Well, FDA's Dr. Peter Marks has outdone himself & is now the 23rd Horseman of the COVID Apocalypse; I did not think he was list calibre but he forced himself pushing the XBB.1.5 omicron

booster onto the US population, so now we are at 23 and while I thought Ashish Jha is a worthy contender as a Horseman, he is just plain dumb & he WILL get the inaugural JACKASS award this week!

The now 23 Horsemen are:

Marks

Karikó

Hotez

Sahin

Gates

Woodcock

Bourla

Malone

Bancel

Offit

Xavier Becerra (HHS’s new head)

Weissman

Fauci

Birx

Azar

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (WHO)

Walensky

Baric

Hahn

Francis Collins

Mark Zuckerburg

Jack Dorsey

Daszak

This is a prior substack where the list was at 22 Horsemen of the COVID Apocalypse:

I will embed Mark’s remarks below and try to explain in my words:

Marks:

"Vaccination remains critical to public health and continued protection against serious consequences of COVID-19, including hospitalization and death," said Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, in a statement. "The public can be assured that these updated vaccines have met the agency's rigorous scientific standards for safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality. We very much encourage those who are eligible to consider getting vaccinated."

My take:

Statement 1: Vaccination remains critical to public health and continued protection against serious consequences of COVID-19, including hospitalization and death,

Marks knows there is no randomized clinical study, not one, in adults or children, as well as real world evidence, that shows the COVID vaccine protects against severe outcomes, hospitilization, or death. There is no such data or evidence. He knows it.

Statement 2: The public can be assured that these updated vaccines have met the agency's rigorous scientific standards for safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality.

Marks knows he is deceiving the public and essentially lying here. What rigorous scientific standards? How long was the study? weeks? And based on mice. Not on human data and it is rigorous and robust? Based on antibody levels that is not indicative of an immune response that is patient important like infection, hospitilization, death, ICU etc.

Statement 3: We very much encourage those who are eligible to consider getting vaccinated."

Why would Marks encourage people to get the shot when the body of evidence shows that it is ineffective, already a mismatch to the dominant variant and thus will cause viral immune escape and drive more sub-variants to emerge. Marks knows that there is negative effectiveness and that data is clear that the more boosters, the more the vaccinated gets infected and re-infected.

What he is doing here is wrong for there is no evidence that these boosters (XBB.1.5) are needed especially when it will not ‘hit’ the circulating variants. Moreover, the present variant is very mild and there is no evidence that it is lethal or more lethal than prior variants. In addition, the COVID ‘emergency’ was ended by Biden INC on May 11th. Thus why the EUA for booster? What is the basis, the medical or clinical or public health justification?