP 4 PICKS EACH RACE-01-02,02-02,03-03,04-03,05-01,06-03,07-01,08-03,09-02,10-03,11-02,12-02,13-00=27-48-OATOT-807-1,276-63.2%
(STANS PREDICTIONS)-RECORD AT MOHAWK 2022
01-076-BIG-$20.60 (FEB 14-3RD) (9-1), $17.80 (JAN 24-3RD) (7-1), $14.20 (JAN 27-9TH) (6-1),
02-053-BIG-$28.70 (JAN 20-7TH) (31-1), $21.30 (FEB 19-12TH) (28-1), $16.60 (FEB 24-1ST) (16-1),
03-056-BIG-$18.40 (JAN 20-1ST) (55-1), $10.00 (JAN 24-1ST) (22-1), $9.30 (JAN 07-7TH) (21-1),
04-053-BIG-71-1 (FEB 12-3RD), 54-1 (FEB 14-2ND), 35-1 (JAN 24-2ND), 34-1 (FEB 21-2ND),
04-119-W B P-BIG-71-1 (FEB 12-4TH), 43-1 (FEB 07-2ND), 37-1 (JAN 07-5TH), 28-1 (JAN 20-10TH),
DD-1,2-02-BIG-$42.10 (FEB 19-2ND)
DD-2,3-01-BIG-$63.20 (FEB 14-3RD)
DD-3,4-02-BIG-$11.90 (JAN 31-4TH)
DD-4,5-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-5TH)
DD-5,6-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-6TH)
DD-6,7-01-BIG-$7.00 (FEB 26-7TH)
DD-7,8-01-BIG-$17.10 (FEB 05-8TH)
DD-8,9-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-9TH)
DD-9,10-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-10TH)
DD-10,11-01-BIG-$4.80 (JAN 01-11TH)
DD-11,12-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-12TH)
DD-12,13-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-13TH)
S EX-19-BIG-$91.50 (JAN 10-10TH)
M EX-19-BIG-$223.90 (FEB 07-10TH)
S TRI-04-BIG-$27.50 (JAN 01-10TH)
M TRI-24-BIG-$532.30 (JAN 20-7TH)
S SUP-01-BIG-$71.10 (JAN 01-10TH)
M SUP-20-BIG-$4,176.70 (JAN 20-7TH)
P3 (1-3)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-3RD)
P3 (2-4)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-4TH)
P3 (3-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P3 (4-6)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-6TH)
P3 (5-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P3 (6-8)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-8TH)
P3 (7-9)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-9TH)
P3 (8-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (9-11)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (10-12)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (11-13)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P4 (4-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P4 (7-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P5 (1-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P5 (6-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-11TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-M-01-BIG-$99.60 (JAN 10-11TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
5-1+ LONG-(05)-165
5-1+ LONG TOT-(17)-452-36.5%
LONGEST LONG-67-1 (FEB 12-7TH), 55-1 (JAN 20-1ST), 30-1 (JAN 10-1ST)
LONGS THIS NIGHT T3-0-90-1 (JAN 31,3RD), 55-1 (JAN 20-1ST), 48-1 (JAN 21-7TH), 35-1 (JAN 20-9TH),
4TH PLACE PICKED CORRECT-0
4TH PLACE WRONG BUT PICKED 5-1+ ONLY-0
PICK 4 PLACINGS-30-48
OA PICK 4 PLAC TOT-781-1,276-61.2%
TOTAL RACES-(12)-319
TOP 4 PICKS EACH RACE-01-03,02-02,03-03,04-03,05-02,06-03,07-02,08-03,09-03,10-02,11-02,12-02,13-00=30-48-OATOT-781-1,276-61.2%
MOHAWK PICKS
01-6-7-2-8 W-3.40 - 3.40
02-8-7-6-0 W-5.10, DD-10.90 - 19.40
03-1-6-4-5 S-2.10, MEX-13.70, MTRI-15.95 - 51.15
04-3-2-7-1 W-4.10, P-3.20, 4TH WBP (10-1), SEX-12.30 - 70.75
05-1-4-5-3 4TH WBP (12-1)
06-6-3-7-5 W-2.60, P-4.80, S-2.50, SEX-6.80, STRI-8.50 - 95.95
07-7-8-9-2 W-4.90, DD-7.00 - 107.85
08-1-5-3-4 P-5.60 - 113.45
09-7-3-4-2 4TH WBP (8-1)
10-1-4-3-8 4TH WBP (6-1)
11-8-3-7-4 4TH WBP (2-1)
12-8-6-3-2-1
MOHAWKS TONIGHTS TOTAL $113.45 OVERALL TOTAL $7,509.50
STANS PICKS
01-6-1-7-8-2 W-3.40, S-3.50 - 6.90
02-6-7-8-3-4
03-5-6-1-4-2 4TH WBP (5.2)
04-7-6-3-2-1 4TH WBP (5.2)
05-5-8-1-9-10 4TH (14-1)
06-6-3-5-1-7 W-2.60, P-4.80, 4TH (21-1), SEX-6.80 - 21.10
07-7-8-4-1-9 W-4.90, S-6.20, DD-7.00 - 39.20
08-1-4-3-2-5 4TH WBP (10-1)
09-3-8-7-5-4 W-8.90, S-2.30 - 50.40
10-4-3-1-7-8 P-12.70 - 63.10
11-3-5-4-8-7 S-2.60 - 65.70
12-7-4-5-8-6 4TH WBP (6.5)
HI-5 MONEY BEFORE TONIGHT = $275,986.55
STANS TONIGHTS TOTAL $65.70 OVERALL TOTAL $16,867.90
ACTUAL RACE RESULTS
01-6 (3.5)-4 (4-1)-7 (9-1)-1 (8-1) (5-SCR)
02-8 (3.2)-6 (3-1)-4 (7-1)-2 (38-1) (5-SCR)
03-6 (8.5)-1 (9.5)-4 (5.2)-3 (26-1)
04-3 (1-1)-2 (5.2)-1 (10-1)-6 (9-1)
05-8 (9-1)-2 (27-1)-3 (12-1)-9 (14-1) (6-SCR)
06-6 (1.5)-3 (7-1)-7 (6-1)-1 (21-1)
07-7 (7.5)-5 (19-1)-4 (15-1)-6 (31-1)
08-2 (10-1)-5 (4-1)-1 (9.5)-3 (4-1)
09-3 (3-1)-2 (8-1)-7 (9.5)-1 (6-1)
10-8 (6-1)-3 (13-1)-6 (13-1)-1 (5.2)
11-7 (7-1 )-6 (7.2)-4 (2-1)-5 (56-1)
12-3 (9.2)-8 (6.5)-1 (7-1)-4 (11-1)-7 (67-1) (9-SCR) (6-4P9 NOT LOSING GROUND ON A BREAK)
(MOHAWK PREDICTIONS)-RECORD 2022
01-108-BIG-$18.20 (JAN 29-8TH) (8-1), 17.20 (FEB 24-1ST) (7-1), $17.10 (FEB 19-11TH) (8-1),
02-055-BIG-$7.40 (JAN 28-3RD) (9-1), $5.90 (JAN 21-5TH) (6-1), $5.60 (JAN 10-6TH) (7.2),
03-057-BIG-$16.60 (JAN 27-2ND) (17-1), $6.60 (FEB 03-8TH) (32-1), $5.20 (FEB 04-4TH) (15-1),
04-042-BIG-34-1 (FEB 21-2ND), 25-1 (JAN 31-1ST), 23-1 (JAN 21-3RD), 23-1 (FEB 11-3RD), 19-1 (JAN 07-6TH),
04-112-W B P-BIG-17-1 (FEB 11-11TH), 17-1 (FEB 18-10TH), 16-1 (JAN 03-2ND), 15-1 (FEB 05-10),
DD-1,2-07-BIG-$36.00 (FEB 24-2ND)
DD-2,3-05-BIG-$10.70 (FEB 10-3RD)
DD-3,4-02-BIG-$21.00 (FEB 10-4TH)
DD-4,5-02-BIG-$30.50 (FEB 19-5TH)
DD-5,6-02-BIG-$07.60 (JAN 14-6TH)
DD-6,7-02-BIG-$36.40 (JAN 03-7TH)
DD-7,8-07-BIG-$27.90 (JAN 29-8TH)
DD-8,9-02-BIG-$06.10 (JAN 28-9TH)
DD-9,10-04-BIG-$21.30 (FEB 10-10TH)
DD-10,11-02-BIG-$15.70 (FEB 18-11TH)
DD-11,12-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-12TH)
DD-12,13-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-13TH)
S EX-27-BIG-$44.10 (JAN 01-1ST)
M EX-24-BIG-$34.50 (JAN 06-10TH)
S TRI-04-BIG-$49.50 (JAN 01-1ST)
M TRI-31-BIG-$75.60 (FEB 12-12TH)
S SUP-01-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-0RD)
M SUP-21-BIG-$528.75 (FEB 05-6TH)
P3 (1-3)-03-BIG-$25.40 (FEB 24-3RD)
P3 (2-4)-01-BIG-$11.40 (FEB 10-4TH)
P3 (3-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P3 (4-6)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-6TH)
P3 (5-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P3 (6-8)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-8TH)
P3 (7-9)-02-BIG-$26.60 (JAN 28-9TH)
P3 (8-10)-01-BIG-$08.45 (JAN 13-10TH)
P3 (9-11)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (10-12)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (11-13)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P4 (4-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P4 (7-10)-01-BIG-$19.35 (JAN 13-10TH)
P5 (1-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P5 (6-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-M-02-BIG-$256.75 (FEB 10-10TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-11TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-11TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
5-1+ LONG-(05)-119
5-1+ LONG TOT-(17)-452-26.3%
LONGEST LONG-32-1 (FEB O3-8TH), 19-1 (JAN 08-9TH)
LONGS THIS NIGHT T3-0-19-1 (JAN 08-9TH),
4TH PLACE PICKED CORRECT-0
4TH PLACE WRONG BUT PICKED 5-1+ ONLY-0
PICK 4 PLACINGS-27-48
OA PICK 4 PLAC TOT-807-1,276-63.2%
TOTAL RACES-(12)-319
TOP 4 PICKS EACH RACE-01-02,02-02,03-03,04-03,05-01,06-03,07-01,08-03,09-02,10-03,11-02,12-02,13-00=27-48-OATOT-807-1,276-63.2%
(STANS PREDICTIONS)-RECORD AT MOHAWK 2022
01-076-BIG-$20.60 (FEB 14-3RD) (9-1), $17.80 (JAN 24-3RD) (7-1), $14.20 (JAN 27-9TH) (6-1),
02-053-BIG-$28.70 (JAN 20-7TH) (31-1), $21.30 (FEB 19-12TH) (28-1), $16.60 (FEB 24-1ST) (16-1),
03-056-BIG-$18.40 (JAN 20-1ST) (55-1), $10.00 (JAN 24-1ST) (22-1), $9.30 (JAN 07-7TH) (21-1),
04-053-BIG-71-1 (FEB 12-3RD), 54-1 (FEB 14-2ND), 35-1 (JAN 24-2ND), 34-1 (FEB 21-2ND),
04-119-W B P-BIG-71-1 (FEB 12-4TH), 43-1 (FEB 07-2ND), 37-1 (JAN 07-5TH), 28-1 (JAN 20-10TH),
DD-1,2-02-BIG-$42.10 (FEB 19-2ND)
DD-2,3-01-BIG-$63.20 (FEB 14-3RD)
DD-3,4-02-BIG-$11.90 (JAN 31-4TH)
DD-4,5-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-5TH)
DD-5,6-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-6TH)
DD-6,7-01-BIG-$7.00 (FEB 26-7TH)
DD-7,8-01-BIG-$17.10 (FEB 05-8TH)
DD-8,9-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-9TH)
DD-9,10-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-10TH)
DD-10,11-01-BIG-$4.80 (JAN 01-11TH)
DD-11,12-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-12TH)
DD-12,13-00-BIG-$0.00 (JUN 00-13TH)
S EX-19-BIG-$91.50 (JAN 10-10TH)
M EX-19-BIG-$223.90 (FEB 07-10TH)
S TRI-04-BIG-$27.50 (JAN 01-10TH)
M TRI-24-BIG-$532.30 (JAN 20-7TH)
S SUP-01-BIG-$71.10 (JAN 01-10TH)
M SUP-20-BIG-$4,176.70 (JAN 20-7TH)
P3 (1-3)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-3RD)
P3 (2-4)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-4TH)
P3 (3-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P3 (4-6)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-6TH)
P3 (5-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P3 (6-8)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-8TH)
P3 (7-9)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-9TH)
P3 (8-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (9-11)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (10-12)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P3 (11-13)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P4 (4-7)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-7TH)
P4 (7-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
P5 (1-5)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
P5 (6-10)-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-5TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
10TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-10TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-11TH)
11TH -P5 (HF)-M-01-BIG-$99.60 (JAN 10-11TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
12TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-12TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-S-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
13TH -P5 (HF)-M-00-BIG-$0.00 (JAN 00-13TH)
5-1+ LONG-(05)-165
5-1+ LONG TOT-(17)-452-36.5%
LONGEST LONG-67-1 (FEB 12-7TH), 55-1 (JAN 20-1ST), 30-1 (JAN 10-1ST)
LONGS THIS NIGHT T3-0-90-1 (JAN 31,3RD), 55-1 (JAN 20-1ST), 48-1 (JAN 21-7TH), 35-1 (JAN 20-9TH),
4TH PLACE PICKED CORRECT-0
4TH PLACE WRONG BUT PICKED 5-1+ ONLY-0
PICK 4 PLACINGS-30-48
OA PICK 4 PLAC TOT-781-1,276-61.2%
TOTAL RACES-(12)-319
TOP 4 PICKS EACH RACE-01-03,02-02,03-03,04-03,05-02,06-03,07-02,08-03,09-03,10-02,11-02,12-02,13-00=30-48-OATOT-781-1,276-61.2%
Friday, February 25, 2022
RUSSIA HAS WAR SHIPS NEAR SYRIA-MIGRATION BIRD SEASON IN ISRAEL IN 4 DAYS-IS THIS THE TIME FOR 300 MILLION SLAUGHTER.OF ISRAELS ENEMIES.MODERNA CREATED COVID.
JEWISH KING JESUS IS COMING AT THE RAPTURE FOR US IN THE CLOUDS-DON'T MISS IT FOR THE WORLD.THE BIBLE TAKEN LITERALLY- WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE MAKES GOOD SENSE-SEEK NO OTHER SENSE-LEST YOU END UP IN NONSENSE.GET SAVED NOW- CALL ON JESUS TODAY.THE ONLY SAVIOR OF THE WHOLE EARTH - NO OTHER. 1 COR 15:23-JESUS THE FIRST FRUITS-CHRISTIANS RAPTURED TO JESUS-FIRST FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT-23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.ROMANS 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.(THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE)
RUSSIA HAS WAR SHIPS NEAR SYRIA-MIGRATION BIRD SEASON IN ISRAEL IN 4 DAYS-IS THIS THE TIME FOR 300 MILLION SLAUGHTER.OF ISRAELS ENEMIES.MODERNA CREATED COVID.
https://israndjer.blogspot.com/2022/02/is-ezekiel-38-39-ready-to-be-fulfilled.html
More evidence Covid was tinkered with in a lab? Now scientists find virus contains tiny chunk of DNA that matches sequence patented by Moderna THREE YEARS before pandemic began-Genetic match discovered in Covid's unique furin cleavage site on spike protein-Matched genetic sequence patented by Moderna for cancer research purposes- Researchers say one in 3trillion chance Covid developed the code naturally -By Connor Boyd Deputy Health Editor For Mailonline-Published: 12:48 EST, 23 February 2022 | Updated: 03:55 EST, 24 February 2022
Fresh suspicion that Covid may have been tinkered with in a lab emerged today after scientists found genetic material owned by Moderna in the virus's spike protein.They identified a tiny snippet of code that is identical to part of a gene patented by the vaccine maker three years before the pandemic.It was discovered in SARS-CoV-2's unique furin cleavage site, the part that makes it so good at infecting people and separates it from other coronaviruses.The structure has been one of the focal points of debate about the virus's origin, with some scientists claiming it could not have been acquired naturally.The international team of researchers suggest the virus may have mutated to have a furin cleavage site during experiments on human cells in a lab.They claim there is a one-in-three-trillion chance Moderna's sequence randomly appeared through natural evolution. But there is some debate about whether the match is as rare as the study claims, with other experts describing it as a 'quirky' coincidence rather than a 'smoking gun'. SARS-CoV-2, which causes Covid, carries all the information needed for it to spread in around 30,000 letters of genetic code, known as RNA. The virus shares a sequence of 19 specific letters with a genetic section owned by Moderna. Twelve of the shared letters make up the structure of Covid's furin cleavage site, with the rest being a match with nucleotides on a nearby part of the genome-SARS-CoV-2, which causes Covid, carries all the information needed for it to spread in around 30,000 letters of genetic code, known as RNA. The virus shares a sequence of 19 specific letters with a genetic section owned by Moderna. Twelve of the shared letters make up the structure of Covid's furin cleavage site, with the rest being a match with nucleotides on a nearby part of the genome-Moderna filed the patent in February 2016 as part of its cancer research division, records show. The patented sequence is part of a gene called MSH3 that is known to affect how damaged cells repair themselves in the body. It was approved on March 7 the following year-In the latest study, published in Frontiers in Virology, researchers compared Covid's makeup to millions of sequenced proteins on an online database.The virus is made up of 30,000 letters of genetic code that carry the information it needs to spread, known as nucleotides.It is the only coronavirus of its type to carry 12 unique letters that allow its spike protein to be activated by a common enzyme called furin, allowing it to spread between human cells with ease. Analysis of the original Covid genome found the virus shares a sequence of 19 specific letters with a genetic section owned by Moderna, which has a total of 3,300 nucleotides.WHAT IS THE FURIN CLEAVAGE SITE? SARS-CoV-2, which causes Covid, carries all the information needed for it to spread in around 30,000 letters of genetic code, known as RNA.But it is the only coronavirus of its type to carry 12 unique letters that allow it to be activated by a common enzyme called furin.This in turn makes the virus better at invading neighbouring cells.The so-called furin cleavage site is located on the virus' spike protein, the structure that binds to human cells in the first place.Scientists sometimes add this element to lab viruses to make them more infectious, but in nature, pathogens can acquire it by swapping genetic code with other members of their family.The furin has been the focal point of intrigue for many scientists studying the origins of the virus because no other known member of Covid's family - a group called Sarbecoviruses - have the site.The US-based pharmaceutical firm filed the patent in February 2016 as part of its cancer research division, records show.The patented sequence is part of a gene called MSH3 that is known to affect how damaged cells repair themselves in the body. Scientists have highlighted this pathway as a potential target for new cancer treatments.Twelve of the shared letters make up the structure of Covid's furin cleavage site, with the rest being a match with nucleotides on a nearby part of the genome. Writing in the paper, led by Dr Balamurali Ambati, from the University of Oregon, the researchers said the matching code may have originally been introduced to the Covid genome through infected human cells expressing the MSH3 gene.Professor Lawrence Young, a virologist at Warwick University, admitted the latest finding was interesting but claimed it was not significant enough to suggest lab manipulation. He told MailOnline: 'We're talking about a very, very, very small piece made up of 19 nucleotides.'So it doesn't mean very much to be frank, if you do these types of searches you can always find matches.'Sometimes these things happen fortuitously, sometimes it's the result of convergent evolution (when organisms evolve independently to have similar traits to adapt to their environment).'It's a quirky observation but I wouldn't call it a smoking gun because it's too small.He added: 'It doesn't get us any further with the debate about whether Covid was engineered.' Dr Simon Clarke, a microbiologist at Reading University, questioned whether the find was as rare as the study claims.He told MailOnline: 'There can only be a certain number of [genetic combinations within] furin cleavage sites.'They function like a lock and key in the cell, and the two only fit together in a limited number of combinations. 'So it's an interesting coincidence but this is surely entirely coincidental.' MailOnline has approached Moderna for comment. Circumstantial evidence has long raised questions about the origin of Covid and its link to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.The facility was known to be conducting experiments on bat coronavirus strains similar to the one responsible for the pandemic.China insisted early and often that the virus did not leak from the lab, claiming that crossover to humans must have occurred at a 'wet market' in Wuhan that sold live animals.Perhaps driven by animosity for then-US President Donald Trump, who embraced the lab leak theory early on, mainstream media and academics in the West heaped scorn on the possibility, calling it an unhinged conspiracy theory.But leaked emails showed that top scientists advising the UK and US Governments expressed concerns about the official narrative privately. A study earlier this month found traces of Covid samples that contained genetical material from humans, hamsters and monkeys and may have predated the official pandemic timeline.Sir Jeremy Farrar, an eminent British expert who publicly denounced the theory as a 'conspiracy', admitted in a private email in February 2020 that a 'likely explanation' was that the virus was man-made.The then-UK Government adviser said at the time he was '70:30 or 60:40' in favour of an accidental release versus natural origin.In the email, sent to American health chiefs Dr Anthony Fauci and Dr Francis Collins, Sir Jeremy said it was possible Covid had been evolved from a Sars-like virus in the lab.He went on that this seemingly benign process may have 'accidentally created a virus primed for rapid transmission between humans'.But the British scientist was shut down by his counterparts in the US who warned further debate about the origins of the virus could damage 'international harmony'. In the latest twist, a study earlier this month found traces of Covid samples that contained genetical material from humans, hamsters and monkeys and may have predated the official pandemic timeline.China's official pandemic timeline of the coronavirus pandemic and the evidence that undermines it-Official timeline-Dec 8, 2019 - Earliest date that China has acknowledged an infection-Dec 31 - China first reported 'pneumonia of unknown cause' to the World Health Organisation-Jan 1, 2020 - Wuhan seafood market closed for disinfection-Jan 7 - President Xi Jinping discusses coronavirus outbreak with his politburo -Jan 9 - China makes public the genome of the coronavirus -Jan 11 - China reported its first death -Jan 13 - First case outside China is confirmed-Jan 20 - China's National Health Commission confirms human-to-human transmission -Jan 23 - Wuhan locked down-Jan 31 - WHO declared 'outbreak of international concern' as China admitted having thousands of cases-Feb 23 - Italy reports cluster of cases in first major outbreak in the West -May 29 - China claims virus did not originate in wet markets but in Chinese bats before it jumped to humans via an 'intermediary animal' July 31 - Chinese researcher admits some coronavirus experiments conducted in lower biosafety labs-Dec 16 - WHO announces it will travel to Wuhan to probe origins of virus in January-Jan 5, 2021 - China denies entry to WHO's investigatory team-Feb 9 - WHO dismisses theory virus leaked from lab - backs China's claim it was imported from frozen meat-Mar 28 - Former US national security officials says intel shows 'there was a direct order from Beijing to destroy all viral samples' at Wuhan lab -New evidence-2012: Six miners struck down with with a mysterious flu-like illness in Mojiang cave in Yunnan.They were found to have been infected with the closest known relative to Covid, sharing 97% of its genes.Samples RATG13 are sent to the Wuhan Institute of Virology to be studied. Sep 2019- Blood samples are taken in a lung cancer screening trial in Italy which later test positive for coronavirus-Oct - Whistleblower Wei Jingsheng claims China deliberately spread Covid at The World Military Games in Wuhan in October, two months before the rest of the world knew about the virus -Oct - Xi Jinping's authoritarian regime tried desperately to shut down whistle-blowers like Mr Jingsheng. Any references made in social media about a new SARS virus or 'outbreak' were censored -Oct-Dec - Rise in 'flu and pneumonia' cases in northern Italy which could be linked to coronavirus -Nov - Whistleblower Mr Jingsheng claims he took his concerns about the military games to senior figures within the Trump administration but was ignored-Nov - Intelligence report passed to agencies in Washington claims three members of staff at the Wuhan Institute of Virology sought hospital treatment in November 2019 after experiencing symptoms consistent with Covid -Nov - Sewage samples taken in Florianópolis, Brazil, suggest virus was present-Nov 10 - Milanese woman has a skin biopsy, producing a sample which later shows signs of the virus -Nov 17 - Leaked documents suggest case detected in China on this date-Dec - Doctors in China, including Li Wenliang, report existance of new type of respiratory infection. But Chinese police arrested him and eight of his colleagues for questioning - instead of publicising reports and warning public -Dec 1 - Chinese researchers report an infection on this date in a peer-reviewed study, but it has not been acknowledged by Beijing -Dec 18 - Sewage samples taken in Milan and Turin suggest virus was circulating in the cities -Dec 26 - Samples analysed suggested a new type of SARS was circulating as early as December 26, but Wuhan was not locked down until January 22 -Jan 2020 - Sewage samples from Barcelona suggest virus was in the city-Jan 3 - Covid-19 infections begin sweeping across other nations including the U.S. as the WHO labelled the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern -May - Scientists at a government lab in California concluded that Covid-19 may have escaped from a facility in Wuhan -July - WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said China failed share vital raw data during their investigation in Wuhan. China rebuffed those claims-June 2021: Leading US virus expert Dr Anthony Fauci was warned Covid may have been engineered in a lab, emails publicly released reveal. -August: The world's first Covid-19 patient may have been infected by a bat while working for a Wuhan lab in China, WHO chief Dr Peter Embarek said-August: A damning report by Republicans in the US claims coronavirus leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, shortly after the facility tried to improve air safety and waste treatment systems-The report also cited 'ample evidence' that lab scientists were working to modify coronaviruses to infect humans and such manipulation could be hidden.October: US intelligence review into origins of pandemic does not reach a judgement on whether the virus emerged via animal-to-human transmission or a lab leak.Chinese officials branded the report 'political and false'. January 2022: Leaked emails from top UK scientist Sir Jeremy Farrar showed he admitted in February 2020 that it was a 'likely explanation' that the virus could be man-made. But he went on to brand the theory a 'conspiracy'. February: Sir Farrar is called to be interviewed under oath at the US Congress. Officials want him to explain why he shifted away from the lab leak theory.
Editors' Pick|Jul 29, 2020,07:51am EDT|110,981 views-Moderna’s Mysterious Coronavirus Vaccine Delivery System-Nathan VardiFormer Staff
Moderna Therapeutics. COVID-19 vaccine-On Monday, Vice President Mike Pence helped launch the big late-stage trial of Moderna Therapeutics’ Covid-19 vaccine. “It is remarkable to think that Moderna—that will be initiating this phase 3 clinical trial—actually entered phase 1 back in March,” Pence said.Moderna has moved lightning fast and is doing work based on bleeding-edge messenger RNA technology that could result in a viable vaccine. There is widespread hope Moderna’s vaccine will play an important role in combating the pandemic. To aid the effort, Moderna has secured $955 million of commitments from the federal government’s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA).Wall Street also has high expectations for the vaccine, and Moderna’s stock has quadrupled this year to a market valuation of $30 billion, allowing Moderna to raise $1.3 billion in a May stock offering. Moderna insiders have sold some $250 million of shares as the stock has soared.PROMOTED-With the stakes incredibly high, the mystery around a key technological component of Moderna’s coronavirus vaccine has only become deeper. Last week, the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board rejected Moderna’s challenge to a patent owned by Arbutus Biopharma ABUS -4.4% related to the lipid nanoparticle (LNP) technology that is crucial to Moderna’s mRNA medicines.For a decade, Moderna has been working to develop mRNA technology that could turn the body’s cells into drug factories. In order for the approach to work, Moderna needs to safely deliver the mRNA to the body’s cells without the payload breaking down in the bloodstream. As a result, any mRNA vaccine or therapeutic consists of two components, the actual sequence mRNA and the delivery mechanism. Moderna has clearly engineered the first component, but there remain questions about the second. No mRNA vaccine or medicine has ever been approved by U.S. or European regulators.Even though Moderna took the trouble to try to invalidate the patent owned by Arbutus, a small Canadian biotechnology company, Moderna said after it lost its patent challenge that its LNP technology had advanced well beyond the technology described in the Arbutus patent. Moderna claimed the LNP used to make mRNA-1273, its Covid-19 vaccine candidate, is not covered by the Arbutus patent. “Moderna is not aware of any significant intellectual property impediments for any products we intend to commercialize, including mRNA-1273,” the company said.In June, researchers from the NIH and Moderna made a manuscript preprint of preclinical data for mRNA-1273 available on bioRxiv, an open-access preprint repository. The preprint described Moderna’s coronavirus vaccine candidate as using delivery technology that appears to be covered in the Arbutus patent that was upheld last week. The preprint of the study that tested the vaccine in mice described the mRNA for mRNA-1273 as being encapsulated into LNP “at molar ratio of 50:10:38.5:1.5 (ionizable lipid:DSPC:cholesterol:PEG-lipid).”The first claim of the upheld Arbutus patent describes “a cationic lipid comprising from 50 mol % to 65 mol % of the total lipid present in the particle;” a non-cationic lipid comprising a mixture of phospholipid and cholesterol, where the “phospholipid comprises from 4 mol % to 10 mol %” and the cholesterol comprises “30 mol % to 40 mol %;” and a conjugated lipid “comprising from 0.5 mol % to 2 mol %.” In a statement to Forbes, Ray Jordan, Moderna’s chief corporate affairs officer, said the June preprint describes data generated using a preclinical research formulation of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine that is not the same as the vaccine itself.“While the authors of the preprint used the term ‘mRNA-1273’ for convenience of the reader, the preprint does not describe the cGMP process by which we make our messenger RNA and LNP or the final drug product composition in our commercial candidate (mRNA-1273),” Jordan wrote in a statement.When asked if Moderna would provide the molar ratios at which mRNA-1273 encapsulates its LNP, Jordan said, “Nope, we are not disclosing our proprietary ratios at this time.”In a different preclinical study testing Moderna’s vaccine in non-human primates that was published in The New England Journal of Medicine on Monday, the authors wrote mRNA-1273 is encapsulated in LNP as described in a 2019 paper, which said the mRNA was encapsulated at the same molar ratios as in the mouse study.The description of the phase 1 study of Moderna’s coronavirus vaccine registered with the federal government shows the LNP for mRNA-1273 is composed of an ionizable (cationic) lipid; cholesterol; DSPC (phospholipid) and PEG2000-DMG (conjugated anti-aggregation lipid). The percentages of the four components in the formulation of mRNA-1273 were not disclosed in the clinical trial registration or the July publication of an interim analysis of the Phase 1 study of mRNA-1273 in The New England Journal of Medicine. The appendix of the interim analysis redacts information associated with LNP.For years, Stephane Bancel, the billionaire CEO of Moderna, has said the company had moved beyond the delivery technology owned by Arbutus. “We knew it was not very good,” he told Forbes in 2016. “It was just okay.” He said Moderna was producing its own nanoparticle lipids, N1GEL, for example, and licensing another from Merck MRK +4.2%. He added that Moderna only used the Arbutus technology initially and had stopped using it for new drugs back in 2016.When Moderna was first getting off the ground, Bancel turned to a tiny company called Acuitas to get access to a delivery technology for his mRNA vision. Acuitas was headquartered in the Vancouver, British Columbia, home of Thomas Madden, who founded it in 2009. Madden had been involved in a lawsuit with Tekmira Pharmaceuticals, which had merged with a company Madden had worked for and eliminated his position. Through the litigation, Madden secured a license for the LNP technology he had helped develop. Bancel decided to get a license for the LNP technology from Acuitas and not Tekmira, which later changed its name to Arbutus.In 2016, Arbutus terminated Acuitas’ license to the LNP technology, causing Acuitas to sue Arbutus in British Columbia court. Arbutus countersued, claiming Acuitas had no right to sublicense the LNP technology to Moderna. A B.C. judge issued a temporary 2017 injunction stopping Acuitas from further sublicensing the LNP technology.A year later, in 2018, Arbutus reached a settlement with Madden that terminated Acuitas’ license and stipulated Moderna could only use the technology in four vaccines that targeted viruses that had already been identified.The Arbutus patents have since been taken over by Genevant Sciences, a subsidiary of Roivant Sciences, which is Arbutus’ biggest shareholder and run by Vivek Ramaswamy. Arbutus retains a stake in Genevant and a right to a portion of the economics of the patents. Genevant declined to comment.In the years since the Acuitas settlement, other vaccine candidates developed by Moderna have been described in publications with LNP technology comprised of the four components listed in the Arbutus patent with formulated percentages that seem to run through the patent. For example, publication of a study of an HIV vaccine listed on Moderna’s website in July describes mRNA as being encapsulated by LNP “at molar ratio of 50:10:38.5:1.5 (ionizable lipid:DSPC:cholesterol:PEG-lipid).”Moderna has challenged three of the Arbutus patents at the adjudicative body within the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. One of its challenges was successful, another partially successful, and the challenge against the third patent was lost last week. There are three other relevant Arbutus patents that Moderna has not tried to challenge.Whatever happens on the intellectual property front, it is highly unlikely that a patent issue will get in the way of the development or distribution of a Covid-19 vaccine. But shareholders of Moderna’s hot stock were broadly warned in a May securities filing that the company had instituted inter-partes review proceedings against issued U.S. patents related to mRNA delivery and the unsuccessful invalidation of those patents might lead to the kind of litigation that could result in substantial damages.Taxpayers also might have an interest in knowing the ownership of the delivery technologies used by an mRNA vaccine backed by nearly $1 billion of federal government funds. When asked about the delivery technologies, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services, which houses BARDA, said that intellectual property is assessed for any company submitting a proposal to BARDA, as part of the proposal evaluation process.
Statement from Moderna on Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Ruling-July 24, 2020 03:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time
CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Moderna, Inc. (Nasdaq: MRNA), a clinical stage biotechnology company pioneering messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics and vaccines to create a new generation of transformative medicines for patients, today released a statement on the July 23rd U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) ruling:The recently issued Patent Trial and Appeal Board ruling on the 8,058,069 patent relates to Moderna’s challenge to certain legacy patents held by Arbutus, commenced well before the development of mRNA-1273. These actions were taken by Moderna in response to the longstanding aggressive posture taken by Arbutus and its predecessor company against many developers of nucleic acid-based therapeutics. Through its actions, Moderna successfully overturned one legacy patent held by Arbutus and invalidated the broadest claims of a second one. Moderna’s continued development of its proprietary LNP formulation technology and manufacturing processes have advanced well beyond the technology described in these legacy Arbutus patents. Our improved proprietary LNP formula, used to manufacture mRNA-1273, is not covered by the Arbutus patents. Moderna is not aware of any significant intellectual property impediments for any products we intend to commercialize, including mRNA-1273.Forward Looking Statements-This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended, including regarding Moderna’s proprietary LNP formulation technology and manufacturing processes and Moderna’s awareness of any significant intellectual property impediments for any products it intends to commercialize. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “will,” “may,” “should,” “could”, “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “aims,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue,” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. The forward-looking statements in this press release are neither promises nor guarantees, and you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements because they involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which are beyond Moderna’s control and which could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. These risks, uncertainties, and other factors include, among others: the fact that there has never been a commercial product utilizing mRNA technology approved for use; the fact that the rapid response technology in use by Moderna is still being developed and implemented; the fact that the safety and efficacy of mRNA-1273 has not yet been established; potential adverse impacts due to the global COVID-19 pandemic such as delays in regulatory review, manufacturing and clinical trials, supply chain interruptions, adverse effects on healthcare systems and disruption of the global economy; and those other risks and uncertainties described under the heading “Risk Factors” in Moderna’s most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and in subsequent filings made by Moderna with the SEC, which are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Except as required by law, Moderna disclaims any intention or responsibility for updating or revising any forward-looking statements contained in this press release in the event of new information, future developments or otherwise. These forward-looking statements are based on Moderna’s current expectations and speak only as of the date hereof.Contacts-Moderna Contacts-Media:Colleen Hussey-Senior Manager, Corporate Communications-203-470-5620-Colleen.Hussey@modernatx.com
Breaking Down Moderna’s COVID-19 Patent Pledge: Why Did They Do It?
Last month, Moderna Therapeutics, one of the global leaders in the race to produce a COVID-19 vaccine, made the following statement regarding enforcement of its patents:We feel a special obligation under the current circumstances to use our resources to bring this pandemic to an end as quickly as possible. Accordingly, while the pandemic continues, Moderna will not enforce our COVID-19 related patents against those making vaccines intended to combat the pandemic. Further, to eliminate any perceived IP barriers to vaccine development during the pandemic period, upon request we are also willing to license our intellectual property for COVID-19 vaccines to others for the post pandemic period.This post examines why Moderna made its patent pledge by examining its mRNA technology, go-to-market status, patent landscape, and market position.Moderna’s Technology-Moderna (appropriately listed in NASDAQ as “MRNA”) was founded by Flagship Pioneering in 2010 and utilizes messenger RNA (mRNA) molecules to cause a recipient’s own cells to express targeted proteins for a desired therapeutic effect. Moderna claims that such therapies can be used to treat a wide range of conditions beyond infectious diseases such as COVID-19.How does it work for COVID-19? Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine introduces “mRNA-1273” molecules into the recipient via a delivery system that protects the mRNA in the bloodstream and allows for entry into cells. Once inside the cells, the mRNA-1273 molecules act like computer code and instruct the cells to produce the characteristic COVID-19 spike proteins. The immune system identifies the spike proteins as antigens and builds its defenses against those antigens in preparation for the potential exposure to the actual COVID-19 virus.This is “a fundamentally different approach” than traditional vaccines that inject entire viruses, either alive (attenuated) or dead, into the recipient to trigger the desired immune response. Moderna claims its mRNA vaccine technology offers potential advantages over traditional vaccines in terms of “efficacy, speed of development, and production scalability and reliability . . ..”Moderna believes its mRNA technology could become the foundation for a new therapeutic modality that transforms the drug development and biologics space for decades to come, similar to the disruption that Biogen, Amgen and Genentech made in the ’80s when they developed biologic protein therapies.Moderna’s Go-To-Market Status-Moderna was focused on mRNA-based vaccine development and had already built a growing mRNA-based pipeline for various indications including infectious diseases, cancer, cardiovascular diseases and rare genetic diseases well before the pandemic arrived.Fig. 1: Moderna is poised to flood the COVID-19 vaccine market, having previously developed several other mRNA-based therapies for other indications.It was therefore well-positioned to produce an mRNA-based vaccine candidate (mRNA-1273) and begin the regulatory approval process at the outset of the pandemic. Indeed, Moderna was the first in the world to do so within about two months from the date COVID-19’s molecular blueprint was known, and is now widely viewed as one of the top contenders in the race to produce a viable COVID-19 vaccine.As of the date of this writing, the U.S. Government has agreed to purchase 100 million doses of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, with the opportunity to obtain an additional 400 million doses. Moderna has also struck a deal with the European Commission to supply an initial 80 million doses to Europe with an option to purchase 80 million more, as well as with Japan to supply 50 million doses, and with Qatar as well.Moderna has expressed confidence in its ability to manufacture vaccine in large quantities to meet demand, including 20 million doses of mRNA-1273 by the end of this year, and between 500 million and 1 billion doses in 2021. Reports also indicate that Moderna has received $1.1 billion in deposits for supplies of the vaccine.Accordingly, should its vaccine be approved as safe and effective, Moderna appears poised to flood the COVID-19 vaccine market, recoup a hefty payday at launch, and be positioned to supply its vaccine under existing and new contracts throughout the world on a going-forward basis.Patent Landscape for Moderna/mRNA-Moderna and its investors have spent billions of dollars on mRNA research and Moderna has sought and obtained hundreds of patents in the U.S., Europe, Japan, and other jurisdictions to protect that technology, with several hundred patent applications pending. Moderna has identified at least seven U.S. patents that it alleges protect the subject mRNA-1273 technology, and has numerous patent applications pending, including dozens in the U.S. alone.Some third-party patents appear to pose challenges for Moderna. For example, the biotech has been in an ongoing patent dispute with Arbutus Biopharma, which owns certain patents relating to lipid-nanoparticle “delivery systems” for mRNA molecules. These delivery systems essentially wrap the molecules in balls of fat to both disguise them, thereby preventing attack by the immune system, and to allow the target cells to readily ingest the mRNA molecules.Moderna lost its sublicense to those disputed patents in 2016 and then (before the pandemic) sought to invalidate the patents through three USPTO inter partes review proceedings that have had mixed results (one win that was reversed on appeal and is on remand, one partial win that is on appeal, and one loss that is on appeal).There have also been reports that the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”) has an ownership interest in Moderna’s mRNA-1273-related patents and has filed its own patents relating to the technology, raising potential ownership, infringement, and validity issues.There are also reports that Moderna failed to report Department of Defense funding (through DARPA) underlying many of its patents, which has potentially negative implications including under the Bayh-Dole Act that provides, among other things, the U.S. Government with certain rights to use inventions it helps fund.Moderna has also notified its investors of the existence of “many issued and pending third-party patents” that it may need to license or that may be asserted against Moderna.Despite these issues, Moderna has nonetheless expressed confidence that it is “not aware of any significant intellectual property impediments for any products we intend to commercialize, including mRNA-1273.”Potential Economic Rationales-Moderna and several other teams are developing mRNA-based-vaccines to combat COVID-19 including Pfizer (with BioNTech), Arcturus (with Duke Medical School), Sanofi (with Translate Bio), Aboge (with Walvax Biotechnology), Chula, CureVac, and others.Other teams are developing traditional, non-mRNA-based vaccines, including Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca, Merck, and others, and yet other teams are developing protein-based and other vaccines that also do not utilize mRNA technology. A comprehensive list of developers and the status of their programs can be found here.The COVID-19 vaccine market (“Covid Market”) is therefore comprised of numerous companies utilizing different technologies, several of which (importantly) utilize the new and non-traditional mRNA technology.Fig. 2: Moderna is expected to be a leading entrant into the COVID-19 vaccine market, comprised of other drug makers utilizing mRNA, traditional, non-mRNA-protein, and other vaccine technologies.Recall that in the bigger picture, Moderna wants mRNA-based therapies to fundamentally transform the drug development space for decades to come. The pandemic—a black swan event—appears to have opened that door. Here’s why:As of the date of this writing it appears the first two market entrants into the Covid Market may be Pfizer (reporting a 90% vaccine effectiveness rate from its trials) and Moderna (with its interim trial results expected shortly), each vaccine utilizing mRNA technology.No matter who follows after that, should the first two COVID-19 vaccines be mRNA-based, this development would hammer a very large stake into the ground, marking mRNA-technology as a viable alternative in the drug development space.From an execution standpoint, success of the mRNA COVID vaccines could pave the way for future therapies in the infectious disease space and potentially other mRNA therapies, including the therapeutic candidates that Moderna has steadily developed since 2010. With its current pipeline and patent portfolios, Moderna appears to be very well positioned to capitalize on such downstream markets.Moderna’s pledge not to enforce its patents against companies that use mRNA to make COVID-19 vaccines serves that end. The hands-off approach allows other market participants to aggressively pursue mRNA-based therapies for COVID-19 without fear of suit. This increases the chances of a viable mRNA vaccine getting to market. It also may result in developers investing further in the technology to develop other mRNA therapies post-pandemic for other indications.But why would Moderna want to encourage more market participants and potential competitors? In a fledgling market, it’s pure economics.More market participants will help drive the diffusion of the new mRNA technology into the drug development ecosystem and help build infrastructure for mRNA-based technologies within that new ecosystem.This rationale is supported by a number of sources, including a 2019 Cambridge University study that found tech diffusion and infrastructure building to be the “primary” drivers behind companies’ decisions to make patent pledges, including by companies such as Tesla Motors, which made such pledges to spur long-term growth in new markets.Fig. 3: Moderna may hope to encourage participation by other players in the new mRNA market to drive mRNA tech diffusion, infrastructure building and overall growth of the new tech platform.Recall also that Moderna is not giving much up under the terms of its self-prescribed pledge in that the pledge not to sue only applies to mRNA-based vaccine makers during the pandemic and that licensing is very much on the table pre and post pandemic.With enforcement allowed post pandemic (a period of time ostensibly defined by Moderna), threat of suit will be very useful to leverage in such downstream licensing deals without a public relations backlash. The pledge is also limited in that it would not preclude Moderna from enforcing its patents for indications beyond COVID-19 at any time.Accordingly, Moderna’s pledge positions it well to grow the new mRNA market its business is founded upon, capitalize on licensing deals, and restore all enforcement rights “post pandemic.”Fig. 4: The COVID-19 pandemic may have opened the door to fundamentally transforming the drug development space, and Moderna’s patent pledge may serve to cultivate the new mRNA market to yield longer-term gains.Furthermore, Moderna’s promise not to enforce its COVID-19 related patents during the pandemic against COVID vaccine developers also sets a disarming tone in the space that may serve to deter others in the space from acting too defensively or aggressively.For example, the pledge may serve to deter third party patent-holders from enforcing their own patents against Moderna in favor of licensing deals, for nothing more than fear of the potential public relations backlash. A cooperative posture by Moderna may also make the Federal Government less apt to assert ownership claims over certain of the mRNA patents it may have an ownership interest in, as well as obviate the need for compulsory licensing.Moreover, aside from its obvious benefit to the fight against COVID-19, Moderna’s patent pledge also makes for good public relations. Their patent pledge statement, while technically narrow, was framed in altruistic terms in the context of the pandemic, and Moderna received significant praise from several industry groups including those calling for other companies to make similar pledges.From another viewpoint, nothing good could come from Moderna enforcing its COVID-19 patents during the pandemic. Being an aggressor in this market, during the pandemic, risks incalculable damaging backfire, involving suits and countersuits by other patent-holders, USPTO inter partes invalidity proceedings, suits, and ownership claims by the Federal Government, compulsory licensing orders, all serving to potentially snuff out the fledgling market before it even has a chance to grow. Furthermore, should any delay in delivering the vaccine or other negative consequences flow from patent enforcement activity, the risk of public rancor could be catastrophic to the company’s reputation and its bottom line.Many of the above rationales are supported by the comments that Moderna’s President Stephen Hogue made to the press regarding the pledge: “[W]e are quite studiously not asserting infringement. We’re doing the opposite of creating that kind of anxiety for folks. We’re not interested in using that IP to decrease the number of vaccines available in a pandemic.”Indeed, this appears to be a shrewd policy decision that may serve to get the COVID-19 vaccine to market at warp speed whether by Moderna, Pfizer or others thereby helping the world, and fulfill Moderna’s broader mission by potentially establishing a transformational drug therapy platform that will advance healthcare and yield gains for the company for years to come.
Russian Navy Masses 16 Warships Near Syria-By: Sam LaGrone-February 24, 2022 6:52 PM
Two Russian guided-missile cruisers from Russia’s North and Pacific fleets met off the coast of Syria as part of a 16-ship Russian Navy formation, according to satellite photos taken on Thursday.Slava-class cruisers RTS Marshal Ustinov (055) and RFS Varyag (011) were part of a 16-ship formation in Syrian territorial waters near Russia’s sole foreign naval base in Tartus as captured by European Space Agency’s satellite imagery, reported Naval News.“This is the concentration of essentially the entire Russian Navy in the Mediterranean, in one place. Ordinarily, these vessels would be operating in distinct groups,” reads the report from Naval News.The formation includes the two Slavas, two Udaloy-class destroyers, two guided-missile frigates, two Kilo diesel-electric attack submarines, a Buyan-class corvette, two assault boats and a variety of auxiliary vessels.Russian Navy ships off the coast of Syria on Feb. 24, 2022. The two Slavas had been operating at either end of the Mediterranean as the head of two separate surface action groups. A third Slava, RTS Moskva (121), is in the Black Sea.The 11,500-ton Slavas were designed around launchers that can hold 16 SS-N-12 Sandbox anti-ship cruise missiles – each about the size of a telephone pole. The 1970s era ships and missiles were crafted to battle U.S. and NATO aircraft carriers by overwhelming them with a barrage of high-speed cruise missiles to sink ships.The formation resembles a photo exercise rather than a military formation. PHOTOEXs, held by navies around the world, are designed to produce dramatic photographs of ships in naval formations that otherwise have limited operational value.While the operations of the Slavas are in part to send a provocative message to NATO forces, officials say, the actual capabilities of the Russian surface fleet in the Mediterranean are outmatched by just U.S. assets surged to the region.On Tuesday, defense officials confirmed the intent of the cruisers was likely to complicate the operations of three NATO carrier strike groups also operating in the Mediterranean-USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75), ITS Cavour (CVH-550) and French Navy carrier FS Charles de Gaulle (R 91) their escorts and air wings have been part of an ongoing reassurance mission to NATO allies in the lead up to Thursday’s invasion.There are about a dozen U.S. guided-missile cruisers and destroyers in U.S. 6th Fleet, and some surged to the region with the last two months.Four East Coast guided-missile destroyers – USS Donald Cook (DDG-75), USS Mitscher (DDG-57), USS The Sullivans (DDG-68) and USS Gonzalez (DDG-66) – left in January for Europe as Russian ships departed from the Arctic and Pacific, USNI News reported.Those ships are in addition the forward-deployed USS Ross (DDG-71), USS Roosevelt (DDG-80), USS Porter (DDG-78) and USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51), and the escorts of the Harry S. Truman CSG.Last week, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Mike Gilday said the U.S. Navy was well prepared to interact with the Russian Navy in the region.“We operate in and around the Russians and the Chinese all the time. So this is nothing new,” he said on Friday when asked about the Russian cruisers by reporters.“Given this current situation, the chance for miscalculation is greater. That’s why we train to a very high standard so that when we find our ships in situations like this the [commanders] that we act in a way that’s not provocative and that we communicate very clearly that we’re not cowboys out there. Our intentions are to be responsible professionals out there.”
It’s unclear the next moves for the Slavas. The last surface action group to visit the Russian naval base in Tartus resupplied their ships and traveled into the Black Sea in support of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Russia's experience in Syria informs approach to Ukraine, NATO-The opportunity to field-test its next-generation weapons systems in recent years has emboldened the Kremlin to raise the stakes in Ukraine, and so has experience in brinkmanship with Turkey over Syria.Kirill Semenov-February 12, 2022
Six Russian landing ships from the Baltic and Northern Fleets, which had previously arrived at the Russian naval base of Tartus in Syria, were transferred to the Black Sea on Feb. 8 to participate in military maneuvers by the Russian army and navy.The passage through Tartus once again demonstrated the importance of this facility for Moscow’s Mediterranean fleet. Tartus not only serves as Russia's foothold in the Middle East, but also as an element of military infrastructure for Moscow's global confrontation with Washington and Brussels. The same applies to the Khmeimim Russian air base in Syria, whose capabilities have been expanded recently. The Russian military campaign in Syria, which began in 2015, in many respects prepared Moscow on a military-technical level for the current confrontation between Russia and the United States and NATO, as well as the Russian-Ukrainian escalation.Russian President Vladimir Putin inherited an incompetent Russian army with an archaic structure and outdated weapons, which was struggling to suppress the guerrilla actions of separatist militants in the Chechen Republic. The Russian-Georgian conflict of 2008 revealed major problems in the Russian army, associated with the obsolescence of not only military equipment, but also auxiliary means (for example, communications). It called into question whether Russian armed forces could defeat an enemy equipped with modern weapons — such as the armies of NATO countries.The Syrian campaign has become an important preparation for Russian armed forces to confront stronger adversaries than the small Georgian army or the Chechen separatist guerrillas. It was not certain whether the re-arming of the Russian army that began after 2010 could meet modern requirements, and the Syrian campaign became a test site for experimenting with these weapons in combat conditions.While Russia started the Syrian campaign relying on the old but proven Su-24 front-line bombers, it later shifted its main striking force in Syria to rely on new Su-34s. The latter showed high combat effectiveness in the event of a hypothetical conflict in Europe.In addition, Russia's activity in Syria afforded the opportunity to test Russian Caliber cruise missiles, with a range of 1,500-2,000 km and which are launched both from warships and aircraft. If necessary, these missiles can even be equipped with a nuclear warhead. When Moscow first began using these missiles in Syria, problems arose, but these shortcomings were eventually eliminated, and now the Caliber is recognized as a very effective combat weapon. It can be used from small-tonnage vessels, for example, river-sea missile ships of the Buyan-M type. This makes it possible to bypass the agreement limiting the deployment of medium-range missiles in Europe.It’s open for debate if there is a direct connection between the Syrian campaign and the current escalation between Russia and NATO. However, Russia’s military operation in Syria has clearly given Moscow the confidence for challenging the West.“The Syria campaign certainly played a part in the Russia-West confrontation," Samuel Ramani, an associate fellow at the Royal United Service Institute (RUSI), told Al-Monitor. "Russia proved that it could intervene militarily in a decisive fashion with an incoherent Western response. … Moreover, Russia's use of new military technologies set a useful precedent for interventions elsewhere, including in the post-Soviet space.”Leonid Isaev, an assistant professor at the Moscow-based Higher School of Economics, told Al-Monitor the Syrian campaign helped to shape the image of Russia both inside and outside the country as a great power with corresponding military power.“This was the last brick in the foundation of Russia’s ‘great power,’ after which even critics of the Russian regime had no doubt that Moscow really is a great military power capable of playing on an equal footing with the United States and NATO,” Isaev said.In addition to the military-technical dimension of the Russian campaign in Syria, Moscow’s experience with NATO member countries such as Turkey is also playing a role in the confrontation.In particular, the game of continuously raising the stakes has become part of the relationship between Moscow and Ankara over Syria. A similar strategy was tested in 2015, when a Turkish F-16 fighter shot down a Russian Su-24 front-line bomber, which led to the collapse of Russian-Turkish relations and put both countries in danger of a military clash in Syria. In early 2020, Turkey and Russia again approached an open military conflict in Idlib after Syrian — and, presumably, Russian — warplanes carried out strikes on the Turkish military.However, at that time the parties were still able to compromise, despite the fact that they initially put forward demands that were unacceptable to each other. This experience may have given the Russian leadership confidence that the Kremlin will be able to get out of any escalation, finding a mutually acceptable solution with the West.As Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, told The New Yorker, “It looks like a classic diplomatic game of escalation, in which both sides, Russia included, demonstrate their adamance with rather dramatic gestures.”In turn, Leonid Isaev told Al-Monitor: “Undoubtedly, the Syrian operation gave Moscow confidence in actions in other areas as well. Both in terms of behavior in Ukraine and in terms of behavior towards NATO. Thanks to Russian policy in the Middle East, the Kremlin has learned to play for higher rates, learned to bluff and learned to articulate its position and issue ultimatums.”
Russia’s Preeminence in Syria Means Israel Will Not Help Ukraine-Israel is unlikely to back Ukraine given that it depends on Russia's approval for conducting airstrikes in Syria against Iranian proxies.-Andrew Pereira-FEB 23,22
Ukrainian officials have recently been complaining about Israel’s lacklustre support in the face of a possible Russian invasion. Last week, Ukraine’s Deputy Foreign Minister expressed concerns about a “lack of political support from Jerusalem” and called for “greater involvement.” Furthermore, Israel has refused to sell its Iron Dome missile defence system to Ukraine, despite direct requests by Kyiv.This is despite the fact that Israel maintains cordial ties with Ukraine, especially since the Eastern European country has one of the largest Jewish populations in the world; Israel is also home to thousands of Ukrainian Jews. Furthermore, both sides enjoy solid economic ties. For instance, Ukraine has been Israel’s main wheat supplier for years and accounts for more than 50% of grains consumed by Israelis.Given this and the fact that Israel maintains very close ties to the United States (US) and has been designated by Washington as a “major non-NATO ally,” Israel’s decision not to actively support Ukraine might come as a surprise. However, supporting Ukraine over Russia could severely hamper Israel’s operations in Syria to contain Iranian influence near its borders.Since civil war broke out in Syria in 2011, Israel has been conducting airstrikes against Iranian proxies and weapons shipments to Lebanese militant group Hezbollah. Israel maintains that its airstrikes are meant to prevent archenemy Iran from increasing its military presence near Israeli borders and stop Hezbollah from expanding its missile arsenal.However, following Russia’s intervention in the civil war in 2015 to prop up the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Israel has been forced to maintain a direct line of communication with Russia regarding its operations, so as to prevent an incident in which Russian forces are targeted by Israeli airstrikes. So far, Russia and Israel have been able to establish a common understanding regarding their role in the conflict. According to reports, Russia has allowed Israel to continue its air raids as long as Israeli airstrikes do not directly threaten the Assad regime—a close ally of Moscow—and avoid targeting Russian infrastructure.Since 2015, Russia has emerged as the dominant power in Syria. Russian airstrikes on rebel-held territories have helped Syrian regime forces put an end to the rebel offensive. Moreover, Russia has allowed Iranian proxy groups like Hezbollah to operate in the country, as they have helped the Syrian regime in the ground offensive against anti-Assad forces.Against this backdrop, Israel has sought closer ties with Russia. In fact, former Israeli Prime Minister (PM) Benjamin Netanyahu visited Russia 15 times between 2011 and 2015. In October 2021, current PM Naftali Bennett met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow and announced that both sides had reached an understanding regarding Israel’s operations in Syria.However, recent events threaten to undo the mutual understanding between Israel and Russia over Syria. Israeli airstrikes over the past few months have not only targeted Iranian proxies but also resulted in Syrian troop casualties. Israeli fighter jets also targeted the Russian controlled Syrian port of Latakia twice in December, and one of the strikes even caused a major fire in the port. Despite Israel claiming that the strikes were carried out to prevent Hezbollah from shipping Iranian weapons to Lebanon, Russia condemned the strikes. Not only did Moscow express “deep concern” about Israeli strikes, it also said that represent a “crude violation of Syria’s sovereignty.” Furthermore, Russia stated that it “opposes” Israel’s actions and called on the Israeli government to “refrain” from conducting airstrikes in Syria, which has been interpreted as a warning that Moscow will not hesitate to act if its interests in Syria are compromised.In fact, Russia’s recent decision to increase its military presence in Syria and conduct joint drills with Syrian troops could signal Moscow’s rising intolerance for Israeli airstrikes that target Russian interests. Earlier this month, Russia sent warplanes to the Khmeimim airbase in Syria and immediately afterwards, Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu visited Damascus and met with Assad. Moscow also conducted naval drills in the Mediterranean and launched air exercises along with Syrian forces.In this respect, Russia’s criticism of Israeli strikes and its public display of military support for the Assad regime does not bode well for Israel, as it threatens to upend Israeli dominance over Syria’s skies. Until now, Russia has not used the S-400 missile system against Israeli jets, even though Moscow has installed the advanced system in its military bases in Syria. Moreover, Russia has thus far refused to sell the S-400 batteries to Iran. Israel remains strongly opposed to the sale of the system to Iran, as such a move could prevent the Israeli air force from carrying out strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. Russia’s furious reaction has undoubtedly set off alarm bells in Israel and according to reports, the government is scrambling to reduce tensions from escalating, with Israeli military officials holding talks with their Russian counterparts to try to calm nerves. This perhaps explains why Israel has not been forthcoming in its friendship with Ukraine in this time of need, as it is no doubt keen on not riling Russia further, particularly given that Israel’s primary concern, apart from its conflict with Palestine, is Iran and its affiliates. Successfully thwarting these threats requires an amicable relationship with Russia, particularly in Syria. All things considered, Israel’s refusal to publicly back Ukraine is a perfect example of the realist dogma that national interests and security issues trump all other concerns and “friendships.” Israel has repeatedly stated that the activities of the Iranian regime are a “national security concern” and that conducting airstrikes against Iranian proxies in Syria is crucial in preventing Tehran from establishing a major presence near Israel’s borders. Therefore, regardless of the strong bilateral ties between Israel and Ukraine, Israel will continue to act in a manner consistent with its security goals, which, in the case of Syria, includes acceding to certain Russian demands in return for Moscow turning a blind eye to Israel’s operations.
Putin urges Ukraine’s army to stage coup against country’s ‘neo-Nazi’ leaders-In televised address, Russian leader urges Ukrainian military to ‘take power in your own hands’ from ‘this gang of drug addicts and neo-Nazis’-By AFP-FEB 25,22-Today, 6:59 pm
MOSCOW — Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday called on the Ukrainian army to overthrow the government whose leaders he described as “terrorists” and “a gang of drug addicts and neo-Nazis.”Putin also accused “Ukrainian nationalists” of deploying heavy weapons in residential areas of major cities to provoke the Russian military, a claim that could fuel fears Moscow is creating pretexts for justifying civilian casualties.In a televised address, he urged the Ukrainian military to “take power in your own hands.”“It seems like it will be easier for us to agree with you than this gang of drug addicts and neo-Nazis,” he said, referring to the leadership in Kyiv under President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is Jewish.Putin, who on Thursday ordered Russian troops to invade Ukraine, claimed that Ukrainian “nationalists” were preparing to deploy multiple rocket launchers to residential areas of Ukrainian cities, including Kyiv and the northeastern city of Kharkiv.Ukraine’s leadership are “acting like terrorists all over the world: they are hiding behind people in the hope of then blaming Russia for civilian casualties.”“It is known for a fact that this is happening on the recommendation of foreign consultants, primarily American advisers,” Putin said.Separately, Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov said of the alleged deployment: “We consider the situation to be extremely dangerous.”Putin and top Russian officials have said Moscow’s troops are only targeting ultra-nationalists in Ukraine.Putin also praised Russian troops saying they were acting in a “courageous and professional manner.”“They are successfully solving the most important task of ensuring the security of our people and our Fatherland,” Putin said.On a conference call to reporters, Peskov accused the Ukrainian authorities of refusing to hold talks with Russians in Belarus, as was previously suggested by Moscow.“After a brief pause Ukrainians said they now want to go to Warsaw,” Peskov said. “And now they have gone incommunicado.”
More than 50,000 Ukrainians have fled country in 48 hours, UN says-Most moving to Poland and Moldova, and many more are heading for the borders, officials say-By Agencies-FEB 25,22-Today, 8:48 pm
Tens of thousands of people have fled Ukraine since the start of the Russian invasion less than two days ago, the United Nations refugee chief said Friday.Already on Thursday, the UN refugee agency warned that some 100,000 people had been displaced inside the country, and on Friday it said large numbers were fleeing into neighboring countries.“More than 50,000 Ukrainian refugees have fled their country in less than 48 hours — a majority to Poland and Moldova,” Filippo Grandi said in a tweet.“And many more are moving towards its borders,” he said, offering “heartfelt thanks to the governments and people of countries keeping their borders open and welcoming refugees.”In a separate tweet, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees voiced particular thanks to Moldovan President Maia Sandu “for allowing people fleeing Ukraine to cross safely the border with Moldova.”“We at UNHCR will do our utmost to help mobilize international support as you receive and host them,” he said.His comments came after Russian President Vladimir Putin early Thursday defied Western warnings and launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.On Friday, Ukrainian forces were fighting off Russian troops in the capital Kyiv on the second day of a conflict that has already claimed dozens of lives.Those arriving in neighboring countries were mostly women, children and the elderly after Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky on Thursday banned men of military age from leaving the country.A woman from Kyiv who arrived in Przemsyl, Poland, broke down in tears describing how men were pulled off trains in Ukraine before they got to the border.“Even if the man was traveling with his own child he couldn’t cross the border, even with a kid,” said the woman, who would only give her first name, Daria.Vilma Sugar, 68, fled her home in Uzhhorod, Ukraine, shaking in fear, and then faced the heartbreak of her 47-year-son being stopped.“I’m shaking, I can’t calm down,” she said after reaching Zahony, Hungary. “We crossed the border but they just didn’t let him come with us. We are trying to keep in touch with him on the phone but it’s hard because the line is bad.”Another woman who arrived on her train, Erzsebet Kovacs, 50, said men were not even allowed to enter the station.“We women boarded the train, but the men were ordered to step to the side,” she said.The Ukrainian authorities, she said, “were nice, not rude, but they said that men have a duty to defend the country.”Cars were backed up for several miles at some border crossings as authorities in Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Moldova mobilized to receive them, providing shelter, food and legal help. These countries also eased their usual border procedures, among them COVID-19 testing requirements.At border crossings in Poland, Ukrainians arrived on foot and by car and train — some with their pets — and were greeted by Polish authorities and volunteers offering them food and hot drinks.Some sought to join relatives who have already settled in Poland and other EU nations, whose strong economies have for many years attracted Ukrainian workers.For many the first stop was a train station in Przemysl, a city in southeastern Poland that is a transit point for many. Ukrainians slept on cots and in chairs as they awaited their next moves, relieved to escape the shelling of Kyiv and other places.Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said the EU will take in all people fleeing Ukraine due to the current conflict.“We tried everything so this day wouldn’t come,” she said. “And it came because the Russian president chose it, opted for war and against human lives.”“That’s why we will take in all of the people who are fleeing now,” Baerbock said. “We will bring the people from Ukraine to safety.”Italian Premier Mario Draghi spoke in Parliament on Friday of the “long lines of cars leaving Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities, heading mostly toward EU borders,” and said “it is possible to imagine a huge influx of refugees toward neighboring European countries.”“The images we are seeing — of unarmed civilians forced to hide in bunkers and subways — are terrible and bring us back to the darkest days of European history,” he said.The UN refugee agency, UNHCR, estimated that more than 100,000 people were believed to have left their homes in Ukraine and that up to 4 million people may flee to other countries if the situation escalates.Hungary, which mobilized its military to help, announced in a decree this week that all Ukrainian citizens arriving from Ukraine, and all third-country nationals legally residing there, would be entitled to protection.The welcome that Poland and Hungary are showing Ukrainians now is very different from the unwelcoming stance they have had toward refugees and migrants from the Middle East and Africa in recent years. Hungary built a wall to keep them out when a million people, many Syrians fleeing war, arrived in Europe in 2015.Poland is now building its own wall with Belarus after thousands of mostly Middle Eastern migrants sought to enter from Belarus in past months. The EU accused Russia-backed Belarus of encouraging that migration surge to destabilize the EU. Some of those people denied entry into Poland died in forests.But Ukrainians are viewed very differently by Poles and others because they are mostly Christian, and, for the Poles, fellow Slavs with similar linguistic and cultural roots.Transcarpathia, Ukraine’s westernmost region which borders Hungary, is also home to about 150,000 ethnic Hungarians, many of whom are also Hungarian citizens. While Russia’s invasion has not yet extended to that area, which is separated from the rest of Ukraine by the Carpathian Mountains, many have decided not to wait for the situation to get worse.
Russia summons Israeli envoy, said to ask: ‘Why are you backing Nazis?’Moscow seeks clarifications after Lapid lambastes Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine; Alexander Ben Zvi reportedly notes Israel’s response has been relatively mild-By TOI staff-FEB 25,22-Today, 9:44 pm
Russia on Friday summoned Israel’s Ambassador to Moscow Alexander Ben Zvi to clarify Israel’s position regarding the Ukraine invasion.According to reports on Channel 12 and Ynet, Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov asked Ben Zvi why Israel was expressing support for the “Nazis” in Ukraine.Russia has repeatedly made the questionable claim its invasion of its neighbor seeks to “de-Nazify” the country, whose president Volodymyr Zelensky is Jewish. Historians have seen the use of the Holocaust in Moscow’s PR campaign as disinformation and a cynical ploy to further the Russian aims.In a statement, Russia’s foreign ministry said Bogdanov and Ben Zvi discussed bilateral ties and that the Russian diplomat “expressed hope” that Israel would show understanding toward Moscow’s motives for the military campaign. He characterized the invasion as an operation to defend Ukrainian separatists in the country’s east and to “demilitarize” Ukraine.Bogdanov also spoke of the “importance of preserving the historical truth about the Second World War.”As Russia attacks Ukraine, Israel has avoided taking a stance aligned too closely with either side. This is believed to be at least partly due to its need to work with the Russian military presence in neighboring Syria.Israel has expressed concern regarding the invasion and offered humanitarian aid to the Ukrainian people, but Prime Minister Naftali Bennett has avoided condemning Russia or even mentioning the country by name in his statements since the launching of the widespread military operation across Russia’s border early Thursday morning.However, Foreign Minister Yair Lapid issued a far more clear condemnation Thursday, calling the invasion “a grave violation of the international order.”Russia’s Ambassador to Israel has struck a different tone, telling The Times of Israel earlier Friday that Moscow “hope[s] that Israel will continue [taking] a wise diplomatic approach.”According to Channel 12, Bogdanov expressed surprise at the Israeli condemnation, to which Ben Zvi responded that Jerusalem’s comments have been measured, and far milder than those of other nations.Israel’s Foreign Ministry clarified that the conversation was not a reprimand or dress-down while acknowledging that there are disagreements between the sides.Bennett spoke with Ukraine’s President Zelensky on Friday, offering to send humanitarian assistance to the embattled nation as Russian forces reached Kyiv.The two discussed the fighting in Ukraine, especially around the capital, according to the Prime Minister’s Office.Bennett offered humanitarian aid to the country and laid out to Zelensky what Israel has provided thus far.He told Zelensky that he hopes the war will end soon, and sent a message of support to the Ukrainian people, according to a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office.Agencies contributed to this report.
Op-Ed-A plea to the free world, US and Israel: Tell Putin that Zelensky must not be harmed-Ukraine’s president fears he is Russia’s ‘number one target’ and his wife and children are number two. Our pledged support for Ukraine must include demanding his safety-By David Horovitz-FEB 25,22-Today, 5:41 pm
Russia “has marked me down as the number one target,” Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky warned in a video message early Friday. “My family is the number two target. They want to destroy Ukraine politically by destroying the head of state.” He reportedly told EU leaders in a video call late Thursday that it might be the last time they see him alive.Having interviewed Zelensky barely two years ago in his presidential offices in Kyiv, and with my heart going out to him and his people, I want to issue what is both a personal and a principled plea to the US, the free world, and emphatically Israel’s leadership, too, to do their best to ensure that he is not targeted.President Joe Biden on Thursday stressed that while American troops would not be deployed to fight Russia in Ukraine, the United States “will support the Ukrainian people as they defend their country.” In a conversation with Zelensky on Thursday, he condemned the Russian invasion and, similarly, promised “to provide support and assistance to Ukraine and the Ukrainian people.”In a phone call of his own with Zelensky on Friday, Israel’s Prime Minister Naftali Bennett “offered Israel’s assistance with any humanitarian aid needed,” the Prime Minister’s Office announced, “and said that he stands by the people of Ukraine in these difficult days.”In these surreal hours, as the mighty Russian military moves to crush its neighbor, the words of solidarity and promises of support and assistance, however heartfelt and well-intentioned, ring a little hollow.Biden has drawn a clear line between Ukraine, a would-be NATO member, and those countries that are already included in the alliance — the former receives backing short of direct military assistance, while “every inch” of the latter will be defended “with the full force of American power.”Under Bennett, a rather wobbly line has been drawn. His foreign minister, Yair Lapid, on Thursday condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as “a grave violation of the international order.” Bennett himself has avoided such directly critical language — trying to walk a tightrope between a principled position in support of a friendly state facing obliteration, and Israel’s crucial interest in maintaining viable relations with a Russia that is so influential in our region, so significant a world power, and the host of so large a Jewish community. I hope the foreign minister’s comments will prove sufficient to place Israel on the right side of history.One vital and highly symbolic area in which the US, Israel and other principled international powers can and should urgently speak out, however, is in making plain to Russia’s President Vladimir Putin that no harm must befall Zelensky — the duly elected Ukrainian president who is leading his nation and his people through this crisis.Zelensky has sought to reform Ukraine, to bring it closer to the free world, to root out corruption. He had also sought to foster a viable relationship with Putin’s Russia — in vain, as these terrible unfolding events are proving.When I interviewed him, Zelensky spoke lovingly and admiringly of the State of Israel, where he had appeared as a comedian in his previous, pre-political life: “I respect Israel as hugely special, especially given all the sensitivities around it — the unity of Israel, the unity of the nation,” he marveled. “The Jews managed to build a country, to elevate it, without anything except people and brains. The Jewish people in Israel are a unique people, a unique population. It has economic strength. There are many countries in the world that can protect themselves, but Israel, such a small country, can not only protect itself, but facing external threats, can respond.”We know exactly what Zelensky is going through now — trying to protect his country from an external threat that has closed in on his capital; a president who happens to be Jewish defending against an invader who claims to be striving for the “denazification of Ukraine” and who on Friday urged the Ukrainian army to overthrow a leadership of “terrorists…, drug addicts and neo-Nazis.”In his Friday video message, Zelensky vowed: “I will stay in the capital. My family” — his wife Olena and their two children — “is also in Ukraine.”The notion that the elected leader of a democratic country dragged into a war might be targeted for assassination by the enemy is beyond unthinkable, but then so is everything that is playing out in Ukraine right now.The very least that the US-led free world can do is try to guarantee Zelensky’s safety and freedom — which means impressing that imperative on Putin. Biden, Bennett and other world leaders have pledged their support for the Ukrainian people; here’s the most resonant family on whose behalf to start showing it.
Germany says EU will ‘severely’ sanction Putin and Russian FM Lavrov-Meanwhile, UK and North European allies say strong sanctions needed on ‘Putin’s inner circle’ By AFP-FEB 25,22-Today, 5:26 pm
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on Friday said new sanctions against Russia would personally punish President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov for their responsibility in the invasion of Ukraine.“They are responsible for the death of innocent people in Ukraine. They are responsible that the international system is trampled and we as Europeans do not accept that,” Baerbock said as she arrived for talks in Brussels.Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s office said the UK and nine other northern European defense allies agreed in a call that further sanctions were needed on Russia after its invasion of Ukraine.The UK leader told the so-called Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) bloc — which includes Baltic and Scandinavian states — that the crisis “was a defining moment in European history.”“The leaders agreed that more sanctions were needed, including focusing on [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin’s inner circle, building on the measures that had already been agreed,” his Downing Street office said following the call.Johnson told representatives from the nine JEF members that “the western world must keep the flame of freedom burning in Ukraine as Russian forces inflict horror on an innocent country and its people,” it added.He also said that “more support must be given to Ukraine, as a matter of the greatest urgency” and that Putin’s actions “could never be normalized, or his aggression against Ukraine ever accepted as a fait accompli.”The JEF, set up in 2012, is made up of NATO members Denmark, Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom, and non-members Finland and Sweden.It is focused on security in the “High North” region around the Arctic, the North Atlantic and the Baltic Sea area.At a meeting of its defense ministers on Tuesday, they announced upcoming maneuvres in the Baltic Sea to demonstrate “freedom of movement” in the strategic zone.The warnings about targeted sanctions on Kremlin leaders came as the EU agreed to freeze European assets linked to Putin and his Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, officials and a European diplomat told AFP.It also followed the bloc, Britain, and the United States unveiling a range of sanctions on Thursday, further targeting the banking sector and Russian oligarchs.Earlier Friday, Johnson pledged “further UK support to Ukraine” in a phone call with President Volodymyr Zelensky, as Russian forces closed in on the capital, Kyiv.“President Zelensky updated the prime minister on the most recent Russian military advances… including the terrible developments in Kyiv,” Downing Street said in a statement.Britain has said is ready to provide Ukraine with additional military support, including lethal defensive weapons but Defense Secretary Ben Wallace ruled out sending troops.He told BBC television Britain would “hold the line in NATO,” adding: “I’m not putting British troops directly to fight Russian troops.“That would trigger a European war because we are a NATO country, and Russia would therefore be attacking NATO.”Johnson praised “the bravery and heroism of the Ukrainian people in standing up to Russia’s campaign of violence,” according to Downing Street.“The Prime Minister committed to provide further UK support to Ukraine in the coming days as the people of Ukraine and the world continue to demonstrate that Putin cannot act with impunity,” it added.
Ukrainian soldiers battle Russian troops in capital Kyiv as Moscow presses invasion-At the same time, the Kremlin says it is willing to meet with Ukrainian officials for talks aimed at resolving the burgeoning war-By Agencies-FEB 25,22-Today, 5:10 pm
KYIV, Ukraine — Ukrainian forces fought off Russian troops in the streets of the capital Kyiv on Friday as President Volodymyr Zelensky accused Moscow of targeting civilians and called for more international sanctions.Pre-dawn blasts in Kyiv set off a second day of violence after Russian President Vladimir Putin defied Western warnings to unleash a full-scale invasion on Thursday that quickly claimed dozens of lives and displaced at least 100,000 people.The United States and its allies responded with a barrage of sanctions, but the Russian forces looked to press home their advantage after a string of key strategic victories in their air and ground assault.Zelensky recalled Nazi Germany’s 1941 invasion and praised his people for “demonstrating heroism.”In Kyiv, gunfire and explosions resonated ever closer to the government quarter.Amid growing casualties from the deadly warfare — including shelling that sliced through the facade of a Kyiv apartment building, bridges and schools — the Kremlin said Russia was ready to talk with Ukrainian officials.That came even as there were also increasing signs that Putin’s Russia may be seeking to overthrow Ukraine’s government, in his boldest effort yet to redraw the world map and revive Moscow’s Cold War-era influence.The US and other global powers slapped ever-tougher sanctions on Russia as the invasion reverberated through the world’s economy and energy supplies, threatening to further squeeze ordinary households. UN officials said they were preparing for millions to flee Ukraine. Sporting authorities sought to punish Russia on global playing fields. And NATO leaders called an urgent meeting to discuss how far they can go to challenge Putin without engaging Russian forces in direct war.Day two of Russia’s invasion focused on the Ukrainian capital, where Associated Press reporters heard explosions starting before dawn and gunfire was reported in several areas. Ukrainian authorities used armored vehicles and snowplows to defend Kyiv and limit movement, and said Russian spies were seeking to infiltrate the city.Russia’s military said it had seized a strategic airport outside Kyiv that allows it to quickly build up forces to take the capital.It claimed to have already cut the city off from the west — the direction many of those escaping the invasion are heading in, with lines of cars snaking toward the Polish border.Intense fire broke out on a bridge across the Dneiper River dividing the eastern and western sides of Kyiv, with about 200 Ukrainian soldiers establishing defensive positions and taking shelter behind their armored vehicles and later under the bridge.Ukrainian officials reported at least 137 deaths on the Ukrainian side and claimed hundreds on the Russian one. Russian authorities released no casualty figures, and it was not possible to verify the tolls.UN officials reported 25 civilian deaths, mostly from shelling and airstrikes, and said that 100,000 people were believed to have left their homes and estimated up to 4 million could flee if the fighting escalates.Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky pleaded with Russia’s government to hold talks, and with Western powers to act faster to cut off Russia’s economy and provide Ukraine military help.“When bombs fall on Kyiv, it happens in Europe, not just in Ukraine,” he said. “When missiles kill our people, they kill all Europeans.”Zelensky’s whereabouts were kept secret after he told European leaders that he was No. 1 on Russia’s list of targets.He also offered to negotiate on one of Putin’s key demands: that Ukraine declare itself neutral and abandon its ambition of joining NATO. And the Kremlin responded that Russia was ready to send a delegation to Belarus to discuss that.After denying for weeks he planned to invade, Putin argued that the West left him no other choice by refusing to negotiate on Russia’s security demands.The autocratic leader hasn’t said what his ultimate plans for Ukraine are. Lavrov gave a hint, saying Friday: “We want to allow the Ukrainian people to determine its own fate.” His spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Russia recognizes Zelensky as Ukraine’s president, but wouldn’t say how long the Russian military operation could last.Ukrainians, meanwhile, had to abruptly adjust to life under fire, after Russian forces started moving into their country from three sides in an invasion telegraphed for weeks, as they massed an estimated 150,000 troops nearby.In a Kyiv apartment building, residents woke to screaming, smoke and flying dust. What the mayor identified as Russian shelling tore off part of the building and ignited a fire.“What are you doing? What is this?” resident Yurii Zhyhanov asked — a question directed at Russian forces. Like countless other Ukrainians, he grabbed what belongings he could, took his mother, and set out to flee, car alarms wailing behind him.Elsewhere in Kyiv, the body of a dead soldier lay on the ground near an underpass. Fragments of a downed aircraft smoked amid the brick homes of a residential area. Black plastic was draped over body parts found beside them. And people climbed out of bomb shelters, basements and subways to face another day of upheaval.As air raids sirens sounded in the capital early Friday, guests of a hotel in the city center were directed to a makeshift basement shelter, lined with piles of mattresses and bottles of water.“We’re all scared and worried. We don’t know what to do then, what’s going to happen in a few days,” said one of the workers, Lucy Vashaka, 20.Meanwhile, the mayor of the city in the rebel-controlled east said Ukrainian shelling hit a school building.The Ukrainian military on Friday reported significant fighting near Ivankiv, about 60 kilometers (40 miles) northwest of Kyiv, as Russian forces apparently tried to advance on the capital from the north. Russian troops also entered the city of Sumy, near the border with Russia that sits on a highway leading to Kyiv from the east.US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Kyiv “could well be under siege” in what US officials believe is a brazen attempt by Putin to install his own regime.With social media amplifying a torrent of military claims and counter-claims, it was difficult to determine exactly what was happening on the ground.The assault, anticipated for weeks by the US and Western allies, amounts to the largest ground war in Europe since World War II. After repeatedly denying plans to invade, the autocratic Putin launched his attack on the country, which has increasingly tilted toward the democratic West and away from Moscow’s sway.Zelensky, whose grasp on power was increasingly tenuous, appealed to global leaders for even more severe sanctions than the ones imposed by Western allies and for defense assistance.“If you don’t help us now, if you fail to offer a powerful assistance to Ukraine, tomorrow the war will knock on your door,” said the leader, who cut diplomatic ties with Moscow, declared martial law and ordered a full military mobilization that would last 90 days.The invasion began early Thursday with a series of missile strikes on cities and military bases, and then quickly followed with a multi-pronged ground assault that rolled troops in from several areas in the east; from the southern region of Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014; and from Belarus to the north.After Ukrainian officials said they lost control of the decommissioned Chernobyl nuclear power plant, scene of the world’s worst nuclear disaster, Russia said Friday it was working with the Ukrainians to secure the plant. There was no corroboration of such cooperation from the Ukrainian side.As Western leaders rushed to condemn and punish Russia, US President Joe Biden announced new sanctions that will target Russian banks, oligarchs, state-controlled companies and high-tech sectors, saying Putin “chose this war” and had exhibited a “sinister” view of the world in which nations take what they want by force. He added that the measures were designed not to disrupt global energy markets. Russian oil and natural gas exports are vital energy sources for Europe.British Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced sanctions, freezing the assets of all large Russian banks and planning to bar Russian companies and the Kremlin from raising money on British markets.“Now we see him for what he is — a bloodstained aggressor who believes in imperial conquest,” Johnson said of Putin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)