Summary of the Proceedings and Japanese translation …

Part 1

パート1

Dr. Iwamoto raises concerns that Japan’s five‑year retention rule for medical and vaccination records is too short, especially compared with many EU countries that keep records 20+ years, and warns that short retention will make future safety verification of COVID‑19 and mRNA vaccines impossible. She calls for:
(1) a firm legal guarantee that COVID‑19 vaccination records will be preserved beyond 2026 and centralized in a national database, and
(2) extending electronic medical‑record retention to at least 20 years.

岩本医師は、日本の医療・ワクチン記録の保存期間5年というルールは短すぎると強く懸念し、記録が20年以上保存されるEU諸国などと比較しても見劣りすると訴えている。短期間しか保存されないことで、COVID-19やmRNAワクチンの将来的な安全性検証が不可能になると警鐘を鳴らし、（1）2026年以降も新型コロナワクチン接種記録を法的に確実に保存し、国のデータベースに集約すること、（2）電子カルテ等の医療記録の保存期間を少なくとも20年以上に延長すること、を求めている。

The Ministry’s response — The current rule is 5‑year retention by local governments, expiring February 2026. The ministry says a council has agreed to transfer these records into a national vaccination database planned to start June 2026, extend preservation by about one year, and require local governments to specially preserve any records that would otherwise expire before the database goes live so that all are transferred. The minister acknowledges there may be benefits to longer retention but stresses that medical records are sensitive personal information, with risks of data leaks and increased storage burdens on medical institutions. Therefore, any extension of the 5‑year retention rule must be “carefully considered” going forward, taking into account the spread and use of electronic medical records, rather than being immediately extended to 20+ years.

厚労省の回答――現在の保存ルールは自治体ごとに5年で、2026年2月に期限が来る。今後は専門会議の合意により、これらの記録は2026年6月から国のワクチン接種データベースに移管し、保存期間をさらに約1年延長。データベース稼働前に保存期限を迎える記録も特例で自治体に保存させ、すべて移管できるよう対応するという。大臣は記録を長期保存することのメリットを認めつつ、医療記録は極めて機微な個人情報であり、情報漏洩リスクや医療機関への保管負担増加も課題として挙げ、現行5年ルールをすぐに20年以上に伸ばすのではなく、電子化の進展や実態も考慮し「慎重に検討していく必要がある」と強調した。

Part 2

パート2

Dr. Iwamoto then raises concerns about medium- to long‑term safety signals for mRNA vaccines and the large number of cases recognized under the vaccine‑injury relief system, and urges pausing or reconsidering mRNA COVID‑19 vaccination until more thorough safety re‑evaluation is completed.

岩本医師は、mRNAワクチンに関して中長期的な安全性シグナルが報告されていることや、ワクチン副反応救済制度で認定された事例が多いことに危機感を示し、十分な安全性再評価が終わるまでmRNA型コロナワクチンの使用中止や再検討を求めている。

The Ministry’s response — The Ministry states that safety is evaluated at approval and during routine use, and that a council reviews suspected adverse events reported by medical institutions. It claims that, based on a comprehensive review including published studies, it has concluded there are currently “no serious safety concerns.” It also says it is continuing to collect and organize information (including about spike protein, etc.) and will consult experts before any further decisions.

厚労省の回答――ワクチンの安全性については、承認時や定期的な積極的監視のほか、医療機関等から報告された疑い事例も専門家会議で評価している。公表論文なども含めた総合的な検討の結果、「現時点で重大な安全上の懸念は認められていない」としている。また、スパイクタンパク等に関する情報も引き続き収集整理し、必要時には専門家の意見も踏まえて対応していく方針。

Part 3

パート3

Dr. Iwamoto then criticizes the focus on “95% effectiveness” based on relative risk without clearly explaining low absolute risk and NNT (Number Needed for Treatment rate of treating 120 subjects to prevent 1 case), particularly for healthy younger people, and questions why the government has not communicated absolute risk more transparently.

岩本医師は、「有効性95%」とされる数値が相対リスクだけで語られ、絶対リスクやNNT（治療必要数/120人接種で1件防止）などが説明されないまま、特に健康な若年層に対しても政府が絶対リスクを十分伝えてこなかったことを批判し、その根拠を問うている。

The Ministry’s Response — The Ministry argues that absolute risks are hard to compare across studies because infection incidence changes by time/place, whereas relative risk is less affected by epidemic conditions and is the standard index used by regulators worldwide and referenced in WHO guidelines. Japan uses relative‑risk measures in approval reviews, and these are what appear in package inserts; it does not concede that focusing on relative risk is misleading, but presents it as international best practice.

厚労省の回答――絶対リスクは感染状況や調査時期・場所により大きく変動するため各研究間で比較が難しい一方、相対リスクは流行状況の影響を受けにくくWHOのガイドラインや各国規制当局でも標準的な効果指標とされ、日本も審査過程や添付文書で相対リスクを用いている。「相対リスク強調＝誤解を招く」とは考えておらず、国際的標準だと説明した。

Part 4

パート4

Dr Iwamoto then condemns the burdensome, paper‑heavy vaccine‑injury relief process, long delays in compensation, pushing for digital applications and data linkage as a form of secondary harm.

岩本医師は、副反応救済申請手続きの紙の多さ・煩雑さや、補償までの長期遅延などを「二次被害」とまで批判し、電子申請やデータ連携の抜本改革を訴えている。

The Ministry’s Response … The ministry says detailed documentation is needed because it must evaluate causality between vaccination and claimed harm in each case using medical and scientific criteria, which inevitably takes time. It reports that it has increased the number and frequency of review committees, reduced some documentation requirements (e.g., for anaphylaxis), and as a result cut the backlog of unprocessed cases more recently. It portrays the situation as “gradually improving” and says it will continue taking steps so that applicants do not feel an excessive burden, but does not commit to the structural digital reforms or timelines that Dr. Iwamoto requests.

厚労省の回答――接種と健康被害の因果関係を医学的・科学的に個別検証するには、どうしても詳細な書類が必要になるため一定の時間がかかるとしている。審査会の増員や開催頻度の拡大、アナフィラキシーなど一部で書類軽減措置も取り、未処理案件の滞留は以前より大幅に減少したと説明。「改善は進んでいる」としつつ、デジタル化の抜本改革や具体的な時期には言及せず、「今後も不必要な負担感が残らないよう努力する」と述べた。

Cleaned up translation of proceedings in real-time, and transcription …


0:00 — Dr. Mana Iwamoto:

Let’s move on to the next question. This is about verification. As someone who has received the vaccine myself and has also administered it to patients, I would like to ask a question about the need to examine the coronavirus vaccine.

First, I would like to ask about the institutions that store medical records. In the case of serious crimes such as murder, the statute of limitations has been abolished in light of advances in scientific investigation such as DNA testing, and evidence is preserved for long periods so the truth can be clarified and re‑examined at any time.

By contrast, medical data directly related to life – medical records and vaccination records – can in principle still be discarded after five years, and I have strong doubts as to whether that is appropriate. Regarding records of coronavirus vaccination, it was decided at the expert committee meeting on July 2 and at the ministerial press conference on October 10 that administration records would be retained for up to five years after death. Indicating a direction such as revising the law by February 2026 and transferring data held by local governments to a national database is, in my view, a step forward.

However, two major problems remain. First, even if vaccination records are kept long term, if medical records are discarded after five years, then the medical evidence – including onset, testing, and treatment after vaccination – cannot be fully examined. Second, a five‑year retention period is extremely short even by international standards. In many EU countries, adult medical records must be stored for more than 20 years, and some countries essentially require high‑level long‑term storage of electronic medical records.

Our party, which calls for verification of vaccines, is preparing to submit a bill requiring verification of the development of mRNA vaccines. But if medical records and related data are lost in five years, then even if future generations attempt full‑scale verification, the original data will no longer exist. So I have questions.

First, regarding vaccination records: for the special temporary COVID‑19 vaccination records from February 2021 onward, can the Minister firmly commit that the legal revision will be completed by February 2026, five years from then, and that there will be no circumstances in which records subject to a retention requirement are lost? I would also like to ask about medical records.

Regarding the five‑year minimum retention requirement for medical records under the Medical Care Act, in light of the need to align with international standards and to track the long‑term effects of medical procedures, including vaccination, could you consider revising it so that electronic medical records must in principle be retained for at least 20 years, aiming for high‑level storage? I would appreciate your response.

2:55 — Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare Ueno:

Regarding records related to the special temporary vaccinations in response to the COVID‑19 pandemic, under current rules each local government keeps them for five years, with the retention period expiring in February 2026. In this context, handling of these special vaccination records was discussed at the council meeting held this morning. To enable use of this information for future national research and investigations as needed, it was agreed to store the information in a vaccination database scheduled to begin operation in June 2026, and to extend preservation by about one year.

Because some records’ original retention periods will expire before the database goes live, special arrangements will be made so that local governments preserve them and all records are properly transferred into the database; approval has been obtained for this policy.

There was also a question about medical records. For institutions that store so‑called medical records, relevant laws and regulations stipulate a five‑year retention period, with penalties attached. As for extending medical‑record retention in general, there may be benefits to longer storage, but on the other hand, because this is highly sensitive personal information, there is a risk of data leaks, and longer retention also increases the burden on medical institutions in terms of data volume. Taking these points into account, this will require careful consideration going forward, including in light of the spread of electronic medical records.

4:40 — Dr. Mana Iwamoto:

Yes. First, we strongly request that the retention rules be reviewed as soon as possible so they are compatible with electronic records and with international standards.

Next, I would like to ask about the safety‑assessment framework for mRNA and the future positioning of mRNA technology.

Regarding mRNA vaccines, multiple signals raising concern about medium‑ to long‑term safety have been reported domestically and internationally. These include the possibility that spike protein and other components may persist for a long time and distribute widely in the body, causing inflammation; reductions in immune responses, including IgG4 class‑switching; effects on immune function and regulation and on key immune‑surveillance mechanisms; and possible impacts on cancer incidence and on hyperlipidemia.

In Italy, South Korea and other countries, observational studies and registry analyses using large‑scale data are underway; although evidence quality and methodology may not always be sufficient, there are findings that call for serious statistical verification. In Japan, as of November 7 this year, 9,343 cases have been recognized under the vaccine health‑damage relief system, including multiple fatal cases. It is only natural from a public‑health ethics standpoint to regard these as important safety signals that must be examined seriously.

Since the Thalidomide and SMON drug disasters, decades have passed since vows were made to learn from hundreds of victims. Yet reports of deaths after COVID‑19 vaccination have already exceeded 2,000, and there are said to be many more people whose lives have been devastated by post‑vaccination health problems. Despite this, the government has repeatedly stated there are “no serious safety concerns at present.” If there are truly no serious concerns, then there should be some quantitative premise as to what level of fatalities and severe cases is expected.

In light of this, the current use of mRNA COVID‑19 vaccines should at least be reconsidered and refrained from until mid‑term safety evaluations and a re‑examination of the risk–benefit balance are carried out. At present, there are moves to rapidly expand mRNA technology to other routinely administered vaccines, such as influenza and other infectious‑disease vaccines, and to therapies. However, from the standpoint of health and medical security, at a stage when comprehensive examination of the existing COVID‑19 vaccines is still insufficient, priority expansion of the platform should be approached with extreme caution.

So I have another question. While respecting the research by academics and private developers on the mRNA platform itself, before expanding mRNA vaccines and therapeutics, which have not yet been fully verified, to other routinely administered products, should we not first compile a concise summary of the verified benefits and medium‑ to long‑term effects of the current COVID‑19 vaccines, and then conduct a review and evaluation that is more cautious than usual, premised on ensuring safety? What is your view?

8:15 — Minister Ueno:

Regarding the safety of COVID‑19 vaccines, including mRNA vaccines, in addition to evaluations at the time of approval and during routine use, a council evaluates suspected adverse events reported by medical institutions and others. Based on a comprehensive review that also includes scientific publications suggesting safety, it has been concluded that there are no serious safety concerns.

At the same time, information on safety continues to be collected and examined. For example, concerning residual spike protein and other specific issues, various opinions are being gathered from the standpoint of evaluating vaccine safety, regardless of whether serious defects occur. After hearing from experts, the matter will be considered; currently, the necessary information is being collected and organized. Going forward, efforts will continue to accumulate scientific findings, and after expert review, the safety of the vaccines will be appropriately assessed.

9:20 — Dr. Mana Iwamoto:

Yes. I very much hope that the obvious sequence will be restored: ensuring safety first, before expansion. Next, I would like to ask about the risk–benefit assessment regarding the effectiveness and safety of vaccines.

This concerns the 95% effectiveness figure that was initially widely publicized. That figure emphasizes relative risk reduction, whereas the absolute risk difference between the vaccine and placebo groups was under 1%. For example, according to the Pfizer package insert: in the vaccine group, 8 of 18,198 participants developed COVID‑19; in the placebo group, 162 of 18,325 did. Put another way, among 10,000 people, about 88 unvaccinated would develop disease compared to about 4 vaccinated, a difference of 84 per 10,000. Turning this around, roughly 120 people must be vaccinated to prevent one case – what is called the NNT (number needed to treat).

Unlike highly contagious diseases such as measles, where nearly everyone gets sick without vaccination, the absolute risk level with COVID‑19 at that time was fundamentally different, and this must be recognized. There is even a lawsuit in the United States arguing that advertising only relative risk reduction without absolute risk is misleading. Statistically, for healthy younger people with low risk of severe disease, the benefit levels are very limited, yet there are young people who have suffered grave harm or died after vaccination.

Why has the government emphasized only relative risk in its explanations of effectiveness until now, without conveying absolute risk to the public?

11:48 — Health Ministry official Miyamoto:

Regarding absolute risk, because infection incidence varies by time and place depending on the epidemic situation, it is difficult to directly compare absolute‑risk figures across studies. By contrast, relative‑risk measures are less affected by such differences and are widely used internationally as an index to evaluate vaccine effectiveness. WHO guidelines also recognize relative risk as one method of evaluating vaccine effect, and it is commonly used by regulators worldwide. In Japan as well, relative‑risk indices are used in approval reviews and presented in documents such as package inserts.

12:48 — Dr. Mana Iwamoto:

Even so, it is the government’s responsibility to provide numerical information that allows healthcare professionals and the public to properly weigh risks and benefits.

Next, I would like to ask about the documentation required for victim‑relief procedures. Many vaccine‑injured people have not yet received sufficient compensation; they have lost jobs and livelihoods and are suffering for long periods. Among people close to me, some can no longer work because of post‑vaccination disorders and their household finances are on the verge of collapse. Committee members here must also have received consultations from such people in their constituencies.

When the government was promoting vaccination, it mobilized its administrative capacity to roll out the program nationwide in a matter of weeks. The public knows that, if serious, the government can implement measures quickly across the country. Yet for relief applications, the paperwork is entirely on paper and extremely voluminous – in the worst cases from 100 to nearly 1,000 pages – and it often takes at least six months to a year from application to payment. Provisional support for those in financial distress barely functions. At this point, one can no longer deny that this constitutes a form of secondary harm of administrative origin.

The current paper‑based scheme with countless required documents places an excessive burden not only on victims but also on all parties involved, including treating institutions. Ideally, reforms such as full‑scale electronic applications and fundamental online linkage of medical records and test data should be implemented promptly. What is your current recognition of these issues?

14:50 — Director of the Infectious Disease Control Department, Health and Living Bureau:

Under the vaccine health‑damage relief system, it is necessary to evaluate causal relationships between vaccination and each individual case based on medical and scientific findings, so applicants are asked to submit relevant documents, and it is true that review takes time. The Ministry has tried to speed reviews by increasing the number of review committees and their meeting frequency, and by reducing documentation requirements in some categories (for example, waiving some documents for anaphylaxis cases).

As of June 2023, before these efforts, there were 4,483 unprocessed cases – about 56% of 8,064 applications. That number has since fallen to 855, about 6% of the 14,394 applications received, so the review process is gradually improving. The Ministry will continue taking necessary steps to ensure that applicants do not feel an excessive burden.

Chairman,

The time allotted to Dr. Mana Iwamoto has ended.

16:04 — Dr. Mana Iwamoto:

Please advance policies that truly value each irreplaceable human life among the victims. That concludes my questions.

My comment under the podcast … or rather former comment … was deleted by YouTube less than 24 hours after posting. At the height of this military operation, the Japanese government led the world in demanding Twitter remove Tweets questioning the official propaganda. So here is my comment again, along with a Japanese translation, which I again posted under the YouTube podcast.

私のポッドキャストへのコメント――正確には以前書いたコメント――は、投稿してから24時間も経たずにYouTubeに削除されました。軍事作戦の絶頂期には、日本政府がTwitterに対して公式プロパガンダに疑問を呈するツイートの削除を世界に先駆けて要求しました。

だからもう一度、私のコメント（そしてその日本語訳）をYouTubeのポッドキャスト下に投稿しました。

”Mainstream Western media and self-proclaimed influencers on social media are trying to portray the Sanseito party as “Far Right.”

欧米の主流メディアやSNS上の自称インフルエンサーたちは、参政党を「極右（Far Right）」として描こうとしている。

Regarding the ‘plandemic’, I think we should turn that label on its head and push forward with a slightly modified slogan: “Right, so far.”

この「プランデミック」に関しては、そのレッテルを逆手に取り、少しだけ言い回しを変えたスローガン――「Right, so far.（今のところ“正しい”だろう）」で押していくべきだと思う。

2:56 ... Damn it. The Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare is worried about storing potentially useful medical information too long because of threats to ‘personal privacy’? And yet the government is pushing for a permanent digital ‘My Number’? Does this mean that after 5 or 6 years, my digital ‘My Number’ information will be deleted ... to ‘protect my personal privacy’?

2:56 ……ちくしょう。厚生労働省は、「個人情報保護」への脅威を理由に、将来役に立つかもしれない医療情報を長く保管しすぎることを心配しているっていうのか？　それなのに政府は、デジタルのマイナンバーを恒久的なものにしようとしているのか？　ということは、5～6年経ったら、私のデジタル・マイナンバー情報も「個人情報保護」のために消されるのか？

The Ministry is clearly desperate to find a legal way to destroy evidence of scientific fraud, medical malfeasance, and legalized murder. ... similar to how Pfizer petitioned the FDA to be granted 75 years to not release its own vaccine research to the public.

厚労省は、科学的不正行為、医療上の過誤、そして合法化された殺人の証拠を合法的に破壊する方法を必死で探しているとしか思えない。まるでファイザーが自社のワクチン研究データを75年間も公開しなくて済むようにFDAに働きかけたのと同じ構図だ。

75 years? Also conveniently long enough so that those corrupt, predatory psychopaths responsible for so many deaths can live out the rest of their lives in luxury. Like Fauci.

75年？　それだけ長ければ、多くの死に責任のある腐敗した略奪的サイコパスどもが、残りの人生を贅沢に過ごすには都合が良すぎる。ファウチのようにな。

The Ministry is as corrupt as any in Europe or America. They should be strapped down and force-injected with the same gene-therapy treatments they are pushing on the public.

厚労省は、ヨーロッパやアメリカの官庁にも劣らず腐敗している。連中には、一般庶民に押し付けているのと同じ「遺伝子治療」を縛り付けて強制注射してやるべきだ。

8:45 ... Corrupt beyond redemption.

8:45 ……救いようがないほど腐敗している。

10:03 ... YES! A deliberate statistical conflation between ‘relative risk’ and ‘absolute risk’ was maliciously, deceptively used to trick people into believing in the safety and effectiveness of the gene-therapy treatments. Statistical p-hacking was also used to lie to the public along with bogus PCR tests.

10:03 ……そのとおりだ！　「相対リスク」と「絶対リスク」を意図的にごちゃまぜにした統計トリックが使われ、この“遺伝子治療”の安全性と有効性を信じ込ませるために人々をだましている。統計的な p-ハッキングとインチキなPCR検査も使われて、嘘がばらまかれた。

12:16 ... Damn it. Another corrupt mouthpiece. In showing his allegiance to the WHO, he is showing he does not represent the Japanese public, or people in general. He serves globalist predators.

12:16 ……ちくしょう。また腐敗した広報役だ。WHOへの忠誠心をこれ見よがしに示している時点で、彼は日本国民はもちろん、誰一人として代表していない。仕えているのはグローバリストの略奪者どもだ。

The risk shown in package inserts? The same inserts that were blank pieces of paper at the beginning of this military operation? Substack writers Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt provide plenty of documented evidence for this.

添付文書に書かれたリスク？　この「軍事作戦」の最初は真っ白な紙切れだった、あの添付文書か？　Substackのサーシャ・ラチポワとキャサリン・ワットは、これを裏づける証拠を豊富に提示している。

14:51 ... Yet another corrupt bureaucrat, serving concentrations of wealth, not the people. He sounds like a well-paid official from TEPCO saying they will support those who had to evacuate their homes in Fukushima because of the meltdown ... but only if they fill out this form, and then another, and then continue jumping through hoops like a professional lawyer to prove their case.

14:51 ……またしても腐敗した官僚だ。彼の忠誠は人々にではなく、富の集中構造へ向いている。福島のメルトダウンで家を失った人達を「支援する」と言いながら、「この書類を書いて、次もその次も書いて弁護士のように証明し続けろ」と命じる、高給取りの東電幹部と全く同じだ。

Yes, as Dr. Iwamoto said, the government is perfectly capable of enacting swift and wide-spread mandates when it serves their own interest. But when serving the interest of the working class ... the government becomes conveniently slow and inept. These are typical Machiavellian tactics for accumulating and serving concentrations of wealth off of the backs of the working class.

そうだ、岩本医師が指摘したように、政府は自分の利益のためなら驚くほど迅速かつ強引に全国命令を出すこともできる。だが労働者階級の利益となると、途端に都合よく「遅く」「無能」になる。こうした態度こそ、労働者階級の犠牲を踏み台に、富の集中に奉仕するための典型的なマキャベリ的戦術だ。

The ruling Liberal Democratic Party in general, and The Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare in particular, show themselves to be captured by corporate-globalist interests. They do not serve the people.

与党自民党全体としても、とりわけ厚生労働省は、企業グローバリストの利害に取り込まれていることを露呈している。彼らはもはや人々のために働いていない。

Even though I am just a ‘gaijin’ living in Japan for 43 years, if asked ... I would be more than willing to support people such as Dr. Iwamoto … the good, honest, adults in the room who try to serve the people.

自分は「ガイジン」として日本に43年住んでいるだけだが、もし聞かれたなら、岩本医師のような、誠実で正直で、人々に奉仕しようとする「部屋の中の大人たち」を喜んで支持すると答えるだろう。

The same day of the above proceedings, this afternoon, I tuned into the NHK 7:00 pm news to see how much of the above would be covered by mainstream media.

この質疑が行われたのと同じ日、今晩NHKの午後7時ニュースを見て、どれだけこれらが報道されるか観察してみた。

More wild bears sighted. Check.
The aftermath of Japan’s largest urban fire in half a century. Check.
The Prime Minister discussing the budget. Check.
The Princess does Laos. Check.
Some big guys shoved and slapped each other in the Sumo ring. Check.
Oh, and hey … crazy weather but beautiful autumn leaves. Check.
That’s all folks.

野生のクマがまた出たそうだ。はい、チェック。
半世紀ぶりの都市大火災の爪痕。はい、チェック。
首相が予算を語る。はい、チェック。
プリンセスがラオス訪問。はい、チェック。
大男たちの相撲で押し合い叩き合う。はい、チェック。
そして…記録的な異常気象だが紅葉も見事。はい、チェック。
以上です。
これに自分の税金が使われているのか。

And my taxes funded that.
Caveat emptor.

これに自分の税金が使われているのか。
カーヴィアット・エンプター（買い手よ用心せよ）。

I did not forget that bonus language lesson.
’Chick Show’ is not a politically incorrect euphemism.
This is how you pronounce ‘Damn it!’ in Japanese. 😂

Despite Facebook’s new algorithm now limiting how often I can share information, I immediately attempted to post the above link to about 50 ‘private’ Facebook groups.

I’ve seen this a couple of times now, enough to be convinced that Senator Richard Blumenthal and Josh Greene, Governor of Hawaii, are not simply mistaken or inept. They are both high-functioning psychopaths, and knowingly spinning a defense of corporate-captured science … and just about any other corrupt institution furthering the plandemic. Yet even while listening to Greene spew, confident we have put the torching of Lahaina behind us, another 'all-natural wildfire’ was melting windows in Maui …

Hmm … YouTube, Substack, or some other party seems to be fiddling with history in not showing the video directly. For the video, check YouTube’s ‘Brush Junkie’ for Traci and Shane’s post from Jun 19, 2025, entitled “Is Governor Green HIDING From Maui’s new FIRE Crisis?”

I will end my short contribution to this post with an observation and one-point Japanese language lesson.

Although the sophistry and sociopathic behavior in that Senate hearing is clear enough to anyone with eyes and ears, I am not optimistic that it will prove to be anything more than 「空気を抜く」 (kuki wo nuku) – literally: "to let the air out" or "to release air", with the metaphorical usage carrying the social connotation of ‘defusing tension’.

The reasoning behind my cynicism regarding accountability or progress in public health policy, is in the form of a prompt to Perplexity Pro and its answer, particularly the penultimate paragraph (ha … drowning in a pool of ‘p’ here) — demonstrating how high-functioning sociopaths are confident we are too stupid to distinguish what is merely legal from what is morally defensible, and too marginalized to do anything about it.

Prompt ...

"Who has been found guilty and has served prison time regarding either the decades long cover-up of the causal relationship between tobacco and lung cancer or the addictive risk behind the ongoing opioid crisis"

Answer ...

"The stark reality is that no executives from Big Tobacco have served time behind bars for their decades-long cover-up of tobacco’s deadly health effects, and no members of the Sackler family have been found guilty or are serving time for their role in creating the opioid crisis.

Big Tobacco: No Prison Time Despite RICO Conviction

Despite overwhelming evidence of a massive conspiracy, Big Tobacco executives escaped criminal prosecution. In 2006, Judge Gladys Kessler found tobacco companies guilty of lying to the American public about the deadly effects of cigarettes and secondhand smoke. The industry was even convicted of RICO racketeering, with that conviction upheld by an appeals court.

However, the legal system failed to hold individuals accountable. When four tobacco CEOs testified before Congress in 1994, they were investigated for perjury after claiming they didn’t believe tobacco was addictive or caused cancer. The Department of Justice ultimately declined to prosecute because the executives had carefully crafted their testimony using the word “believe,” making perjury charges difficult to prove.

The consequences were limited to civil penalties - tobacco companies were required to run corrective advertising campaigns at their own expense and post warning signs at retail locations. But as one analysis noted, “Big Tobacco murdered roughly 100 million people worldwide between 1950 and 2010” while knowing their products were deadly, yet “not one person has ever spent a day in jail for it”.

The Sackler Family: Immunity Despite Massive Settlements

Similarly, no members of the Sackler family have faced criminal charges or prison time for their role in the opioid crisis. Despite multiple massive settlements, they have secured broad legal immunity from prosecution.

In 2021, Federal Judge Robert Drain approved a bankruptcy settlement granting the Sacklers “global peace” from opioid liability in exchange for roughly $4.3 billion. However, the Supreme Court overturned this arrangement in June 2024, leading to an even larger settlement.

In January 2025, a new $7.4 billion settlement was reached - the nation’s largest settlement to date with individuals responsible for the opioid crisis. This settlement ends the Sacklers’ control of Purdue Pharma and their ability to sell opioids in the United States, with funds distributed over 15 years for addiction treatment and prevention programs.

Crucially, these settlements explicitly protect the Sacklers from civil lawsuits while clarifying that criminal prosecution remains possible. However, Purdue Pharma has twice pleaded guilty to criminal charges, but no Sackler family members have been charged with crimes, and there are no current indications of forthcoming criminal charges.

The Pattern of Corporate Accountability

Both cases reveal a troubling pattern where corporate entities face financial penalties while individual executives avoid criminal consequences. The Sackler family, like Big Tobacco executives before them, has expressed regret but never offered unequivocal apologies for their actions. They maintain they “acted lawfully in all respects” while acknowledging that OxyContin “unexpectedly became part of an opioid crisis”.

The contrast is striking: while individuals face severe criminal penalties for minor drug offenses, those who orchestrated massive public health crises affecting millions of lives have faced only civil penalties and continue to maintain their wealth and freedom.”

Then they came for the beekeepers in Australia — and I did not speak out — because I was not a beekeeper in Australia.

Then they came for the poultry farmers is England — and I did not speak out — because (you guessed it) I was not a poultry farmer in England.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.

Japan's bird flu cases surge in January

Japan is currently battling a serious bird flu outbreak that has already led to the culling of approximately 5 million birds across five prefectures. The situation is escalating quickly, with new outbreak sites being identified and concerns mounting about potential supply disruptions. Egg prices have already increased by 15%, reflecting the significant impact on the poultry industry. Health officials are closely monitoring the H5N1 strain and implementing strict containment measures to prevent further spread.

Dr Rima Truth Reports Substack

First, They Came for the Ostriches.... Will There Be Anyone Left to Speak for You if You Do Not Speak for the Ostriches?

Read more

2 years ago · 61 likes · 15 comments · Rima E Laibow MD

Been a bit busy with a few start-up alternative schools, but I am planning on going to the big demonstration in Tokyo on May 31.

A typhoon is predicted to hit Tokyo that day too. We'll see.

Look for me in my old “Arrest Fauci” t-shirt, putting a Pocket Osmo 3 through its paces, and swinging (if not swimming) like a hammer. And look forward to a few videos at a stack close to you. — steve

In preparing this post, I just discovered that delightful performance by chance.
But is there really any such thing as chance? Or is this just another intimate fractal of synchronicity?

I've been following New Zealand's "The Hatchard Report" for quite a while as a trustworthy source of medical information. But this issue, “Ten Thousand Cities”, contained an unexpected angle and new idea for me with his recommendation of "Vastu Architecture' as a prophylactic against the coming top-down, globalist / corporate nation-state designed, 15 minute slums.

I was especially struck by "At its basis is a profound principle — as is the macrocosm so is the microcosm." — which triangulates well with my intuition that any quantification of reality that is in line with nature, either structures or frequencies, is inherently fractal, the mandelbrot set being my favorite metaphor and mandala for that intuition.

Anyone who wishes more personal dialogue regarding this post, please feel free to use the 'comment' feature of this platform. I tend to respond to worthwhile comments. Otherwise, I let the post and links do my talking for me.

https://www.facebook.com/onscenenewsaustralia/posts/pfbid036u79fFWfwTUCECdaPZrH26Uy1ZAdEzSXN27SgVsAaA6LXQoG888xgEHKhdiDu4Cml?comment_id=1103563484335600&notif_id=1704099825635415&notif_t=comment_mention&ref=notif

Toyama / Ishikawa looks like they are really gonna get smacked, but the whole West Coast, from Kyushu to Hokkaido, is now being given a tsunami warning.

Now watching the cameras of sea side Ishikawa sway with after shocks in real time. And now, a bit after 5 and broadcasts of some fallen houses are starting to come in, along with what appears to be a tsunami wave pushing building debris upstream from what used to be a river. Soon to be dark, and especially difficult for the elderly to evacuate.

https://twitter.com/MEERYASIR0056/status/1741739291833999428?fbclid=IwAR0LqKkytEJlfOcgRdUoGQ54EPTSelusIEKg4q7H2837xmyZs68sV7cP0UY

Now 5:30, and seeing buildings beginning to burn.

Pushing 6:00 and so far, the largest tsunami appears to be only 1.2 meters, but it is coinciding with high tide. Probably will not know the extent of the damage until tomorrow morning's helicopter footage.

A bit worried about the nuclear plant at Kashiwazaki is predicted to get hit with a 40 cm wave. 🥺

X (Twitter) Japan has the most on-the-ground news and videos of the unfolding damage ... buckled roads, tsunami's churning up stream of rivers, drivers stranded and calling for help, etc.

As noted by one Japanese X post, the one good thing about the timing is that many of the younger people are back in their home towns for the holiday, and carrying the elderly to safety on their backs.

And thanks to buddy Tirion … an extremely interesting link …

And now day 2 of the New Year, when it rains, it pours …

With this reminder of how just how fragile we are, and how little ‘safety’ we can expect from the corporate nation-state, I wish you all a healthy and meaningful New Year.

Breaking News!

A big mea culpa for jumping too soon on this.
Thanks to Transcriber, corrected through the link below, somewhat convoluted and confused, but hopefully somewhat closer to correct through tre-triangulation …

Secret Jab Exemptions for Healthcare Workers in New Zealand Come to Light

(Warning, apologies for further edits to come.)

——————————————————————————————————––––––––


Do I detect a similar pattern elsewhere?

Anyone else still remember New York's exemption for "elites"?

Adams defends expanding vaccine exemption to NYC athletes, performers

Or of the 90% of Japan's Ministry of Health, Education, and Welfare ... opting out of the vaccination? (1:27)

Don’t think for a minute that they are psychopathic, predatory parasites.

They are just so special.

On the one hand, a responsible use of CRISPR could be used to speed up traditional breeding of our food stock for the benefit of us all, with an emphasis on that provisional ‘could be’. But the perpetual problem is that the most well-intentioned of technical specialists tend to be naive regarding the politics of power.  They will not be the ones deciding when, where, or how to use the fruits of their labor.   

In the other hand, a half-empty bottle of rum, and whether rumination or triangulation, I can’t help but to see dire consequences ahead.

The first leg of my bar stool — As of a couple of days ago, Nov. 27, the Second Meeting of State Parties to Treaty on Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons will have begun proceedings at the U.N. headquarters in New York.  Though the list of speakers for the general exchange of views has been published, it is the silence of who will not be speaking that reveals what Prime Minister Kishida meant by ‘sincere’ condolences at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial earlier this year.

World wide, thanks to politicians such as Kishida, “sincere” has been reduced to either a three letter agency or a four letter word.

Though a voice or two from Japan has been raised, neither the Mayor of Nagasaki nor an A-bomb survivor speak for ‘Japan’.  The corporate nation-state of Japan, as with other G7 nations, did not even bother to send an observer. 

The mass media here in Japan has given more airtime to professional baseball than the U.N. meeting.  One might think in this land of noodles and circuses, this year’s Hollywood blockbuster,  “Oppenheimer”, would at least be a box-office business opportunity.  

But again, with silence, the lady doth protest too much methinks.

Another swig of rum, and the second leg of my stool begins to wobble — the precedent of how Big Agra GMOs have all but gutted the small farming class of India by making them dependent on seeds that don't reproduce.  Or has it? 

Apologist for pre-Roundup Monsanto, the WEF, the WHO, and efficiencies of scale … journalist Keith Kloor, quotes Ronald Herring, a political scientist at Cornell University

“It is hard to imagine farmers spreading a technology that is literally killing them.” 

Crazy?  Yep.  As a fox.  The very same logic has been applied to the public health industry and EUA bioweapons, with an added ‘through the looking glass’ bonus (Hey Margaret!) … the victims are also funding their own demise.  

For brevity’s sober sake, I will not swirl the dirty dregs of what most readers here already know about the plandemic / third leg of this bar stool, but I just about fell off at the latest deviousness of the corruption.

The audio chat explains how the FDA is putting our tax dollars to work with an old angle on how to get the working class further addicted to weapons masquerading as cures.  Again, our public servants are trying to ban long proven health supplements, this time including melatonin and aloe vera, while other arms of the emerging public-health police-state are trying to legally empower hair-dressers and beauticians to administer injections of the bioweapon.

Another swig, I close my eyes, and see think-tanks and ‘murders’ of corporate lawyers (a disservice to many a good crow) behind closed doors, scheming to game, dominate, and monopolize consumable GMOs and genetically modified humans alike.  Flashback to a speech contest and comment

Whether the definition or legalities of GMOs are defined by process or product is a moot point.  If, collectively, anything can be learned from history, it is this — what can be weaponized, will be.  

Switzerland is caught between a rock and a hard place … a Luddite reliance on centuries-long traditional forms of breeding crops and cattle in this accelerating matrix, or faith that this time, power will play out differently.  A belief in collective moral progress.  The certainty that in this modern, science-driven era of enlightenment, there are few would-be, god-anointed, sociopathic-royalty among us — as was in the past.  That this time, technology will not be a slippery, weaponized slope towards the self-interest of the self-entitled.  

Though Switzerland is not a member of the E.U., neither is China, Russia, the U.S. or Israel.

Looking back at the broad sweep of history, or even a little one, I don't know if there is anything we little people can do about it other than a rear-guard resistance against the inevitable power-plays to come.  

Whoa.  It’s been a while since I’ve seen the bottom of a bar stool. 
That was some mighty fine rum.   
I should have been a pirate.

——————————————————————

”Once upon a time, not too long ago, Australia was a prison colony. Prison officers meted out orders and directions, and convicts carried out their prison sentences...

At “Covid Inquiry 2.0”, a cross parliamentary summit held in Brisbane in August, Peter Fam, Principal Human Rights lawyer at Maat's Method, spoke about Australia’s history as a prison colony, and how this dynamic bleeds into our Covid response. He spoke about the organisations in Australia whose job it is to defend and advocate for human rights. And he spoke about how, in the end, it is ultimately the people’s responsibility to stand up for themselves.”

Damn it.
Even in a substack sheath, anything I now try to share on FB now results in the following message. I attribute this to Martin’s Razor … “Never attribute incompetence to that which can adequately be explained by corruption.”