At this critical juncture, both myself and, I imagine, the reader may presume that we've reached a poignant conclusion to the narrative. The journey has been nothing short of strenuous, stretching across not just the lived experiences but also encompassing four years of painstaking recounting and meticulously linking each step—a task Cheryl and I grappled with during our initial endeavor. Yet, even as I navigate through the unfolding narrative, I find it perpetually oscillating between progression and retrospection. It's a dynamic process where the storyline advances while concurrently circling back, unveiling hidden or interconnected elements within the fabric of the narrative. These revelations carry profound implications, reminiscent of a metastatic cancer that proliferates in one part of the body only to be traced back to its origin from an earlier source—a poignant analogy drawn from Cheryl's own fate, which remains ever-present in my mind, resonating with haunting relevance.
One notable incident that I find taking the storyline back to the first days occurred on the second day following Rico's birth, involving the administration of Nevirapine. While it's understood that the use of Nevirapine on newborns is not universally standardized and is typically reserved for specific cases, particularly in preventing mother-to-child HIV transmission during childbirth, its application raises significant implications in light of the events recounted in the preceding 100,000 words of this narrative.
It becomes evident to me that the medications administered to newborns, especially those testing positive for HIV, are experimental in nature, with researchers continuously exploring their efficacy and outcomes. However, the utilization of Nevirapine on a newborn introduces an additional layer of experimentation, distinct from the compelled administration of AZT that, under duress, Lindsey was pressured into permitting for Rico.
Lindsey was never consulted about the administration of Nevirapine to Rico. Its traditional usage typically occurs "during childbirth," yet its delayed administration until day two suggests it was a concealed aspect, at least initially. As I piece together the narrative, considering all the involved parties, from Fauci's significant funding to Dr. Gay's "unpublished research," as well as the Mississippi baby case and Dr. Huskins' presumed role as principal investigator, it becomes imperative to scrutinize each action taken by physicians who operate beyond the constraints of established product labels. This includes an examination of how medications were incorporated into Dr. Huskins' treatment protocol.
Based on my analysis of the product label, it's evident that Huskins deviated from the prescribed protocol by administering any amount of Nevirapine to Rico. However, the situation becomes more complex when examining documentation withheld from Lindsey and the family for at least three months. In these records, Dr. Huskins acknowledged on the third day after Rico's birth that the Nevirapine administered the day prior was incorrect. He took responsibility for the mistake, citing a misinterpretation of the HIV exposure treatment recommendation outlined in his consultation note dated December 19, which coincided with Rico's birth and his consultation with Dr. Deeks and the Mississippi group. This alleged error arose from Huskins administering an amount of Nevirapine in one dose that would instead be the amount required for three individual doses that should have been spread across a 96-hour period.
Considering these circumstances, including Huskins' previous involvement with the Mississippi baby and his departure from the product label by administering any nevirapine dosage, it prompts me to question whether the triple dose was a mere accident or if it concealed a more intentional motive. The explanation Huskins gives for his error seems highly unlikely for several reasons. Firstly, it suggests not only a significant error on his part but also implies that this mistake went unnoticed by the pharmacist. In the insurance billing records, the term "unit" is used instead of "dosage." It's evident that in the billing records, "unit" and "dosage" are used interchangeably, as the term "unit" is consistently used to refer to any of the drugs administered to Rico.
Since the pharmacist listed Nevirapine as "1 unit," it strongly suggests that Dr. Huskins ordered the Nevirapine as a single dose, and the pharmacist dispensed it accordingly, not the triple dose Huskins claims was his mistake. Viewed from a different angle and considering the pharmacist's crucial role in preventing errors of this nature, it appears highly unlikely that the pharmacist, situated within the same hospital as Rico, would permit such a mistake. It's also unlikely that a pharmacy within the same hospital as the patient would dispense a four-day drug supply, which leads to concerns about medication safety, proper documentation, and adherence to hospital protocols. Additionally, it raises questions about why the head of infectious disease in a large hospital, presumably with significant responsibilities, would personally handle the mundane task of drug administration to a patient, especially a newborn situated in the hospital's NICU surrounded by professionals whose job it is to dispense medication.
While a skeptic might argue that my interpretation of the term’s "units" and "dosage" in billing records is flawed, it's evident from the context that other medications, such as four doses of fentanyl, were administered to Rico multiple times in a single day, each being billed separately rather than as a collective dose for the day. This suggests that the pharmacist was likely aware, or would have made Huskins aware, that the "1 unit" of Nevirapine he was receiving was being used in a manner inconsistent with the product label. This reinforces the notion that Huskins was functioning as a principal investigator, allowing for experimentation, and felt legally secure with Mower County after filing the SANC order on the day of Rico's birth. These events could explain why Mayo Clinic's legal team felt compelled to file the SANC order with Mower County immediately on the day of Rico's birth, despite Lindsey, under duress, agreeing to the use of AZT.
So, why revisit the issue of the triple dose of Nevirapine administered two days after Rico's birth? Is it merely to add complexity to the narrative, potentially confusing the reader? I contend that it serves a greater purpose, shedding light on the overarching theme that governed Rico's life and reinforcing the underlying forces, intentions, and experimentation at play.
Contrary to Huskins' assertion that Lindsey and John were informed about the triple dose of Nevirapine shortly after Rico's birth, I distinctly remember the day this information was disclosed to the family, and it was not on day two, as Huskins documents. It coincided with the same care meeting six days after Rico's birth, where Huskins revealed the missed "treatment" Lindsey could have received during pregnancy.
In a recording from that meeting, Huskins apologizes for the triple dose, and John responds, "I forgive you for that." I found John's statement ridiculous at the time because, even eleven years later, I cannot forgive these individuals for what I believe were deliberate, intentional, and destructive actions.
Skeptics may scrutinize the details of this narrative much like the ongoing debates that surrounded O.J. Simpson's trial and whether the glove did or did not fit his hand. Similarly, critics who have followed Lindsey's and Rico's stories for over three decades may endeavor to sway readers to discount the fundamental elements of this narrative. Over the years, they have persistently criticized each additional piece of evidence that seamlessly aligns, much like building floors stacked one upon the other. The overdose of Nevirapine is another example of a misstep or misrepresentation that eventually finds its place in the order of events and the intentions of doctors in determining an outcome.
As we delve into the timeline and contextualize the administration of Nevirapine, it aligns neatly with Dr. Huskins' purported consultations with individuals linked to the Mississippi baby experiment. The utilization of not only experimental drugs but what appears to be an innovative application of an experimental drug itself is consistent with Dr. Huskins' receipt of grants from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, collaboration with Roche and Pfizer, advisory board membership with AZT manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline, and ownership of shares in various pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer, Bristol Meyers Squibb, and Zimmer Biomet.
The overdose of Nevirapine appears to align with Fauci's involvement in the subtle intricacies that, upon closer examination, reveal a persistent presence. Lindsey conceiving a child during a period when Fauci was actively seeking pregnant, untreated HIV-positive women might initially seem coincidental timing. Still, the lack of treatment offered to Lindsey during that pregnancy is not. Mayo Clinic not only possessed Lindsey's HIV diagnosis from her childhood but also confirmed her HIV status. Lindsey and Cheryl informed the OB nurse about Lindsey's HIV status during her initial visit, and this nurse was evidently aware of Lindsey's medical history, as evidenced by her issuance of the same patient number from childhood.
It's reasonable to speculate that doctors viewed legal authorities in Mower County and Olmsted County as a necessary legal safeguard from day one and, through this association, facilitated authorization for the use of experimental drugs, potentially including not just Nevirapine but also the triple dose, which could be linked back to Dr. Gay's "undisclosed research" in Mississippi.
In my view, it should be mandatory for inquisitive minds like Dr. Huskins not only to tout the accolades of their black-label wonder drugs but also to disclose the significant drawbacks. Just as the setbacks experienced by thousands of infants in Africa may be spun into some semblance of success, I anticipate that what transpired with Lindsey and Rico will be similarly portrayed to reassure future mothers of the elite's assistance and that they are acting in the newborn's best interest. Considering the numerous experiments that often end in failures within HIV research, I am inclined to believe that individuals like Fauci and Deeks should, perhaps, come with a warning label — maybe even one tattooed on their foreheads akin to a pack of cigarettes explaining the stark contrast between the promises made and the harsh reality that persists as undeniably evident.
The journey through this book could have concluded more swiftly had I chosen to omit fleeting references from a trial or a couple of paragraphs from an aging judge and guardian a decade ago. Such an omission might have shielded Cheryl and me from accusations of propagating yet another conspiracy theory within the intricate landscape of AIDS, often a tactic employed by elites to dismiss critical inquiries. However, we were not the architects of the purported facts that shrouded Lindsey and Rico's lives. It was the elites who laid the groundwork and constructed the narrative of HIV and AIDS and inserted themselves into our lives.
I haven't posted in for awhile in this thread -- though, I am fully in agreement with the title, A Step Beyond Evil, which perhaps should have been in the plural, like Many Steps Beyond Evil.
I had met Dr Kap oor in the mid 1980s as I earlier said. His company, Lyphomed, produced the AZT which caused immune deficiency symptoms to manifest themselves. His statement, to me was that, "if HIV even exists, it is a harmless virus." His wife said she believed that they were purposefully using AZT to "cause" immune problems as part of a bigger agenda. That Fauxxi was then part of the debacle isn't surprising. He eclipses Dr Mengele many times over in cold-blooded evil. And, that the government condoned his behavior, even to the present moment, tells us what's in DC and, really, the UN, WHO and most UN countries.
Of course, there are many, many doctors and professionals that are in agreement that the HIV/AIDS debacle was an orchestrated, agenda-driven endemic just like C19, swine, ebola and so many other similar "events." Jon Rappoport wrote his book, "AIDS Inc." published in 1988 and Dr Peter Duesberg, in his 90s, somehow survived his self-injected HIV though he and other professionals and heads of state have either been "tarred and feathered" or eliminated if they pushed too hard against the negative agendas of Dr Mengele II
Well written.