Antivaccine nonsense Medicine Pseudoscience Quackery Religion

Jane Ruby: The Mike Adams of nursing and health economics

We met “Dr.” Jane Ruby last week attacking Novavax, but she’s so much more antivaccine than just ranting about “moth DNA” in Novavax. Truly, she reaches Mike Adams level of bonkers.

Last week, I discussed how antivaxxers had recycled old antivax fears about scary-sounding DNA in vaccines. In the past, they would claim that DNA from HPV in Gardasil or from the old cell lines derived from fetal cells would somehow integrate with the vaccine recipient’s DNA and wreak havoc, usually through a “hypothesized—and I do use the word loosely—link to autoimmune reactions leading to autism and all sorts of autoimmune diseases. In last week’s example, they were fear mongering about “moth DNA” in the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine, supposedly from the Sf9 cell line that was originally isolated from the ovaries of the fall armyworm moth. (Sf9 cells are, like the cell lines derived from fetuses in the 1960s and 1970s, used to produce large quantities of antigen for use in vaccines, in the case of the Novavax vaccine, the spike protein from SARS-CoV-2.) A major player in spreading this old antivaccine distortion was someone named Dr. Jane Ruby.

I mentioned at the time that we had met Dr. Jane Ruby once before because she is one of the prime sources of the antivaccine conspiracy theory that COVID-19 vaccines are causing huge numbers of deaths from massive blood clots that only a lone maverick mortician is discovering when he embalms bodies. Of course, as pathologists pointed out to me, the clots that were being shown were almost certainly postmortem, not clots that formed before death, but that inconvenient fact didn’t stop Mike Adams from adding to Ruby’s claim by suggesting that what were likely hairs found in the clots that got there from handling were in actuality “self-assembling nanoparticles.” She’s also a major source of the false claim that COVID-19 vaccines are mostly graphene oxide. In any case, over the last week, it’s become apparent to me that Jane Ruby is a major source of COVID-19 disinformation, which made me want to take a closer look, starting with looking at who she was.

When I first encounter “Dr. Jane Ruby,” I assumed that she was a physician. Certainly, she goes out of her way to give that impression in her appearances, for instance, this appearance on the Stew Peters network:

Dr. Jane Ruby
Note the stethoscope draped over her shoulders.

Note the white coat and the stethoscope draped over her shoulders. (As a historical note, surgeons have in general tended to make fun of this particular look, calling the stethoscope worn this way a “flea collar,” after a frequently used term for internal medicine doctors. At least, they did back in the day, when I was resident.) If I initially assumed that “Dr. Jane Ruby” was actually a physician, then you can bet that lay people seeing her videos almost certainly assume the same thing, and Ruby certainly does nothing to disabuse them of that idea in any of her appearances or articles that I’ve come across thus far. For her, the title of “doctor” plus the stethoscope and white jacket implies that she’s a physician, and I have little doubt that she’s doing this intentionally.

For instance, here’s a photo from her Facebook account:

So I thought I’d follow up on last week’s post and look into her background a bit more, as well as some of her other truly outlandish misinformation about COVID-19 and vaccines.

Who is “Dr. Jane Ruby”?

The first hints about Dr. Ruby’s background came when I did the most obvious thing and perused her website:

BIO:  Dr. Jane Ruby is a medical professional and a pharmaceutical drug development expert with over 20 years of experience in regulatory processes for drug approval with the FDA and the EMA. She is also a published international health economist who has appeared on numerous TV and radio shows across America.   Dr. Ruby worked on the human research studies to launch some of the most famous compounds in the world in Depression, Alzheimer’s disease, Addiction, and Cardio-pulmonary diseases.

One notes the lack of the terms “physician” or “medical doctor.” I was, however, interested in her claims of having worked for the pharmaceutical industry for so long, as well as her claiming to be a health economist; so I started doing some digging into her background. Why? Mainly, I was curious how someone with this claimed long background in big pharma could have turned so quickly into a major spreader of COVID-19 disinformation and conspiracy theories.

First, I was interested in Ruby’s publication record. Searching PubMed for someone with a name as common as hers always brings up the results of multiple investigators, and this was no exception. I got 186 results from my first search. So next, I looked at other sources. ResearchGate has an entry, and there are 23 publications. Of note, none of these publications appear to be relevant to pandemics, infectious disease, COVID-19, vaccines, or the like. Most were about opioids such as buprenorphine and healthcare costs associated with treating opioid dependence. Certainly, none were about clinical trials of “groundbreaking drugs,” leading me to conclude that if Dr. Ruby did indeed do such work, it isn’t reflected in her PubMed record.

A CV posted to SignalHire lists her as being the CEO of Ruby Health Consulting, doing HEOR (health economics and outcomes research), with an employment record that looks like this:

  • President at Ruby Health Consulting – HEOR, Jan 2018 – Current 
  • Director, HEOR at SK Life Science, Inc. (Paramus, New Jersey, United States) Jan 2020 – Jan 2021
  • Associate Director, Field Medical / HEOR at Pear Therapeutics (Boston, Massachusetts, United States) Jan 2019 – Jan 2020
  • HEOR National Lead at Endo Pharmaceuticals (Ballsbridge, County Dublin, Ireland) Jan 2017 – Dec 2019
  • Medical Affairs / HEOR Lead at Indivior  (Richmond, VA, United States) Jan 2010 – Jan 2017
  • Sr Medical Science Liaison / Managed Care MSL at Forest Laboratories (now Allergan) Dec 2000 – Nov 2010
  • Director at Scharf Institute for Research and Tri-State Sleep Disorders CenterJan 1998 – Jan 2001
  • Assistant Professor / Researcher at Nazareth College (Rochester, ny, United States) Jan 1994 – Jan 1998
  • Nurse Practitioner at University of Rochester Medical Center (Rochester, NY, United States) Jan 1990 – Jan 1994
  • Registered Nurse at University of Rochester Medical Center (Rochester, NY, United States) Jan 1988 – Jan 1990

So Dr. Ruby appears to have worked at various times for other pharmaceutical companies in HEOR (health economics and outcomes research). I also discovered that before that she was a nurse and nurse practitioner/advanced practice nurse, not a physician, having gotten a masters in nursing at the University of Rochester. Now don’t get me wrong. I love NPs. I’ve defended them on many occasions against outlandish attacks by my fellow physicians. However, “Dr. Ruby” does not appear to have a doctorate even in nursing. What she does have are a PhD in psychology from Kennedy Western University in Psychology and a Doctor of Education (EdD) from the University of Rochester, as well as masters degrees in nursing and International Health Economics. One can’t help but conclude that Dr. Ruby is definitely trying to give the impression that she is a physician, complete with her frequently appearing with a stethoscope and lab coat. I’d be willing to bet that her audience thinks she’s a physician. She isn’t, and if her CV is any indication she hasn’t even practiced nursing for over 20 years.

These days, Dr. Ruby lists as her position President at Ruby Health Consulting – HEOR (again!), and, of course, she has her own show hosted on the Stew Peters Network, for which she made the video above. Just a perusal of this show, which is on Rumble, of course, shows that it’s a full-on right wing conspiracy and medical misinformation show. Don’t believe me? Just peruse the list of videos for yourself. Also, note how her sponsors include lots of companies marketing quackery and supplements, for example:

  • 30 Day Transformation:
  • (Promo Code: Ruby)
  • The Tower Garden:
  • (Promo Code: Ruby)
  • (Promo Code RUBY for 10% off and free shipping)
  • CardioMiracle:
  • Promo Code: Ruby
  • Become a Premium Member!
  • Natural Detox:
  • Earthing/Grounding:

Then, of course, she has her own “superfoods” line of products.

Again, one of the hallmarks of science denial is fake experts, often with credential inflation, and that’s what we have here. Not only does it appear that it’s been over two decades since Ruby has practiced nursing, advanced practice or otherwise, but there’s nothing that I’ve been able to find about Ruby’s history to suggest that she has any special expertise in the relevant fields of infectious disease, virology, molecular biology, epidemiology, immunology, or, well, any field relevant to commenting authoritatively on the safety and efficacy of vaccines other than—maybe, judging from her publication record—a bit of epidemiology in unrelated fields.

Her “credentials,” such as they are, do appear to be unfortunately more than adequate to provide a veneer of scientific expertise good enough to fool her audience. To boil it all down, “Dr.” Jane Ruby is an advanced practice nurse who has apparently not engaged in clinical practice for at least a couple of decades. She also has a background in health economics and has worked for a number of pharmaceutical companies in their HEOR departments, none of which qualifies her to pontificate on pandemics, vaccines, viruses, molecular biology, or anything related.

COVID-19 misinformation a-go-go!

Jane Ruby has made a name for herself as one of the go-to “medical professionals” providing a veneer of seeming scientific credibility to the most outlandish conspiracy theories. I already discussed her fear mongering about “moth DNA” and “moth cells” in the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine, complete with a joke about how Jeff Goldblum (star of the 1980s horror/SF movie The Fly) agrees that there should be no insect DNA or cells ever used for any vaccine whatsoever. However, it didn’t take me long to see that she had taken it all one step further a week ago:

Before I look at the question, I can’t resist commenting on how over-the-top Stew Peters is. Before he gets to this particular question, he goes on a rant about how the NIH should be torn down and everyone who had anything to do with the “shots” should be arrested and prosecuted, thus echoing a common antivax fantasy about “justice” (in reality, retribution only thinly disguised as “justice”) against their enemies, sometimes called “Nuremberg 2.0.) Of course, the funny thing is how both of them are so upset that Donald Trump is now “pushing the shots” and Peters gets even more upset when Ruby suggests that even Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is also pushing them, ranting that Trump and DeSantis should be calling the shots “fake.”

In response to the question about the vaccines supposedly “corrupting” human DNA, Ruby answers that “many experts” (more accurately if you’re a science-based person, fake experts) now believe that the human genome “is now poisoned” and that it’s “permanently changed” and will “probably change further.” She then observes:

What that means for future generations, I don’t know, but he discusses something called recombinant DNA, which is a process by which, you know, in life the gene pool is shuffled around so that we don’t have too much similarity. And so what he predicts is going to happen is for jabbed people, if they are lucky enough to procreate—unlucky for the rest of the world—they are sending offspring into the world that may be silent in terms of manifestations, illnesses, death for a generation, but they will pass it on, and it will keep going on and on and on and on. So that’s the diabolical nature of this whole thing.

How convenient! These “permanent changes” in your DNA will be silent for a generation and only manifest themselves a generation on. It’s a lovely seemingly non-falsifiable claim, on the surface, that allows someone like Jane Ruby to dismiss observations that there is no evidence of long term harm from the vaccines by saying that we won’t see it until the next generation. Of course, the claim really is falsifiable, both from a basic science standpoint in that there is no known biological mechanism for existing COVID-19 vaccines to do this, no matter how much antivaxxers try to make one up (as anyone with even a basic understanding of molecular biology knows), as well as from scientific observations that they don’t do this.

Just the other day, Ruby was featured revisiting the claim that COVID-19 vaccines cause clots by introducing “self-assembling nanoparticles” into your body, claiming that they had discovered the makeup of the clots:

Unsurprisingly, she had teamed up with Mike Adams himself to spread this “news” a few days before. Hilariously, she cited new “structures” observed in these clots removed from people who had, according to her, died from COVID-19 vaccines, and…well, let me just let Mike Adams describe it:

Ruby, also a pharmaceutical drug development expert, showed the audience one of Hirschman’s latest discoveries – a white fibrous clot with chunky ball sacs. She pointed out that they may have grown intermittently and are almost like outgrowths of the original white fibrous clot.

Hirschman said the chunky ball sacs, which were all from vaccinated individuals, reminded him of spider eggs covered by spider web.

“And you can see that white fibrous stuff kind of marbling into that little ball, which kind of looks like a small grape. But the thing is, even in the beginning a lot of times I noticed that one end or the other would be some blood attached to the white fibers clot that I’m having. And then other times it’s kind of running along the white fiber material as well,” Hirschman said.

Ruby mentioned that a 1,500 times magnification of the blood clots have shown things that are part of the self-assembling nanoparticles. She noted that Brighteon.TV founder Mike Adams said initial analysis showed the white clots are not organic material, protein, amyloid, fibrin or cholesterol. Hirschman also confirmed that the strange white stuff in the blood clots is not normal.

Again, note the fake expert citation. Whatever she is, “Dr.” Jane Ruby is not a “pharmaceutical drug development expert.” She’s a health economist who did HEOR. She’s already made it abundantly clear that she has no clue what she’s talking about when it comes to COVID-19 vaccines, blood clots, biology, or pretty much everything else that she says about pharma, the pandemic, and vaccines. Again, we’ve met Hirschman before with Ruby in the context of Mike Adams’ incompetent examination of postmortem blood clots under the microscope. You can see the pictures there.

I was particularly amused by the use of the phrase “chunky ball sacs” by Hirschman and Ruby. Yes, I admit to a bit of an adolescent amusement at such a phrase, but as an older man now I was even more amused at how they invoked the imagery of spider eggs in order to provoke fear, as if those structures were actually eggs of some sort ready to hatch the evil self-assembling nanoparticles. I also couldn’t help but notice a mention of how a “radiologist from Michigan told him that the micro clots are very concerning because they can flow through the body and block out vessels and slowly starve the organs from getting the nutrients that they need.” I’m in Michigan. I want to know who that radiologist is, so that I can avoid him or her like the plague.

As for who did the “chemical analysis” of these clots? It was Mike Adams, who reported it last week. Remember how I made fun of Mike Adams years ago for using mass spectrometry to look for heavy metals in vaccines and lead in Flint water? He’s at it again, this time with the clots he got from Hirschman. Never mind that mass spectroscopy of biological compounds with proteins, lipids, and other complex biological molecules is a difficult undertaking, even for experts in mass spectrometry. That never stopped our intrepid Mike Adams before! In the video above, Ruby goes on about how these clots are “not part of blood,” which makes me wonder if she ever studied the clotting cascade in nursing school. She and Adams assume that clots are mostly made of blood and are seemingly amazed to discover that they are not, pointing to that as evidence that these clots are somehow unnatural, even though clots are mostly protein.

Reading Adams’s article on it all just made me laugh out loud, for instance:

It’s clear from the elemental composition that the clots are not made of blood. Thus, they are not “blood clots.” For example, in our human blood sample, magnesium (Mg) was at 35 ppm, while in the clot, magnesium was only 1.7 ppm.

Similarly, in human blood, iron (Fe) was measured at 462 ppm while it was 20.6 ppm in the clot.

That last part about iron caught my attention. Again, clots are mostly proteins and platelets (which do not contain hemoglobin and its bound iron), not “blood.” So it’s not surprising that the concentration of iron would be a lot lower in them than in blood. Adams goes on and on about how various minerals are found in the clots at different concentrations and then concludes:

In summary, it is clear that:
  • The clots are NOT blood clots.
  • They are self-assembling. They get larger in the body and add to their aggregate size. This does not mean they are “alive,” and we doubt they have their own organs. They do not appear to be parasites. Rather, they self-assemble through some unknown mechanism.
  • They are not made of human flesh or tissues that reflect the elemental ratios of macro minerals and trace minerals that we would expect to see in human tissue.
  • They seem to harvest electrically conductive elements from circulating blood and incorporate these elements into their own biostructures, resulting in higher concentrations of these elements (Al, Sn, Na) compared to human blood.
We are all still trying to make sense of this, as this is nothing like we’ve ever seen before, and we’ve analyzed tens of thousands of food samples over the years, including flesh-based foods (dog food, cat food) and meat products such as chicken, beef and pork. We have also analyzed thousands of human hair samples. We’ve never encountered this before.

Adams promised a full PDF report on his results this week, but I haven’t been able to find it on his website yet. I might well have to look at that when he posts it and get back to you with a followup post.

In the meantime, Ruby claims that “shedding” from the vaccines is causing all manner of horrors in a truly amusing word salad:

Those who’ve taken the jab are given a genetic code that forces their body to make billions of spike proteins. It is what we believe is the residual off of what their bodies are producing, these spike proteins, that are jumping from people, are transferring from jabbed to the unjabbed. Therefore, it’s the genetic code that is interfering with your own code and turning off your tumor suppression activity. The unjabbed don’t get that material. They only get the offshoot of what their bodies are forced to make. At this point until I see something different in terms of a research study that’s highly controlled that can tell us differently, I don’t believe that we are at risk for the same.

She’s referring to the “unjabbed” getting cancer from shed spike proteins from the “jabbed.” She also wouldn’t know a highly controlled study if it bit her on the posterior, and shedding of spike protein from the vaccinated is just not a thing.

I did like this final question:

Dr. Jane Ruby and the end of the world
A reader asks Dr. Ruby!

Her response:

Only if you allow it. I’m fighting, like Dr. Zelenko said, to my last breath. I’d rather die standing than live on my knees, as he said. So only if you allow it, and I think Stew’s going to have something interesting to add to that.

It wasn’t that interesting. He said that there is hope, to which Ruby added because of God, because of course she did. They both agreed that they’re “fighting for humanity” and “fighting for our kids” as well as “your kids” and “our grandkids.”

The bottom line is that “Dr. Jane Ruby” is not a physician. She is not really a scientist that I can tell. She is highly educated, having earned multiple advanced degrees in education, economics, and nursing. Indeed, she’s more educated than a lot of the physicians that she cosplays. Unfortunately, however, like many physicians (and nurses as well), somewhere along the way she turned full crank, a turn that clearly dates back to years before the pandemic. She’s antivax to the core, as you can see from some of her Instagram pictures:

Then there are the obligatory references to the Holocaust:

Yes, she borrows the abuse of the Yellow Star of David by antivaxxers.

Basically, to boil it down, “Dr. Jane Ruby” is a fake expert, a conspiracy theorist who has bought into the whole right wing conspiracy ecosystem about the pandemic, masks, “lockdowns,” and vaccines. I realize that some might consider it the proverbial “shooting fish in a barrel,” to discuss her disinformation. (Or—dare I say?—dunking on a 7′ hoop.) However, if there’s anything the last few years has taught us, it’s that those who do not take even the seemingly ridiculous seriously can fall prey to these conspiracy theories.

By Orac

Orac is the nom de blog of a humble surgeon/scientist who has an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone, somewhere might actually give a rodent's posterior about his copious verbal meanderings, but just barely small enough to admit to himself that few probably will. That surgeon is otherwise known as David Gorski.

That this particular surgeon has chosen his nom de blog based on a rather cranky and arrogant computer shaped like a clear box of blinking lights that he originally encountered when he became a fan of a 35 year old British SF television show whose special effects were renowned for their BBC/Doctor Who-style low budget look, but whose stories nonetheless resulted in some of the best, most innovative science fiction ever televised, should tell you nearly all that you need to know about Orac. (That, and the length of the preceding sentence.)

DISCLAIMER:: The various written meanderings here are the opinions of Orac and Orac alone, written on his own time. They should never be construed as representing the opinions of any other person or entity, especially Orac's cancer center, department of surgery, medical school, or university. Also note that Orac is nonpartisan; he is more than willing to criticize the statements of anyone, regardless of of political leanings, if that anyone advocates pseudoscience or quackery. Finally, medical commentary is not to be construed in any way as medical advice.

To contact Orac: [email protected]

32 replies on “Jane Ruby: The Mike Adams of nursing and health economics”

What on earth are Murican regulators up to?

At least one nurse over here (UK) has been removed from the nursing register by the NMC for spouting anti-vax and other Covid-related nonsense…

Are your professional regulators really tha toothless?

Also: please fill in my usual rant about the poor quality of nurse education when it comes to critical thinking, under standing scientific method, process and statistics, ability to read or conduct research and all the rest.

I am so glad I went to the trouble of getting a science degree before I did my nurse training…


Have you noticed our esteemed anti vax nurse has been, well, silent of late. I do believe though that she was a nurse for a very short time.

My guess is that she let her nursing license lapse, although to be honest I didn’t try to check one way or another. (If you aren’t going to practice nursing—or medicine—you don’t need to maintain a license, which can be expensive between the renewal fees and the costs of maintaining continuing education.) If you’re not licensed, then there’s nothing the state can do if you spew misinformation.

Come to think of it, sadly, even if you are licensed, it’s pretty unlikely that the state will do anything about it when you spew dangerous misinformation either.

Unmasked, unmuzzled, unvaccinated, unafraid. Unfortunately there have been many unafraid unvaccinated followers of Dr Jane Booby, sorry, I mean Ruby wearing that t shirt that needs another word added……that being ‘dead’…..from a preventable disease called covid 19.

She is just a despicable liar.

If you’re dead, I don’t think you will be wearing that T-shirt.

“Unmasked, unmuzzled, unvaccinated, unafraid”
And you could add, suffering from long-covid. Or was in IC for several weeks, and needed a lot of care afterwards.

Well, in that profile pic from FB, which appears to have given a good Photoshopping, the stethoscope and her hands are carefully posed to call attention to her cleavage. Goosed-up cheesecake imagery is one of the things I always look for in a medical science expert (/s).

If you tap one of those ‘view more on Instagram’ links, a little pop-up appears showing a PR photo of a smiling Dr. Ruby with a smiling Mike Lindell. Friends in high places…

My first thought, as well: “Looks like a stripper playing doctor.”

Echoes of the “researcher” from the discovery institute who got caught being interviewed with a green screen lab behind her. I’ve forgotten her name, but she does not have a lab, and the lab image they used was found by skeptical sleuths somewhere on the interwebs. Anyhoo, most medical professionals don’t pose for photos as they would for a fashion magazine. Most also don’t blackmail you emotionally by accusing you of killing your child by getting them vaccinated.

Then, of course, she has her own “superfoods” line of products.

I was going to respond with this being a requirement among the ant-pharma nutbaggers. However, it turns out to be just a sign up page. I used an alternative e-mail to sign up, got to the end and realised this was just a vehicle for spamming (of course) and I would not learn anything about Jane Ruby’s line of superfoods – which seem most likely to be someone else’s. Afterwards, I realised I had made a typo in the email address, so Jane Ruby is going to be spamming the aether.

Having looked around, Jane Ruby may have come into anti-vaccine nonsense from her political affiliations. She wrote a book, about of all things the media, self published in 2017 where the blurb describes her as New Right political pundit. Another blurb elsewhere from about the same period describes her in addition to being a New Right political pundit, as a Washington TV personality. That claim is stretching it a little. She had a political show called Dr Jane’s DC on The Exceptional Conservative Network and a lightweight celebrity gossip show.

I could just point you to her full biography at

On the topic of far right medical personalities, Dr Simone Gold as she headed off to serve her 60 days in prison is now claiming she was just at the Capitol doing nothing much (probably sightseeing?) when the crowd pushed her into the building. Sadly for Simone, a lot of video footage exists of her actions on the day.

I notice on her politichicks site that she says Covid is real, but the NWO globalist freaks democrats are using it to discredit Trump and divide society etc etc etc.

re the ‘jab pic’

Anti-vaxxers may feel guilty that they themselves took the child for vaccines and thus are complicit in the “crime” thus their leaders may be playing into that guilt. Parents like these may feel it’s necessary to double down on hateful speech to deflect from their own ‘assistance’. A few days ago ( AoA**) , the infamous Katie Wright discussed her severe depression after her son’s dx ( also she just had had another baby but she doesn’t make any connection as to the possibility of PPD) so extreme that she couldn’t eat. They may need to blame someone for the “destruction” of their child so I suppose it’s the evil doctors and PH who tricked them.

re Mike Adams

Of late, he’s completely off the rails, carrying on about his lab, Ukrainian Nazis, Ruby and other clap trap.
I have a theory about his and Null’s vehement tirades that occasionally go to 11 ( or 12):
whenever there is general economic bad news ( a possible recession? inflation? increased interest rates?), they raise the volume and spew hatred for the establishment, banks, corporations. I wonder if economic downturns affect their sales? ( As an example, I got low priced airfare in February for August)] and noticed that tickets for similar flights took off as the economy looked better but recently have descended rapidly – easy to check at the airline’s reservation site). Are people cancelling due to money woes?
Whenever the economy looks bad, these guys rant and rave. Probably so afraid of not earning vast profits. -btw- they’re rich as fuck anyway and live on vast estates/ ranches

** AoA has been quite dark except for another serialised retread of Adriana Gamondes’ opera , complete with “art work” .

I suspect that any nursing board regulatory action against Ruby has been forestalled at least in part by the length of time she’s been out of nursing, assuming she’s still licensed.

Perhaps U.K. medical regulators have been reluctant to go after Dr. Tess Lawrie for a similar reason. Lawrie is a well-known advocate of ivermectin for Covid-19 and has spread misinformation about Covid-19 vaccination. From the BBC:

“Dr Tess Lawrie – a medical doctor who specialises in pregnancy and childbirth – founded the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (Bird) Group.
She has called for a pause to the Covid-19 vaccination programme and has made unsubstantiated claims implying the Covid vaccine had led to a large number of deaths based on a common misreading of safety data.
When asked during an online panel what evidence might persuade her ivermectin didn’t work she replied: “Ivermectin works. There’s nothing that will persuade me.” She told the BBC: “The only issues with the evidence base are the relentless efforts to undermine it.”

Lawrie currently runs an “evidence-based medical consultancy”.

Then there’s U.K. physician Eunice Munford, who bills herself as the “The Soulful Doctor”, combining medicine with “Ageless Wisdom/Esoteric Philosophy & Healing to promote health and harmony”. She’s active on Twitter, where she rails against BIg Pharma (curious since she’s also been involved with Lawrie’s pro-ivermectin BIRD group), and posts anti-Covid-19 vaccination claptrap.

I can’t find any records of action by the British Medical Council against these or other U.K.-based Covid “contrarians”. What on earth are Brit regulators up to? 😉

*as of early this year, eight U.S. physicians had been sanctioned by their medical boards in connection with promoting Covid-19 misinformation. It’s a start…

Yup, the BMC are frequently very tardy and I don’t know the wording of some of their rules.

The nursing ones I know of were done under such phrasing as bringing the profession into disrepute.

Overall, I don’t think our regulators are as good as they should be, although a lot of regulations were written before anti-vax views and the like became so mainstream – think, what did for Wakefield was the research fraud rather than his nonsensical, unevidenced views.

An overhaul is a good idea to reflect current situations.

Ex NHS nurse, Kate Shemirani was first warned and then stripped of her licence in 2020, even her own son informed the media that his mum is a crackpot. But, indeed, it took some time before action. Now, we hear nothing from her, her 15 minutes of fame has been and gone.

I’m fighting, like Dr. Zelenko said, to my last breath.

I have to wonder whether the late Dr. Zelenko regretted getting mixed up with these assholes.

I wonder how she will feel when she learns that about 8% of human DNA is, if I understand correctly, derived from viruses, and that that has been true for a long time, given her concern about that.

I expect she will blame modern vaccines, possible through the use of a TARDIS.

I recently read somewhere that humans share a certain (smallish) amount of DNA with bananas.

Obviously proof of intelligent design. /s

Apparently we humans share 99% of our DNA with Bonobo chimpanzees…..umm, chimps and bananas!

Comparing genomes over large evolutionary distances gets complicated fast. Better to think of it this way: humans and banana trees share a common ancestor which lived around 1.4 billion years ago. Surf over to to find divergence times for your favorite species.

“Stew Peters” show = Rationalists pronounce this as: “The Stupiders” show.

I don’t have much commentary on the crazy stuff from Doc Ruby, but I did have a couple commentary/questions that are more reasonable.

In Wisconsin, I have been keeping track of the Wisconsin DHS data on Covid and something came to light in the recent months:

Most age ranges that have taken the primary vaccination for covid PLUS boosters have a heighted rate of new case (covid) reporting compared to UNvaccinated. ( I did the basic math and it is roughly 1.4:1 depending on the age range, and only in the over 65+ age ranges did it even out)

For those of you in other States, is this also a trend that you are seeing? (I checked WA and they only reported the primary series vs. unvacc.)

It’s strange, because if you only received primary dose, then you are at a lower risk of contracting than the unvaccinated, but if BOOSTED, the rate/100,000 is demonstrably higher… for several months now.

I was mainly wondering if this is a trend in several (or ALL) States or if this is an anomaly? Could Anybody weigh in that follows their health dept data?

Also, wondering if this has been picked up on as a signal and studied more rigorously? I would assume that it would have to be validated from an observational standpoint before it would be looked at from a physiological (theoretical) position.

I am simply just looking at a table from my State’s department of Health Services…
But also, just observationally in my community, anybody that I have interacted with that has Covid NOW, has gone through the whole vaccination regimen.

I was trying to think skeptically about this observation and I was thinking that those who would get vaccine and boosters would typically be more prone to be tested vs. those that are unvaccinated, which made me think that the tabular data that I am seeing is an artifact of behavior?

Would it be mis(dis)information as a PCP to promote Boosting in Wisconsin (depending on age group) since the observational data (very rudimentary) shows a higher risk of contracting and therefore spreading Covid? There always seems to be a discussion about misinformation from qualified health professionals, so I was wondering how that works when the data set becomes more clear during a pandemic, but not wholly validated by academia?

Just some thoughts

We need more respectful insolence. There is way too much quackery in this multiverse of madness we’re currently inhabiting.

Comments are closed.


Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading