(READ) CDC Director tests positive for Covid again

The head of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Rochelle Walensky has tested positive again for Covid-19. Walensky initially tested positive for Covid-19 on Oct. 21.

The following statement was issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:

CDC Director Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky experienced mild symptoms from her recent Covid-19 infection, completed a course of Paxlovid, and, after a period of isolation, tested negative for the virus. On Sunday, Dr. Walensky began to develop mild symptoms and has again tested positive. Consistent with CDC guidelines, she is isolating at home and will participate in her planned meetings virtually.

CDC media statement

CDC officials said Walensky is up to date on her vaccines.

More information at: CDC Website

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

9 thoughts on “(READ) CDC Director tests positive for Covid again”

    1. She must have had the 2 shots plus 3 boosters and I think this is her 3rd time getting covid. Their latest lie is that the jabs make it a mild version, which they don’t know b/c they didn’t do any studies. Just propaganda!

  1. Good morning,
    This comment is for Sharyl Attkisson.

    BLUF: I am seeking to establish a teleconference call with you to discuss a vitally important issue related to public health policies promulgated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
    This past Sunday, my boss, Mr. Bob Kocher, President and CEO at Ideal Innovations Inc., watched your show ‘Full Measure’; at the end, it mentioned that this coming Sunday (November 6th, 2022) the show will focus on the CDC and their loss of public trust. In support of this story, Mr. Kocher would like to share with you our efforts to hold the CDC accountable for known flaws in Federal Public Health policies.
    Background: The US Code of Federal Regulations 42 (CFR 42), Public Health, defines a fever at 100.40F that is cited in federal, state and local government public health policies on COVID and other infectious diseases.
    That value, or more precisely 380C was derived from research Dr Carl Wunderlich conducted in 1870. Since then, technology and human physiology has changed.
    Modern medical research finds body temperature values for normal at 98.60F and for fever at 100.40F are too high. Modern science shows there are many factors that affect normal body temperature, so that a one-size-fits-all approach is overly simplistic.
    While a 1 degree drop in body temperature from the 19th century to the 21st century may seem trivial, it is not. A fever threshold value of 100.40F , means a potential delay in medical treatment. Updating public health policies based on modern science will enable earlier detection, isolation, testing and treatment, thus increasing the chances for a better outcome for the patient.
    The Secretary of Health and Human Services is the issuing agent for CFR 42. A key player in maintaining this regulation is the CDC.
    Efforts to date: Over the past 18 months, we have reached out to the White House, HHS and CDC as well as members of Congress, with an offer to assist the government in correcting the definition of fever in CFR-42 and public health policies. Frustrated by the lack of a government response, but to enhance public awareness, we submitted articles to the Fair Observer, Washington Post and the New York Times, the last two are pending publication.
    I am requesting a teleconference call with you to discuss this vitally important issue as soon as you are available. With your help, perhaps we can bring the CFR 42 into the 21st century, restore confidence in public health policies and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and just maybe save lives in doing so.
    I am available 24 by 7. Please call me at your earliest convenience to coordinate Mr. Kocher’s calendar with yours. In the meantime, I have attached supporting documents e.g. Redefining Fever Can Help Fight COVID-19 Pandemic – Fair Observer, that provide greater details. I look forward to hearing from you soonest.
    Kevin House
    [email protected]
    (571) 480-5004 (office)
    (703) 989-3114 (cell)

    1. All I can decipher here in the CDC administrative bureaucrat’s letter is an effort to justify the negligence– and obvious conflicts of interest– regarding the pandemic pandemonium we have been tortured with for the last three years. I truly pray that the CDC/FDA/WHO are all shut down before they can inflict more psychological(and physical) harm on the world.

    2. FYI…human physiology has not changed. There are environmental factors such as food additives, household chemicals, and the like that were not present in the 1870’s, however normal human physiology remains unchanged. It would take 10’s of 1000’s of years for any significant change in physiology to occur since the 1970’s.

      1. Good points Veritas Now in that genetics don’t change that fast . However, consider some simpler explanations that might support Kevin’s thought.

        People today are more likely to have drove to a doctor appointment or a research laboratory while in the 1870’s they might perhaps have walked. This could account for normal human temperatures running a bit higher in the 1870’s. Also maybe metabolisms had to be a bit faster. Also after walking or any form of exercise muscles tend to stay active and toned and this generates a bit more heat.

        And perhaps in the 1870’s in the winter, indoor metabolism was a bit higher if stoves, fireplaces and radiators weren’t keeping temperatures as ideal as they are today. I think I remember that there is a type of body fat that is brown that actually burns energy and calories, hence producing heat.

        And in the summer without air-conditioning a higher normal body-temperature in days gone by could also be normal.

        Additionally the extra physical labor that people in the 1870’s could have been expected to do, … the body will probably have been in a slightly more “warmed-up” normal phase because a warmed-up body is less prone to injury. A faster metabolism is required to do physical labor than to just sit on the couch and watch tv or sit in front of computer screen.

        It sounds though like a complex and difficult battle would need to be waged though to change the “conventional thinking” about what is normal temperature. From a marketing and health perspective it would be much better to push to produce a product that caters to individuals and their baseline temperatures. I think higher end medical care is trending in that direction. This can be worked out to better understand a person’s temperature at different times of the day and catch anomalies even faster.

Scroll to Top