Headshot.jpg

WHY?

Anti-lockdown, pro-freedom, and pro-America. Replacing the globalists with localists.

I want to do 3 things:

  1.  I want to make Nevada a Constitutional state. This means that every federal law, state law, and mandate must pass Constitutional muster to be effective in Nevada. 

  2. I want to protect locally owned businesses.  They should not pay, on a percentage basis, more in any tax category than the big, multinational corporations that pay the least. 

  3. I want to ban Critical Race Theory and other Marxist ideologies from being taught in public schools. 

 

Does anyone else here feel like they’ve been lied to the last two years? Maybe even longer than that? We were told that wearing face masks would help prevent the spread of a new virus called COVID-19. Dr. Robert Malone, an epidemiologist with excellent credentials, says that masks do nothing of the sort. We were told that if we stood six feet apart from other humans that the spread would slow, but that didn’t happen either, according to their numbers of rising cases. Small businesses were closed, along with churches, while others were allowed to stay open. Nonessential people were sent home from work, and kids were sent home from school to learn online. Then they rolled out a vaccine for something that very few people were dying of. There was not a rise in overall deaths during 2020 and I have the data to back that up. 

            In some places, like Australia, citizens were attacked and beaten up by the police for not wearing a facemask or going outside when they were not supposed to. There was a worldwide effort to change what everyone was doing. The vaccines turned out to be neither safe nor effective. They are still mandating some to be fully vaccinated. Some of the people who have been lying to us and enforcing ridiculous rules were democrats. Some of them were also republicans. But it was really a coordinated global effort to hijack the media to put out a message of fear surrounding a pandemic. If the people are afraid, they can be controlled. The controllers at the head of this are Klaus Schwab, leader of the World Economic Forum. He is also a wealthy and powerful communist.  

            Klaus Schwab and his partner, Larry Fink, influenced the global economy to institute draconian measures to silence and inject huge numbers of people with an experimental pharmaceutical product. Larry Fink is the CEO of Blackrock Securities. Blackrock has significant ownership in every company that trades on the New York Stock Exchange. They have used their wealth and power to elect politicians who will do their bidding. Mandates, lockdowns, vaccines, the censorship of dissenting opinions from qualified professionals were all part of the plan to bring about a great reset of the world order. In fact, Klaus Schwab wrote a book called COVID-19: The Great Reset.  

            We must recognize this threat to our freedom as communism. They are trying to indoctrinate our children in schools with critical race theory, or CRT. CRT is a Marxist ideology. Karl Marx, the founder of Marxism, wrote a book called The Communist Manifesto. This is a clear connection between what we have all witnessed the last two years and communism. The communists will not stop. They want to infect every statehouse across the country with their believers. Their legislation is designed to chip away at our freedom and constitution. This is the enemy that we must fight. In the book, The Art of War by Sun Tsu, he says, “To know your enemy, first understand its strengths and weaknesses.” I know this enemy. It is an enemy that has been around for a long time. They are now making aggressive moves that are meant to reduce our power and increase theirs. I am the only candidate in the five-man field running for AD26 who is talking about this topic. I understand this enemy and am ready to oppose their agenda as your Nevada Assemblyman.  

            If we are battle born, then now is the time to fight. I’m Bret Delaire and I’m running for Assemblyman in District 26.  

To put it another way...

The world has been lied to for the past two years.  The lies started with Klaus Schwab, leader of the World Economic Forum.  Klaus is a wealthy, powerful, communist globalist.  He, along with Larry Fink, CEO of Blackrock Securities, want to exploit COVID-19 to usher in a “great reset” of the world economy. Blackrock Securities has a significant stake in every listed company on the New York Stock Exchange.  They used their influence to enforce a worldwide lockdown and mandate.  This created fear and paranoia. 

 

Next came the roll-out of the vaccine mandates.  The government seized emergency powers to force on the American people a then experimental vaccine with yet unknown effectiveness and side effects, while the pharmaceutical companies remained protected and unaccountable for any potential adverse events.  Aside from select, vulnerable populations, including the elderly and those with other comorbidities, the coronavirus is comparable to that of an annual flu for most people. 

 

There was no rise in the proportion of overall annual deaths during the height of the pandemic.  However, the all-cause mortality rate spiked 40% among 18 to 64-year-old working people after the vaccines were introduced.  All-cause mortality is the number of people who die from any cause.  (Even a 10% increase in deaths is considered cataclysmic).  Reliance on natural immunity to fight off common colds and therapeutics when needed will likely result in better overall health outcomes.  Those who stand against this tyranny will be tomorrow’s leaders. 

 

The global coordinated effort involved the pharmaceutical industry, the media, big business, and politicians.  They will not stop.  They want to fill every statehouse across the country with compliant toadies who do not challenge their ideology.  They want more legislation passed that chip away at the Constitution and our freedoms.  They want to advance ineffectual postulations, such as, “Men can bear children.”  They want to indoctrinate our children in public schools with Critical Race Theory and other Marxist ideologies. 

 

Communism is the enemy, and it is at our front door.  I will be a voice against their agenda in the Nevada legislature.  If we are battle born, then now is the time to fight.  I am Bret Delaire, and I am running for Assembly District 26. 

Here is the AD26 Debate hosted by Red Move Nevada on May 5, 2022.

The debate starts at the 1 hour mark. It is 50 minutes in length.

AD26 Debate May 5 2022.jpg
RWC Speech.jpg

Getting ready to speak at the RWC.

A-Rated-PAC_NV Firearms Coalition.jpg

Here is the data...

The Data.jpg
Schwab with Lenin statue.jpg

Left: Klaus Schwab photographed in his office with a statue of his hero, Vladimir Lenin, a communist leader, on the bookshelf.
Right: Klaus Schwab's new book COVID-19: The Great Reset

Schwab great reset.jpg

Click here for the Senator Ron Johnson Senate hearing on 1/25/2022 titled COVID-19: A Second Opinion featuring Dr. Robert Malone. It is a 5 hour video that covers the dangers of COVID vaccines.

CONTACT

What are your most important issues? Please let us know.

Your details were sent successfully!

AD26 map 2.jpg


 

9 in 10 COVID Deaths Are in Vaccinated People: Report

 

Joseph Mercola

 

March 15, 2022 Updated: March 16, 2022

report released by the UK government has confirmed that 9 out of every 10 deaths related to COVID-19 are found in those who are fully vaccinated. Although the virus variant is the same and the UK approved only one different vaccine (AstraZeneca) from the United States, the data in the U.S. are different. This may be due in large part to the CDC definition used to identify who is “vaccinated.”

U.S. data are also likely to become even more sparse in the coming weeks and months. In addition to the CDC hiding data, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) quietly decided in early February to stop recording deaths attributed to COVID-19.

Data Is Essential

Yet, data is the foundation of scientific analysis. Without it, researchers are unable to analyze statistics and draw conclusions, which leaves public health experts unable to make accurate recommendations. Knowledge gives you the power to make informed decisions based on evidence.

Six months into the pandemic, a report revealed that most Americans had significant misconceptions of the COVID-19 risks. Months later, a second survey demonstrated that not much had changed. While analysts blamed “ignorance of fundamental, undisputed facts on who is at risk” for the so-called misconceptions, others said the politicization of the pandemic was also at fault. But there were other factors at play that skewed the data scientists thought they had.

According to a whistleblower who worked on Pfizer’s Phase 3 COVID injection clinical trials, data were falsified, patients were unblinded, the company hired poorly trained people to administer the injections and follow up on reported side effects lagged way behind. Her testimony was published November 2, 2021, in the British Medical Journal by investigative journalist Paul Thacker.

This is yet another indication that the true number of adverse events and deaths from the shots currently identified as COVID vaccines may never be known. The only logical conclusion to draw is that the data don’t support the Warp Speed production and mass vaccination program initiated in early 2020.

In fact, the shot program not only is ineffective, but also has likely damaged and killed far more people than any health agency will ever publicly admit. It is essential to share this information to help prevent more deaths and damaged lives.

UK Government Report: 90 Percent of Deaths Are in Fully Vaccinated

A reporter from The Exposé points out that while the world has been distracted by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the UK government quietly released a report that confirmed 9 in every 10 deaths from COVID-19 in England were in people who were fully vaccinated.

The February 2022 report was from the UK Health Security Agency, which publishes weekly surveillance. The report contains several tables of raw data showing that the vast majority of people who were infected, hospitalized or died from COVID-19 were fully vaccinated.

The Exposé, demonstrated step by step how the data, gathered from Jan. 24, 2022, through February 28, 2022, supported this assertion. In the UK, health authorities differentiate between those who have never received a shot and those who received one, two or three doses. All told, there were 1,086,434 cases of COVID in vaccinated individuals that accounted for 73 percent of all cases during that period.

When children were removed from the equation, vaccinated individuals accounted for 91 percent of all cases. The reporter also compared data taken in 2021 when Delta was the dominant variant against the current report when Omicron is the dominant variant in England. It showed a higher number of children hospitalized for Omicron than for Delta.

Since children have never been at high risk for severe disease from any COVID variant, it begs the question if the current number of children hospitalized with COVID-19 may be due to increased PCR testing—known to have a high false-positive rate—in children hospitalized for other reasons, such as a broken leg or appendicitis.

When children were included in the figures for hospitalization, the data showed 75 percent of those hospitalized with COVID in the current period were vaccinated. But, when children were removed from the equation, 85 percent of the hospitalized individuals were vaccinated. Similar results were found when the data were analyzed for COVID deaths.

During the four-week period in the current report, vaccinated individuals accounted for 89 percent of deaths. Most interestingly, not only are the deaths in vaccinated individuals rising precipitously, but the number of deaths in those who are not vaccinated is dropping.

Vaccinated Deaths Rising in California

Headlines in the March 7, 2022, Mercury News read, “COVID-19 Deaths in California Among Vaccinated Rose Sharply With Omicron.” The corresponding story added that 10 deaths recorded in Santa Cruz County, California, and nine of those were vaccinated. On the surface, this is similar to findings reported from the UK. Yet, the raw numbers in the United States are different.

This is likely because U.S. data do not differentiate between individuals who have had one, two or three shots. In fact, the U.S. CDC clearly states that you can only be considered fully vaccinated two weeks after receiving the final dose in the primary two-shot series from Pfizer and Moderna or the one shot from Johnson & Johnson.

Therefore, as the UK analyzes data that identify individuals on the spectrum of having received one of three shots, the United States only counts vaccination if you’re two weeks after your last dose. Since not all patients who are fully vaccinated are identified on admission, analyzing U.S. numbers is difficult, if not impossible. You must ask yourself if this is intentional.

It probably is safe to assume that if a person in the United States is identified as being vaccinated, they are likely fully vaccinated by CDC standards. However, there are also likely individuals lumped into the unvaccinated group who have had one or two shots or may even be fully vaccinated by CDC standards but were not counted as such on admission.

The Mercury News justified the vaccinated deaths, writing: “Of the vaccinated patients who died, one was in his early 100s, three were in their 90s, two were in their 80s, three were in their 70s and most had underlying health problems. The unvaccinated man who died was in his 50s.”

While age is certainly a significant factor in any infectious disease including COVID, the article did not mention any of the other CDC-identified comorbidities that contribute to COVID deaths. To add to the misinformation, the article quoted Dr. Errol Ozdalga, a hospitalist at Stanford, who told the Mercury News that patients admitted during the Delta wave and earlier infections were otherwise healthy.

The implication is that those with comorbidities the CDC identified as increasing the risk of severe illness, such as heart disease, diabetes, obesity, chronic kidney disease and immunocompromised, were not hospitalized with COVID before Omicron.

““That went away with Omicron,” Ozdalga said. The variant has afflicted those with weakened immune systems, those who were “predisposed in some way” to severe illness, he said.” Additionally, without supporting information, the news report included a simple statement:

“Dr. George Rutherford, an infectious disease expert at UC-San Francisco, said the raw numbers make the deaths among the vaccinated look worse than they are — their rates of dying remain far less than the unvaccinated.”

Economist Survey Reveals Significant Vaccine Injury Rate

Economist Mark Skidmore executed a critical online survey using the U.S. population to estimate damage from the COVID-19 shots. He presented the most recent and significant data20 from the ongoing study at the Doctors for COVID Ethics Symposium 3.

His paper seeks to understand the number of people who have died from the COVID shots that he estimates based on the survey. He used the survey to triangulate information from the general population and what they are experiencing.

The participants were asked to report on the adverse events of people they knew best in their social circle — in other words, good friends or family members. The surveys were close to representative of the general population in age, income and gender in December 2021.

Skidmore first presented a list of adverse events the FDA acknowledged could be possible and compared it against the documented data of injury and deaths from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) published in OpenVAERS.

Some of the most common events on the list were stroke, heart attack, myocarditis, death, thrombocytopenia and venous thromboembolism (blood clots). According to Skidmore, everyone agrees that adverse events can and do occur — the main difference in opinion is how often and how many.

Skidmore then looked at the ratio between COVID illness fatalities and COVID shot fatalities. The ratio in OpenVAERS is 2.6 percent and in VAERS (the number reported by the CDC that doesn’t contain all data originally substantiated) it’s 0.9 percent.

If these numbers reflect reality, the number of people who report injury or death in the survey should be close to zero since the cohort is small enough that it may not capture such a small percentage. Skidmore then asks, if we assume that the survey is a reflection of the true ratio in the population, what is the true population ratio for injury or death after receiving the COVID-19 shot?

From the data collected the ratio reveals there have been 307,997 deaths from the shot. The method used gives a 95 percent confidence interval between 215,018 and 391,410 deaths. Using the same mathematical approach to identify the number of severe adverse events to the general population, the data show there were roughly 1.1 million severe events and 2.3 million less severe events from the shot.

He acknowledges that much of what people see and report is through the lens of their biases. One of those is political affiliation. He showed that people who identified as Democrats reported far fewer shot-related deaths than did Republicans or independents. This likely also affects the number of deaths and adverse events reported to VAERS.

Using the fatality counts by party affiliation, he found that if the Democrat perception was correct, there were 119,000 fatalities compared to 487,000 fatalities if the Republican perception was correct. This gives a potential range of deaths and illustrates the differences in perceptions of people based on how they see the world. However, no matter which number is used, it is still far more than the number of fatalities reported in the VAERS system.

Unprecedented US Death Toll Keeps Rising

While the data from Skidmore and the UK reflect the death rate from COVID-19, it is also important to track the number of all-cause mortality as it’s one of the most reliable data points we have. This statistic is clear-cut. Either a person is dead or they’re not. It does not rely on the reason for death.

In early 2022, mutual insurance holding company OneAmerica announced an increase in the death rate of working Americans, aged 18 to 64, in the third quarter of 2021. Their data show it was 40 percent higher than prepandemic levels.

Other insurance companies have also cited higher mortality rates, including the Hartford Insurance Group that announced mortality increased 32 percent from 2019 and 20 percent from 2020 before the shots. Lincoln National reported death claims have increased 13.7 percent year over year and 54 percent in quarter four of 2021 compared to 2019.

Funeral homes are also posting an increase in burials and cremations in 2021 over 2020. One large German health insurance company reported their company data were nearly 14 times greater than the number of deaths reported by the German government. This data were gathered directly from doctors applying for payment from a sample of 10.9 million people.

The rising death toll that can be linked to the COVID shots is an inconvenient truth for the health agencies that have promoted mass vaccinations with a genetic therapy experiment. In what appears to be a response to this data, Health and Human Services (HHS) have decided to stop the reporting requirements for hospitals and acute care facilities on COVID-19 deaths.

Although the information is published on the HHS website, fact-checkers have claimed the viral social media posts are “false” by simply changing the headline.29 So, while the HHS publicly announced they would no longer require hospitals to report deaths from COVID-19, fact-checkers erroneously report the U.S. government is not ending daily COVID death reporting.

If it helps to sort all this out, an unnamed federal health official actually acknowledged the move to stop reporting COVID-19 hospital deaths when they spoke with a reporter from WSWS, calling the move “incomprehensible.” The official added, “It is the only consistent, reliable and actionable dataset at the federal level. Ninety-nine percent of hospitals report 100% of the data every day. I don’t know any scientists who want to have less data.”

CDC Withholds Data, Fearing Hesitancy and Misinterpretation

When data from multiple sources all reveal the same trends and values, it’s easy to see how the CDC would be unwilling to acknowledge the information or want to release their data for fear it would have a negative impact on the mass vaccination campaign. February 20, 2022, The New York Times reported the CDC still had not published large parts of the data they collected during the pandemic.

While they have published data on the effectiveness of boosters in some individuals, data from people 18 to 49 years were left out. Interestingly, this is also the group who are the least likely to benefit from the shot, since they have some of the lowest rates of severe disease and death as reported by the CDC.

In comments to The New York Times, a CDC spokesperson attempted to justify why the organization had withheld large portions of data since the beginning of the pandemic. She said the data were “not yet ready for prime time,” that the information may be misinterpreted to mean the vaccines are ineffective and that the data they have is based on 10 percent of the U.S. population, which the Times pointed out is the same sample size used to track influenza each year.

Without raw data from the United States, scientists have relied on Israeli data. One study gathered information from 4.6 million people ages 16 and older who had received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine. They compared severe illness and death between those who had the booster and those who did not. The data showed the group from 16 to 29 years had zero deaths whether they were boosted or not.

Likewise, the group from 30 to 39 years had one death whether they were boosted or not. In fact, the difference in death rate did not rise until the participants were 60 to 69 years, at which point the non-boosted group had 44 deaths and the boosted group had 32 deaths.

In an opinion piece, Staten Island Advance’s Tom Wrobleski characterizes the CDC’s decision, writing about what has happened to most people who have been willing to publish data and opinions that go against a national or international health agency’s narrative:

“We’re told to have faith in the CDC, in Dr. Anthony Fauci, in all the experts who are trained to handle public health crises.

But we can’t have trust if vital information is withheld from us. Because then it becomes a case of, “Shut up and do what we say. We’re the experts. You don’t need to know how we come to our decisions. We know what’s best.”

And if you question the received wisdom, you’re suddenly a dangerous person. You’re likened to a terrorist. You’re told you want people to die. You get banned from social media.

If you dare protest, you can have your bank account frozen and your vehicle insurance suspended, as we saw during the Freedom Convoy protest in Canada. You can get trampled by police on horseback.

Withholding information only makes people more skeptical. It breeds suspicion. Or mere doubt. The CDC needs to do better if it wants our trust.”

Originally published March 15, 2022 on Mercola.com

Sources and References

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Dr. Peter McCullough: Findings From Early COVID-19 Vaccine Studies Potentially Alarming

'This is getting into human chromosomes'

By Beth Brelje

 

March 8, 2022 Updated: March 8, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

How safe are COVID-19 vaccines? Should everyone be taking them? Are people who get vaccines more likely to get COVID-19? Can genetic material in the vaccines be incorporated into the human genome? These are some of the unknown questions that researchers around the world are currently investigating.

With more initial findings and hypotheses now released to the public, a group of free speech and information advocates last week during a presentation in Pennsylvania gave their “uncensored” take of the current science. They are currently traveling around the United States sharing concerns about how public health policy and debate throughout the COVID-19 pandemic has been handled.

The speakers were Dr. Peter McCullough, a renowned cardiologist whose own research is highly-cited; Dr. Bryan Ardis, a chiropractor; attorney Thomas Renz; and Steve Kirsch, a Silicon Valley philanthropist who supported early efforts searching for COVID-19 treatments in medicines already on the market. They were invited by the “Lions for Liberty,” a group of Penn State University students, faculty, and staff that sprang up in response to the university’s pandemic mitigation policies that require employees to get vaccinated for COVID-19.

The four spoke on numerous occasions; at Toftrees Resort in State College on March 3 and at Hershey Lodge on March 4 before which they testified at the Capitol Building in Harrisburg in a hearing hosted by state Sen. Doug Mastriano, who is a Republican running for governor.

They presented data from peer-reviewed studies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and government documents, and expressed their concerns that the COVID-19 vaccines recommended for all Americans were problematic from the start.

“It was clear vaccines weren’t sufficiently tested and important groups were excluded, like pregnant women,” McCullough said in Hershey. “With no data on safety and efficacy, pregnant women were encouraged, then later forced, to take the vaccines.”

He called the results of a newly released study disturbing. The study, titled  “Immune imprinting, breadth of variant recognition, and germinal center response in human SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination,” shows that messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) from the vaccine stays in the body much longer than expected. Messenger RNA is a single-stranded molecule that carries genetic code, usually from the DNA in a cell’s nucleus, to ribosomes, the cell’s protein-making area.

“It shows the messenger RNA is in the lymph nodes months after the vaccine had been received. This is proven,” McCullough said. “The vaccines are not leaving the body. It’s found in the lymph nodes at 60 days. The thought in the FDA briefing book was that these vaccines were going to be in the body for a day or two, generate immunity, and then be out.”

He cited another paper published in February by a team of researchers led by Associate Prof. Yang De Marinis at the Department of Clinical Sciences of Lund University, Sweden, that shows “reverse transcription” is happening—that is, an enzyme makes a copy of DNA from RNA.

“This is getting into human chromosomes, at least this segment is. If it turns out that the entire code goes into human chromosomes, and if it expresses spike protein within cells—spike protein is an abnormal protein, it is not a human protein— if this protein is expressed within human cells on a regular basis or on demand, and it’s passed from parent cells to daughter cells, and it’s passed to the developing embryo, we’re in trouble.”

Now, the race is on to confirm this finding with additional studies, McCullough said.

“On the CDC website, it says the vaccines don’t change the human genome. This paper that just broke in the last week is strongly suggesting the CDC was gravely wrong,” McCullough said. “We should have had monthly safety reports to America. If we’re going to ask Americans to take an experimental vaccine or investigational vaccine, there should have been a safety report.”

Coming out of the clinical trials, what was reported in the briefing booklet looked OK, McCullough said. Through October, over 220 million people took a vaccine.

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has now recorded as many as 24,000 reports of people dying shortly after taking a COVID-19 vaccine, over 34,000 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis after taking a vaccine, and 44,000 reports from people permanently disabled with a host of conditions after taking a vaccine. These reports, which can be made by any member of the public, have yet to be definitively linked to COVID-19 vaccines and further research is needed to quantify the risk.

Now, a new study in The Lancet is pointing to potential multi-inflammatory syndrome in COVID-19 vaccinated children, McCullough said. “Some kids are on ventilators. These were perfectly healthy kids and now they’re on the ventilator fighting for their life.”

State Legislation

During the hearing in Harrisburg, a number of COVID-related bills were mentioned.

Mastriano is the prime sponsor of Senate Bill 471, dubbed the Medical Freedom Act, which proposed that the state government shall not impose a vaccination requirement on adults or children without consent. It also proposed to make it illegal for the government to mandate employers to require vaccination of their staff and ensures unemployment compensation for unvaccinated workers. The bill moved out of the Health and Human Services Committee in November, committee chair state Sen. Michele Brooks said at the hearing. She also advocated for her own legislation, Senate Bill 937, which prohibits the state from requiring COVID-19 vaccines for students in kindergarten through grade 12. It is now in the House Education Committee, Brooks said.

A companion bill, SB 1091/HB 1741 would increase access to off-label FDA approved medications in the early stages of COVID-19. This would allow physicians and pharmacists to prescribe and dispense drugs already approved by the FDA for off-label treatment of COVID-19, without penalty from licensing boards. And it would clarify that a pharmacy may not decline to fill a prescription of a COVID-19 early treatment drug based solely on their opinion of the drug. Mastriano is the prime sponsor of this Senate bill and Rep. Dawn Keefer sponsors the House version.

Ardis made a plea to lawmakers at the hearing, on behalf of doctors.

“Please let them practice medicine. Never in the history of the world has there been one protocol for every human. We are all genetically different,” Ardis said. “Please allow doctors, once again, to be protected to practice medicine. They are the only ones that have known the history of their patients. You cannot tell me there’s one solution or protocol for every American who gets a respiratory infection right now; it’s impossible. And then you’re going to take their license from them, destroy their livelihood and then slander them with their reputation, because they’re holding to their oath to do no harm? Please. Put legislation in place that they can never be punished for doing their best to do no harm, to treat their patients.”

Penn State Snubbed Event

Lions for Liberty invited two university policy makers, Penn State President Eric Barron and Provost Nick Jones, to attend the forum. But Barron and Jones were not among the combined 700 attendees.

“It is disconcerting, to say the least, that leadership from the university’s administration were unwilling to attend or engage in either of these events,” Arielle Girouard, Lions for Liberty press secretary told The Epoch Times. “It is unfortunate that one of the nation’s top universities in research, education, and innovation has repeatedly denied our attempts to have a discussion on the science that has driven public health and institutional, including university, policies over the past two years. President Barron acknowledges a growing lack of public trust in higher education. It is hard to see how refusal to engage with credentialed academics and professionals, from both within and outside of the Penn State community, does anything but sow further distrust in the public. Regardless, Lions for Liberty isn’t going anywhere. We are committed to fostering a community, open to all who seek truth, so we may make well-informed decisions regarding our health, among other individual liberties.”

Penn State did not respond to a request from The Epoch Times to explain why they did not attend.

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and the Penn State chapter of Turning Point USA co-hosted the speakers with Lions for Liberty.

 

 

 

The Alarming Trends in COVID Vaccine Side Effects

BY JOSEPH MERCOLA TIMEMARCH 6, 2022 PRINT

The newest data from a large German health insurance company and the Israeli Ministry of Health continue to show side effects from the COVID jabs and boosters are anything but ‘rare.’

In mid-February 2022, the U.K. started rolling out the COVID jab for children aged 5 to 11. In the U.S., the shot has been recommended for this age group since October 2021.

The question raised in a Nick De Bois interview with Jamie Jenkins, former head of health and labor market analysis at the British Office for National Statistics (above), is ‘Why bother injecting kids this young?’ The risk COVID-19 presents to children is minuscule.

What’s more, the British Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI) estimates that by the end of January 2022, 85% of children aged 5 to 11 already had natural immunity. Add to that the fact that the prevailing variant, Omicron, is far milder than previous strains, causing only mild cold symptoms in most people, including children.

Together, these three facts ought to make it clear that children don’t need this jab. A cost-benefit analysis by Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., and researcher Kathy Dopp, also shows the COVID jab actually increases children’s risk of dying from COVID infection. Children under 18 are also 51 times more likely to die from the jab than they are to die from COVID if not vaccinated.

Four Million Doses Required to Prevent a Single ICU Admission

An astounding statistic Jenkins does bring up is that 4 million doses must be administered to children, 5 to 11 years of age, to prevent a single ICU admission in this age group. Assuming two doses per child, that means 2 million children must take their chances with serious and potentially lifelong side effects to prevent a single child from requiring intensive care due to COVID-19. How is this justified? As explained in Jenkins’ website:

“JCVI has said that vaccination of children aged 5 to 11 years who are not in a clinical risk group would prevent a relatively small number of hospitalizations or intensive care admissions. For a variant like Omicron, it would take around four million vaccine doses to two million children to prevent one admission to ICU.

For less severe illnesses, 58,000 child vaccinations would prevent one-child hospitalization. Children admitted recently to hospital with COVID had an average length of stay of 1-2 days. The Omicron wave saw no more children in hospital than before Omicron hit the UK.”

Pfizer Backs Off Shots for Children Under 5

While vaccine makers and health agencies have been pushing forward with COVID jabs for babies as young as 6 months, parents with children under 5 can, for now, draw a sigh of relief, as plans to roll out shots for the under-5 age group have been suspended, at least temporarily.

February 11, 2022, Pfizer withdrew its U.S. Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) application for children under 5. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Pfizer, they want to collect more data on the effects of a third dose, as two doses did not produce expected immunity in 2- to 5-year-olds.

Three days later, former FDA Commissioner and current Pfizer board member Scott Gottlieb told CNBC the EUA application was pulled because COVID cases are so low among young children that the shot couldn’t be shown to provide much of a benefit.

Considering you have to give the jab to some 2 million children to prevent a single ICU stay, it’s no wonder they can’t show effectiveness in studies that have just a few thousand children. Pfizer’s youth trial on 5- to 11-year-olds had just 2,268 participants, and only two-thirds of those received the real COVID jab.

However, the OpenVAERS team suspects there may be something far more problematic behind Pfizer’s withdrawal. In a February 21, 2022, email notice to subscribers, OpenVAERS stated:

“None of these explanations suffice because all of that information was known prior to Pfizer submitting this EUA to the FDA on February 1 [2022]. It makes one wonder whether adverse events in the treatment group might be the factor that neither Pfizer nor the FDA want to talk about?

So, we decided to look at reports of injury associated with COVID-19 vaccines in children 17 and younger. Remember, these shots have only been on the market for a short while and only children 5 to 17 are eligible. We created a separate page called Child Reports that will update automatically as new reports come in.

We were shocked by what we found — 34,223 VAERS reports in the U.S. in this age range, including infants harmed through transmission from the mother via breast milk, lots of reports of kids receiving shots who were too young (either the parents lied about their age or the doctor/pharmacy made a mistake with screening or dosing), and heartbreaking reports of myocarditis and death.”

Shocking Data From Israel Show Extent of Side Effects

While health agencies and mainstream media still insist that side effects from the COVID jab are “rare,” real-world data show a different story. An English translation of the report can be downloaded from Galileo Is Back on Substack. As noted in the report:

“On December 20, 2020, a vaccination program was launched in Israel using Pfizer’s vaccine for COVID-19. By the end of March 2021, more than half of the population had been vaccinated with two vaccine doses.

The decrease in immunity over time and emergence of new variants led to a renewed increase in morbidity in Israel in the summer of 2021. By the end of July 2021, a third shot of the vaccine (booster shot) was authorized for everyone who had received two shots and at least five months had passed from the second shot.

From data collection by medical teams or self-reporting by the public of side-effects in temporal proximity (passive monitoring), it appears that there is underreporting; therefore, it is important to identify side-effects in temporal proximity to vaccination with the booster in an active manner via a dedicated survey.

General goals: To determine the frequency of side-effects which appeared within 21-30 days from vaccination with the third Pfizer shot (booster) against COVID-19 among citizens above 18 years of age.

Specific goals: Examine the prevalence of side-effects in temporal proximity to the third shot grouped according to age and gender. Examine the time of onset relative to administration of the vaccine and the duration thereof, and to compare it with the side-effects of previous vaccines.”

In all, 2,894 people were contacted and 2,068 agreed to be interviewed (response rate: 71.4%). Of those 2,068 boosted individuals:

  • 0.3% required hospitalization for an adverse event

  • 4.5% experienced one or more neurological problems (2.1% of men and 6.9% of women), such as tingling or itching sensation, Bell’s palsy, vision damage, memory deterioration, hearing damage, convulsions, loss of consciousness and more

  • 9.6% of women under the age of 54 experienced menstrual irregularities. Of those, “39% suffered from similar side-effects after prior COVID-19 vaccinations; however most (67%) indicated that the side-effects waned prior to the third vaccination and returned after receiving it”

  • 26.4% of those with preexisting anxiety disorder or depression experienced a worsening of their symptoms

  • 24.2% of those with preexisting autoimmune disorders experienced exacerbation of disease

Between 6.3% and 9.3% of those with preexisting high blood pressure, lung disease, diabetes and heart disease also reported that their condition was exacerbated after the third booster. A small number of women, but no men, also reported herpes infections (0.4% for herpes simplex infections and 0.3% for herpes zoster). Other key take-home’s from this Israeli report are that:

  • Side-effects are more common among women and younger people

  • 1 in 10 women suffer menstrual irregularities

  • Neurological side effects typically don’t appear until about a month after the jab

  • In the majority of cases, the occurrence of a given side effect was not more severe after the third shot compared to the two previous doses. Put another way, the severity of side effects tends to be the same, regardless of the number of doses, so these finding can perhaps be applied to doses 1 and 2 as well

German Health Insurance Data Show Alarming Side Effect Rates

German health insurance data are also triggering alarms. Andreas Schöfbeck, a board member of a large insurance company called BKK ProVita, shared the data with Die Welt.

They analyzed the medical data of 10.9 million insured individuals, looking for potential COVID jab side effects. To their horror, they found 400,000 doctors’ visits could be realistically attributed to the jab. According to Schöfbeck, extrapolated to the total population of Germany, the total number of doctors’ visits attributable to jab side effects would be 3 million.

“The number that resulted from our analysis are very far away from the publicly announced numbers [by the Ministry of Health]. It would be unethical not to talk about it,” Schöfbeck told Die Welt, adding that the data are “an alarming signal.” As reported by Die Welt (translated from German):

“From January to August 2021 … around 217,000 of just under 11 million BBK policyholders had to be treated for vaccination side effects — while the Paul Ehrlich Institute keeps only 244,576 side effect reports based on 61.4 million vaccinated …

Thus, the number of vaccine side effects would be more than 1,000 percent higher than the PEI reports … With his analysis, Schöfbeck turned to a wide range of institutions — from the German Medical Association and the StiKo to the Paul Ehrlich Institute itself.

He said the figures were a ‘strong alarm signal’ that ‘absolutely must be taken into account in the further use of vaccines.’ His figures could be validated by the same data analyses of other health insurance companies, he says …

Since ‘danger to human life cannot be ruled out,’ he set a deadline of 6 p.m. Tuesday [February 22, 2022] to respond to his letter. As this passed, they turned to the public.”

Autopsy Results in Teens Reveal Heart Damage

 

Getting back to the issue of children and the danger we’re putting them in by giving them this shot, two autopsies of teenage boys who died within days of their COVID jabs revealed the shot caused their deaths. As reported by The Defender:

“The three pathologists, two of whom are medical examiners, published their findings Feb. 14 in an early online release article, ‘Autopsy Histopathologic Cardiac Findings in Two Adolescents Following the Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose,’ in the Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine.

The authors’ findings were conclusive. Two teenage boys were pronounced dead in their homes three and four days after receiving the second Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 dose. There was no evidence of active or previous COVID-19 infection. The teens had negative toxicology screens (i.e., no drugs or poisons were present in their bodies). These boys died from the vaccine.”

Histopathological examination revealed that neither of the boys’ hearts had signs of typical myocarditis. Instead, what they found were changes consistent with catecholamine-mediated stress cardiomyopathy, also known as toxic cardiomyopathy.

This is a temporary kind of heart injury that can develop in response to extreme physical, chemical or emotional stressors. Another common term for this kind of injury is “broken heart syndrome.” Hyperinflammatory states such as severe COVID-19 infection can also cause this kind of injury to the heart.

More details about the medical history of each of the boys and their autopsy findings are reviewed by Pam Popper of Wellness Forum Health in the video above. Curiously, neither of the boys had any symptoms of myocarditis before they died. One had complained of a headache and upset stomach. The other had not mentioned any symptoms. As noted by The Defender:

“This is extremely concerning. These boys had smoldering, catastrophic heart injuries with no symptoms. How many others have insidious cardiac involvement from vaccination that won’t manifest until they get a serious case of COVID-19 or the flu? Or perhaps when they subject themselves to the physical stress of competitive sports?

These findings suggest a significant subset of COVID-19 deaths in the vaccinated could be due to the vaccines themselves. Furthermore, it raises this question: How often does this condition exist in a latent form in vaccinated individuals?”

Myocarditis Risk in Young Men Is Not Rare

U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) data also raise questions about the risk of potentially lethal myocarditis, especially in boys. The following slide was presented during a June 23, 2021, meeting convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), to discuss the risk of myopericarditis.

As you can see, the observed rates of myocarditis and/or pericarditis for several age groups, and especially among males, are significantly higher than the expected background rate.

This is a loud and clear safety signal, yet the ACIP proceeded to recommend the shot to preteens and teens anyway, and in a public statement insisted that myopericarditis is “an extremely rare side effect” that “only an exceedingly small number of people will experience after vaccination.” How can they say that with data like this right in front of their noses?

 

Based on this VAERS data, the rate of myocarditis is about 6.5 per 100,000 doses in 12- to 17-year-olds. Going back to where we started, 4 million doses are required to prevent a single child, 5 to 11 years of age, from being admitted to the ICU for COVID.

Assuming the rate of myocarditis in 5- to 11-year-olds is identical to that of 12- to 17-year-olds, we could potentially be looking at 260 cases of myocarditis for every ICU admission for COVID that we prevent. On the whole, the COVID jab provides only risk for children under 18, so there’s absolutely no justification for it.

References

Yale Medicine October 25, 2021, Updated February 11, 2022

Stats Jamie

COVID-19 and All-Cause Mortality Data Analysis by Kathy Dopp and Stephanie Seneff (PDF)

Twitter Jamie Jenkins February 18, 2022

Stats Jamie February 20, 2022

New York Times February 12, 2022

USA Today February 11, 2022

CNN December 17, 2021

CNBC February 14, 2022

VOA October 22, 2021

Galileo Is Back Substack February 15, 2022

WELT Mehr Impf-Nebenwirkungen als bisher bekannt

Fauci Comparison of Great Barrington Declaration Authors to AIDS Deniers ‘Utterly Shocking:’ Bhattacharya

By Zachary Stieber and Jan Jekielek

 

March 21, 2022 Updated: March 21, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

Dr. Anthony Fauci’s comparison of Great Barrington Declaration authors and signatories to “AIDS denialism” was “utterly shocking,” one of the authors says.

“In no way have I or any of the signers of the Great Barrington Declaration denied COVID. COVID is a deadly disease. It’s killed millions. It in particular is a danger to older populations,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, an epidemiology professor at the University of Stanford, told EpochTV’s American Thought Leaders program.

The premise of the declaration is that COVID-19 presents a danger to some people, Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, another author, told The Epoch Times.

“The reason that we proposed focused protection in the Great Barrington Declaration is because we take COVID very seriously and that there needed to be much better protection of older, high-risk people,” Kulldorff said. But “we protected the younger members of the laptop class who were terrified of the COVID when they shouldn’t have been because the risk was very, very small. At the same time, we didn’t protect older working-class people” like bus drivers.

Related Coverage

LIVE: Censorship of Science, with Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Dr. Scott Atlas, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya

The declaration called for a more targeted approach to combating the pandemic. Instead of imposing lockdowns and other harsh measures against the entire population, the authors called for focusing on protecting those most at risk from COVID-19, such as the elderly.

Fauci, on the other hand, has endorsed lockdowns and the closure of schools, among other policies.

Fauci, the longtime head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in an internal email obtained by The Epoch Times, said the declaration reminded him of “AIDS denialism,” referencing three scientists who questioned the link between HIV and AIDS.

Fauci and his agency have not responded to requests for comment.

Bhattacharya, who penned the declaration with Kulldorff and fellow epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta, said the trio was “not arguing that COVID isn’t caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”

“So the analogy makes no sense on its own terms. And in terms of denying the harms of COVID—I think quite the contrary—what we’re trying to do is take the data about who’s most at risk from COVID seriously, take data on who’s most at risk from the lockdowns seriously, and then propose a policy that would address the risk that COVID actually poses, as opposed to the failed policy which Tony Fauci was the primary architect I believe. Where if we just locked down for a short period of time, the disease will go away, if we just wear masks for a short period of time the disease go away, if we force-vaccinate 100 percent of the population, the disease will go away, ” he added.

Fauci was among the top U.S. health officials who promoted efforts like “15 days to slow the spread” early in the pandemic.

“All of these were failed promises based on flawed scientific understanding of the nature of COVID. And to turn around and then say that we were somehow denying COVID? I think the charge goes more strongly in the other direction, where Tony Fauci and others who supported lockdowns denied basic facts about COVID, such as whether COVID-recovered patients have natural immunity, that actually led to many of the mistakes that were made,” Bhattacharya said.

 

 

 

Nearly Three-Quarters of US Counties Saw Spike in Deaths in 2021, Census Data Show

By Katabella Roberts

 

March 24, 2022 Updated: March 24, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

Nearly three-quarters of counties in the United States experienced a spike in deaths last year, according to newly released Census data.

More than 73 percent (2,297) of U.S. counties experienced a “natural decrease” in 2021, up from 45.5 percent in 2019 and 55.5 percent in 2020 at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Vintage 2021 estimates of population and components of change.

A natural decrease in population happens when more deaths occur than births over a given period of time, in this case from July 2020 to July 2021.

Fewer births, an aging population, and increased mortality further exasperated by the pandemic also contributed to a hike in natural decrease, according to the Census Bureau.

The bureau’s data covered 3,143 counties, 384 metropolitan statistical areas, and 543 micropolitan statistical areas across the nation.

According to Axios, which cited the data, there were 535,000 more deaths in 2020 than in 2019.

In 2021, all counties in Delaware, Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island experienced more deaths than births, according to the data.

The bureau’s data suggested that some counties experienced population declines due to migration as many Americans relocated to less populous or less expensive areas during the pandemic.

Counties in California (41.4 percent), Oregon (27.8 percent), and Mississippi (23.2 percent) experienced the largest international migration loss, meaning more people moved out of the country than moved in, according to the data.

The states of Alaska (80.0 percent), Louisiana (71.9 percent), and Illinois (65.7 percent) experienced the highest percentages of counties with net domestic migration loss, which is when people move from one area of the United States to another.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during an event in San Francisco on Feb. 9, 2022. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Overall, most counties (2,063 or 65.6 percent) experienced “positive domestic migration” from 2020 to 2021, meaning there were more people entering than leaving those areas.

Arizona’s Maricopa County welcomed the most residents from domestic migration, at 46,866, followed by Riverside County, California with 31,251, and Collin County, Texas with 30,191 residents.

Los Angeles County, California, experienced the greatest net domestic migration loss with 179,757 residents, followed by New York County in New York with 113,642.

New York was at one point in the spring of 2020 the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in America.

“The patterns we’ve observed in domestic migration shifted in 2021,” said Dr. Christine Hartley, assistant division chief for estimates and projections in the Census Bureau’s Population Division. “Even though over time we’ve seen a higher number of counties with natural decrease and net international migration continuing to decline, in the past year, the contribution of domestic migration counteracted these trends so there were actually more counties growing than losing population.”

Meanwhile, micro areas in the United States, or smaller locales, diverted from previous trends, experiencing a slightly faster growth (0.2 percent between 2020 and 2021) than metro areas, which increased by 0.1 percent.

Among metro areas, 251 (65 percent) experienced population increases between that time period, while 287 (52.9 percent) of the 543 U.S. micro areas saw population increases in 2021.

Of the 384 metro areas in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, 213 (55.5 percent) experienced a natural decrease in 2021, among which Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (-10,838); Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, Florida (-9,291); and North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, Florida (-6,643) had the highest levels.

Overall, five of the top 10 largest-gaining counties in 2021 were in Texas in the counties of Collin, Fort Bend, Williamson, Denton, and Montgomery. They gained a combined total of 145,663 residents.

Los Angeles County in California, which has had the highest number of deaths from COVID-19, experienced the largest population loss of any county, losing a total of 159,621 residents in 2021.

The latest data come after figures released by the Census Bureau on Dec. 21 showed that the U.S. population grew by 392,665 people (0.1 percent) between July 1, 2020 and July 1, 2021, the lowest rate on record.

Previous data released in August showed that America’s population also grew by just 7.4 percent during the previous decade, which is the second slowest growth on record.

Only the decade spanning the 1930s—when the Great Depression occurred—had a slower growth rate.

 

 

 

Woman Died of Rare Brain Bleed After Getting COVID-19 Vaccine: Coroner

By Jack Phillips

 

March 20, 2022 Updated: March 21, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

A coroner in the United Kingdom has determined that a woman died from a side effect caused by the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.

The woman was identified as 34-year-old Kim Lockwood, who had complained of a headache eight days after taking the shot in March of 2021, South Yorkshire Coroner Nicola Mundy told the BBC in a statement on March 16.

The coroner said her condition quickly deteriorated, and she was pronounced dead 17 hours after being admitted to the hospital, eight days after getting the shot.

Mundy said Lockwood was “extremely unlucky” in developing a “sudden and catastrophic” bleed on her brain. Her death was recorded at the Doncaster Coroner’s court as Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia (VITT), officials told the broadcaster.

An article published by the U.S. National Center for Biotechnology Information says VITT is “defined as a clinical syndrome” that entails the “development of thrombosis at uncommon sites” that include cerebral venous sinus thrombosis or splanchnic venous thrombosis. Thrombosis occurs when blood clots block veins or arteries.

The American Society of Hematology in January 2022 stated that VITT is marked by low platelet count, known as thrombocytopenia, and blood clots that usually occur in the splanchnic veins located in the abdomen and stomach or the cerebral veins located in the brain.

Lockwood’s husband, Damian, told news outlets that his wife, a mother of two, had complained that “her head felt like it was going to explode,” while her father, Wayne Merrill, recalled her last words, which he said were that her headache was “actually killing her.”

“Kim’s pain wasn’t appropriately managed, and the family should have been listened to,” Mundy said.

The UK government says there have been 438 reported cases of thromboembolic events (blood clotting) and 79 deaths to date after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Last year, officials in Edmonton, Canada, said a woman in her 50s died of VITT after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine, which entails two doses and uses adenovirus technology. AstraZeneca’s vaccine, while common across Europe, hasn’t been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for usage.

“I am sad to report … that we have confirmed Alberta’s first death from VITT following vaccination from the AstraZeneca [COVID-19] vaccine,” Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. Deena Hinshaw wrote on Twitter on May 4, 2021. “My sincere condolences go out to those grieving this loss.”

U.S. and UK government officials have repeatedly said that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks for most people.

COVID-19 is the illness caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

AstraZeneca officials didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

Data Reveal Disturbing Trend From COVID Jab

 

Joseph Mercola

 

 

March 19, 2022 Updated: March 20, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

Commentary

After mining the Department of Defense database (one of the best in the United States) and comparing 2021 data gathered before the COVID shots, three whistleblowers are sounding the alarm about a 10x to 20x increase in malignancy post-jab, as well as other alarming early warning signs.

Part 1 Part 2

I hope you enjoy this two-part interview of two intellectual giants by Candace Owens with Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine core platform technology. They discuss some of the most important issues facing humanity today. In their nearly four-hour discussion, they touch on everything from COVID-19 shots’ effects on fertility to the “red line” that’s been crossed — referring to targeting children with social pressure and coercion to get jabbed.

Malone has been thrust into the spotlight for speaking out about the risks of COVID-19 shots, with his words going viral before quickly being erased from YouTube and Twitter. It doesn’t matter if what he’s saying is true; if it creates “vaccine hesitancy,” it will be censored. Toward that end, Malone has been targeted by the media and labeled an “anti-vaxxer,” which is ironic since he’s received COVID-19 shots.

That fact should make it all the more apparent that he’s speaking out not due to a predetermined agenda or because he’s getting rich — to the contrary, his reputation is constantly under attack — but because he believes it’s the right thing to do, and he feels morally obliged to help anyone he can.

COVID-19 Shots Are Affecting Fertility

Anecdotal reports of alterations in women’s menstrual cycles following COVID-19 shots have poured in around the globe. Changes include heavier and more painful periods and changes in menses length, as well as unexpected breakthrough bleeding or spotting among women on long-acting contraception or those who are postmenopausal and haven’t had a period in years or even decades.

Health officials have tried to brush off the reports, and doctors have told women that it’s just a result of stress — something dubbed “hysteria” in earlier times. Upon hearing that so many women’s concerns were brushed off as hysteria, Malone said:

“Is this the 1950s? Have I just gone back a century? This whole thing that women are being histrionic is so mid-century. But that’s how they rolled it out. And it’s not just younger women. It’s post-menopausal women that start having menstruation. That’s another big one, which is, for pathologists, which is part of my background, that’s a red flag for cancer.”

Sure enough, a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology in January 2022 — funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Research on Women’s Health — confirmed an association between menstrual cycle length and COVID-19 shots.

Pfizer’s biodistribution study, which was used to determine where the injected substances go in the body, also showed the COVID spike protein from the shots accumulated in “quite high concentrations” in the ovaries.

A Japanese biodistribution study for Pfizer’s jab also found that vaccine particles move from the injection site to the blood, after which circulating spike proteins are free to travel throughout the body, including to the ovaries, liver, neurological tissues and other organs. Malone explained:

“The thing that drives menstruation is the ovary. We know that the lipids — the synthetic, positively charged fats that wrap the RNA to get it to slip into cells — have never been administered to humans before. We know from the Pfizer data package that came out of Japan that these lipids go to the ovary … your children, your girls are born with all the eggs that they will ever have in their entire lives.

And we don’t know yet what the reproductive harm is going to be, but we do know that in young women, reproductive age women, we are seeing this phenotype, this characteristic.

And not only am I very worried about it, I did testimony — as did many others — with the Orthodox Jewish community … they made the determination and sent out a formal statement to their community that these vaccines should not be used in children and strongly discourage their use in adults.

And one of the reasons is they are very focused on reproductive health. What we’re talking about is a deep issue that is not treatable at all … I think we can say this with confidence that if we’re having menstrual irregularities, we are having alterations in fertility.”

DOD Whistleblowers Warn of Spike in Adverse Events

Thomas Renz, a lawyer that Malone knows personally, had three Department of Defense (DOD) whistleblowers come forward. They had datamined the DOD health database, which Malone states is one of the best in the U.S.

They looked through data from 2015 to 2020, establishing a baseline of the number of cases of miscarriage, cancer, neurological disease and stillbirths. Then, they compared it to 2021, after the COVID-19 shots rolled out. Renz showed Malone some of the disturbing data:

“I just skimmed the data. Thomas had his laptop open and showed me some of the things that are popping up. They pulled a massive amount of data out of the DOD databases and then did a whistleblower complaint. Ron Johnson has now extended Senate protection to them formally as whistleblowers.

So they came to Thomas Renz with this information, and from what I saw — now this is preliminary, we haven’t dissected it yet — but at the top level, I thought it was mind-blowing. The information about miscarriages, the information about cancers, which is validating what Ryan Cole has been concerned about, neurologic disease and the stillbirths is there.

And apparently, according to Thomas, these brave whistleblowers have captured examples and information, with the cardiac events, for instance, of the Department of Defense — whoever is doing this, the data management — is actually going in and deleting cases, manipulating the database.”

Owens also saw the data and said the lowest category increase was 248%, while others increased by 1,000%. “It’s not subtle,” Malone said.

Experts Raise Cancer Concerns

Dr. Ryan Cole, the Mayo Clinic-trained, triple-boarded pathologist who Malone referred to, has stated that he’s seeing potential cancer-causing changes, including decreases in receptors that keep cancer in check, and other adverse events post-shot:

“I’m seeing countless adverse reactions … it’s really post-vaccine immunodeficiency syndrome … I’m seeing a marked increase in herpetic family viruses, human papilloma viruses in the post vaccinated. I’m seeing a marked uptick in a laboratory setting from what I see year over year of an increase of usually quiescent diseases.

In addition to that — and correlation is not causation — but in the last six months I have seen — you know, I read a fair amount of women’s health biopsies —about a 10- to 20-fold increase of uterine cancer compared to what I see on an annual basis.

Now we know that the CD8 cells are one of our T-cells to keep our cancers in check. I am seeing early signals … what I’m seeing is an early signal in the laboratory setting that post vaccinated patients are having diseases that we normally don’t see at rates that are already early considerably alarming.”

In addition to the effects on the ovaries, the Japanese study found vaccine deposits were found in bone marrow, raising additional cancer concerns, Malone says:

“Bone marrow is really sensitive to local environments … and produces a whole lot of different types of cells that are involved in bone metabolism. This is something that matters a lot to women, particularly as they move through menopause — bone density. I

So there are cells that regulate bone remodeling and bone density that come from your bone marrow. Much of your blood elements come from stem cells that sit in your bone marrow. Red cells and white cells.

There are many types of cancer that can occur when those stem cell populations that live in your bone marrow get changed so that they lose their normal controls on growth. So that’s really what cancer is. So lymphoma, leukemia, chronic myelogenous leukemia, all these things, are all bone marrow cancer diseases.”

The Silencing of Mass Formation Psychosis

If you’ve heard the term “mass formation psychosis” recently, it’s likely because Malone mentioned it on an episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience” December 31, 2021, which was viewed by more than 50 million people January 2, 2022, mass formation psychosis reached a value of 100 on Google Trends, which means it had reached peak popularity, after previously being practically unheard of.

The technocrats quickly took action, manipulating search results and populating Google with propaganda to discredit Malone and the mass formation psychosis theory — even though Mattias Desmet, professor of clinical psychology at the University of Ghent in Belgium, who has 126 publications to his name, has been studying it for many years, and the phenomenon actually dates back over 100 years.

Those under the spell of mass formation psychosis obsessively focus on a failure of the normal world or a particular event or person, who becomes the focus of the attention and can effectively control the masses.

Mass formation can occur in a society with feelings of social isolation and free-floating anxiety among a large number of people, and provides a coherent explanation of why so many people have fallen victim to the unbelievable lies and propaganda of the mainstream COVID-19 narrative. The phenomenon leads to totalitarian thinking and, eventually, to totalitarian states, but as Malone told Owens, fortunately about one-third of people are resistant to it.

Speaking Out to Save Children

Malone is dedicated to speaking out because he wants to protect future generations. He’s concerned about the pandemic response’s effects on children, stating that public policies have had a particularly strong adverse effect on the young.

He called COVID-19 injection mandates “completely unjustified” for children and recommends that youths who have received COVID-19 injections have their hearts checked for damage, given the real risk of myocarditis and heart damage. Mask mandates in schools have also interfered with children’s psychological health, and Malone believes they’re causing developmental delays in children.

Further, a bill has now been introduced in California that would allow 12-year-olds to consent to COVID-19 shots, which Malone presents as another way the government is enforcing control where it doesn’t belong:

“In terms of kids, moms and dads have to take ownership … it’s your job, it’s my job to protect the kids, and don’t let the government get in the middle of your family. That’s another thing that has been so wrong here, how we’ve allowed the government to insert itself into the family, and that has got to stop …

What we’ve learned is that children are being subjected to intense social pressure and pressure by their school teachers. So technically in the clinical research world, we call this coercion. Just like giving out ice cream to take jabs is enticement …

They’re seeking to create a situation in which children are going to be subjected to coercion by their school teachers and their peers to take an unlicensed medical product that they don’t need to take because they are not at risk from the disease, and which has real risks of causing them harm. That’s, to be blunt, where we’re at. What do I say to parents? I say get informed.”

Will There Be a Great Reset or a Great Awakening?

We’re at the point now where all media is being manipulated and information is being controlled. “There’s a school of thought,” Malone said, “that this happened long ago with the rise of the Rockefellers, and the perversion of the entire medical enterprise and medical schools.”

In the immediacy, people who have been harmed by COVID-19 shots are being called crazy by their friends and family. Those who have banded together with other victims on social media, forming groups to share their experiences that even many doctors continue to deny, have also been shut down, their pages deleted. “It’s the ultimate gaslighting,” Malone said.

He and Owens touch on much more in the interview, from the global narrative that’s intent on hunting down physicians and taking away their licenses for providing early COVID-19 treatment to how Bill Gates and Big Tech have succeeded in creating monopolies and gained control of information.

Malone, however, wants to empower people with information and tools to think so they can make their own decisions about the world around them. If that occurs, and people reconnect and come together once again for a real greater good, he believes we can avoid a Great Reset and instead experience a Great Awakening:

“There’s the Great Reset, which is often tied to this language of ‘build back better,’ because that’s the approved language from the World Economic Forum. So there’s this Great Reset toward a world where we own nothing and we’re happy … and we’re told what to do and we do it.

And there’s the Great Awakening, where it could be a renaissance. If we use the metaphor of Europe in the 1400s, 1500s and 1600s, moving from a dark age into a renaissance … there was a period of intense explosion when people got intellectually engaged …

If we allow ourselves to start thinking again and engaging with the world and engaging with each other, could we get to a point where we have a Great Awakening instead of a Great Reset? Where we become committed to each other and to a life of the mind and the body? I think that is a possibility. I don’t think that we’re too far gone.”

Sources and References

 

 

 

Newly Released Pfizer Documents Reveal COVID Jab Dangers

By Joseph Mercola

 

March 22, 2022 Updated: March 24, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

What really happened in the first 90 days of the jab rollout? How many adverse events and different health problems? How many deaths? The first tranche of documents were released March 1, 2022, and it proves beyond any shadow of a doubt—we’ve been sold down the river!

Story at-a-glance

  • A small batch of documents released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in mid-November 2021 revealed that in the first three months of the COVID jab rollout, Pfizer received 42,086 adverse event reports that included 1,223 deaths

  • The first really large tranche of Pfizer documents — some 10,000 pages — was released by the FDA March 1, 2022. Included are nine pages of recorded side effects, about 158,000 different health problems in all

  • An initial review of case report forms (CRFs) reveal significant data collection errors and anomalies

  • Problems included patients entered into the “healthy population” group who were far from healthy; serious adverse event (SAE) numbers that were left blank; sample barcodes that were missing; at least one death of a patient the day before being listed as being at a medical checkup; and second doses that were administered outside the three-week protocol window. There also are questions as to whether participants were properly observed for an adequate amount of time; plus adverse events were listed as “not serious” despite extended hospital stay and much more

  • A majority of the CRFs in this release were from Ventavia-run trial sites. Ventavia is currently facing a lawsuit brought by Brook Jackson, a former Ventavia regional director. Jackson was fired shortly after she brought concerns about potential data falsification and poor laboratory management to the attention of the FDA and higher-ups in the company

In September 2021, a group called Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT) filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to obtain the documentation used to approve Comirnaty, including safety and effectiveness data, adverse reaction reports and lists of active and inactive ingredients.

When, after a month, the FDA still had not responded to the FOIA request, the PHMPT sued.1 Pfizer and the FDA asked the judge to give them 75 years to release all the documents (doling out just 500 pages per month)2 but, fortunately, the judge ruled that they have to release them at a rate of 55,000 pages per month.

COVID Jab Supporter Gets Red-Pilled

In mid-November 2021, the FDA released the first 91 pages,3,4 which alone revealed the FDA has been aware of shocking safety issues since April 30, 2021. For nurse educator John Campbell, featured in the video above, these documents appear to have served as a “red pill,”5 waking him up to the possibility that the jabs may be far more dangerous than anyone expected, but he didn’t get around to reviewing them until now.

Cumulatively, through February 28, 2021, Pfizer received 42,086 adverse event reports, including 1,223 deaths. The latest tranche of Pfizer documents also includes a whopping nine pages of recorded side effects — 158,000 in all!

In his video, Campbell reviews the documents listed as “5.3.6. Postmarketing Experience,” which were originally marked “confidential.” They reveal that, cumulatively, through February 28, 2021, Pfizer received 42,086 adverse event reports, including 1,223 deaths.

As noted by Campbell, “It would have been good to know about this at the time, wouldn’t it?” referring to the rollout of the jabs. Campbell has been fairly consistent in his support of the “safe and effective” vaccine narrative, but “This has just destroyed trust in authority,” he says.

To have 1,223 fatalities and 42,086 reports of injury in the first three months is a significant safety signal, especially when you consider that the 1976 swine flu vaccine was pulled after only 25 deaths.

Now, the number of doses shipped has been redacted under a FOIA redaction code that stands for “Trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential.” Why would the number of doses shipped be confidential?

Campbell is clearly bothered by this redaction, as you cannot calculate the incidence rate or side effects if you don’t know what the denominator is. As noted by Campbell, that number cannot be proprietary. It’s being withheld for some other reason (and I just stated what that might be).

Even without knowing the underreporting factor, Campbell is appalled by the number of reported side effects. It is very clear that this information red-pilled Campbell. For an overview of the types of side effects recorded, check out Campbell’s video. I’ve already reviewed that in previous articles.

Here, we’ll move on to the first really large tranche of Pfizer documents, which was released March 1, 2022. In all, the FDA has some 450,000 pages of data from Pfizer’s COVID jab trials, and we now have just over 10,000 of those pages. You can find them all on PHMPT.org.6

Findings From Early Review of Case Reports

March 7, 2022, investigative journalist Sonia Elijah published a review of her initial findings on Trial Site News,7 having glossed through some of the thousands of newly-released documents.

Her review centers primarily on the case report forms (CRFs). These are documents used in clinical research to record standardized data from each patient, including adverse events. As such, they’re a crucial part of the clinical trial process.

A majority of the CRFs in this release were from Ventavia-run trial sites. Ventavia is currently facing a lawsuit brought by Brook Jackson, a former Ventavia regional director. Jackson was fired shortly after she brought concerns about potential data falsification and poor laboratory management to the attention of the FDA and higher-ups in the company.

Her testimony was published November 2, 2021, in The British Medical Journal — the oldest and most prestigious medical journal in the world — by investigative journalist Paul Thacker.8 Facebook fact checkers actually tried to “debunk” this BMJ article and censored it.

In her review of the CRFs, Elijah found a number of errors and anomalies that seem to corroborate Jackson’s claims, including the following:9

  • Patients entered into the “healthy population” group who were far from healthy — For example, one such “healthy” participant was a Type 2 diabetic with angina, a cardiac stent and a history of heart attack.

  • Serious adverse event (SAE) numbers were left blank — Ventavia site No. 1085 has a particularly large number of missing SAE numbers.

  • Missing barcodes for samples collected — Without those barcodes, you can’t match the sample to the participant.

  • Suspicious-looking SAE start and end dates — For example, the so-called “healthy” diabetic suffered a “serious” heart attack October 27, 2020. The “end” date is listed as October 28, the next day, which is odd because it was recorded as serious enough to require hospitalization.

Also, on that same day, October 28, the patient was diagnosed with pneumonia, so likely remained hospitalized. “This anomaly raises doubt as to the accuracy of these recorded dates, potentially violating ALOCA-C clinical site documentation guidelines for clinical trials,” Elijah writes.

  • Unblinded teams were responsible for reviewing adverse event reports for signs of COVID cases, and to review severe COVID cases — Yet in some cases they appear to have dismissed the possibility of an event being COVID-related, such as pneumonia. This despite the fact that Pfizer’s protocol (section 8.2.4) lists “enhanced COVID-19” (i.e., antibody dependent enhancement) as a potential side effect to be on the lookout for. As noted by Elijah:

“Inadvertently, this could have led to bias, as the unblinded teams would have been aware which participants were assigned the placebo and those who received the vaccine. They might have been under pressure by the sponsor for the trial to go a certain way and for events like ‘COVID Pneumonia’ to be classified simply as pneumonia.”

  • Impossible dating — The diabetic who suffered a heart attack followed by pneumonia (which may have been unacknowledged COVID pneumonia) died, and the date of death is listed as the day before the patient supposedly went for a “COVID ill” visit.

Clearly, it’s impossible for a dead person to attend a medical visit, so something is wrong here. The clinical investigator note states: “There cannot be a date later than date of death. Please remove data from the COVID illness visit and add cough and shortness of breath as AEs (adverse events).” “What kind of pressure was being exerted here?” Elijah asks.

  • Adverse events listed as “not serious” despite extended hospital stay — In one case, the participant fell and suffered facial lacerations the day after the second dose and was hospitalized for 26 days, yet the fall was not reported as serious.

Other anomalies in this particular case include listing the fall as being caused by a “fall” unrelated to the study treatment, and the facial laceration being the result of “hypotension” (low blood pressure). The SAE number is also missing for the facial lacerations.

Elijah writes, “Doubts can be raised over the credibility of this information given the fall and facial lacerations were intrinsically related. So, if facial lacerations were due to ‘hypotension’ then the fall should be due to that too.” Might low blood pressure be an effect of the experimental shot? Possibly. Especially when you consider the patient fell the day after being given the second dose.

Even more suspicious: the causality for the fall was recorded as “related” (to the treatment) on the serious adverse event form, but listed as “not related” on the adverse event CRF. A note states, “Please confirm correct causality.”

  • Dismissing brand new health problems as unrelated to the treatment — For example, in one case, a female participant with no medical history of impaired kidney function was diagnosed with kidney stones and severe hypokalemia, requiring hospitalization, one month after her second dose. Yet despite her having no history of kidney problems, both events were dismissed as “not related” to the study treatment and no further investigation was done.

In closing, Elijah writes:10

“All the evidence gleaned over a limited time appears to back up whistleblower Jackson’s claims of poor trial site data management and raises questions as to how Ventavia conducted the Pfizer clinical trials.

The errors and anomalies in the CRFs also allude to her claims that the clinical research associates were not trained adequately, with many having had no prior clinical experience history. If such egregious findings are true at these sites, could they manifest at other trial sites around North America and beyond?”

Enormous List of Side Effects

The latest tranche of Pfizer documents also includes a whopping nine pages of recorded side effects — 158,000 in all! The picture below speaks louder than anything I can say about this list.

 

Enormous Gap Between What We’ve Been Told and Reality

The Pfizer documents reveal an enormous gap between what we were told about the jab and what the FDA and Pfizer actually knew about it. In a recent article published by The Defender,11 Dr. Meryl Nass asks, “Pfizer, FDA documents contradict official COVID vaccine safety narrative — Is this fraud?”

As noted by Nass, what we’re told in the media is one thing, and what these documents reveal is another. And, importantly, the content of these documents “tell us what information Pfizer and the FDA are willing to stand by.” They also establish what the legal requirements for emergency use authorization and licensing.

“It may come as a shock, but what the FDA said when it issued both the EUA and the license for Pfizer’s vaccines was very different from what you heard from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the media and other sources,” Nass writes.12

CDC Guidance Contradicts Comirnaty Label

She also lists several instances where CDC statements to the public clearly contradict statements on the Comirnaty label. For example:13,14

• While the CDC initially claimed that anaphylactic reactions to the jab occur at approximately the same rate as other vaccines, they’ve since removed that claim, and both the CDC and the Comirnaty label now states that administration of Comirnaty is limited to facilities that can medically manage anaphylactic reactions.

“This is not the case for other vaccines,” Nass says, adding that research from Harvard hospitals reveal the rate of anaphylaxis in employees who got the COVID jab was 50 to 100 times higher than the rate claimed by the CDC, which calculates that rate based on reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Interestingly enough, this matches up with what we believe to be the underreporting factor for VAERS might be.

• While the CDC claims post-jab myocarditis is mild and resolves quickly, the Comirnaty label clearly states that “Information is not yet available about potential long-term sequelae.”

• The CDC recommends the COVID jab for pregnant women, yet the label states that “available data on Comirnaty administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine associated risks in pregnancy.”

• The CDC, FDA and mainstream media contend that the COVID jab cannot cause cancer or fertility problems, yet the Comirnaty label clearly states that “Comirnaty has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, or impairment of male fertility.” If it has not been evaluated, how can they claim to know that it cannot cause these kinds of problems — especially considering the list of reported side effects, above?

• Even though the stated purpose of mass vaccination is to create “herd immunity,” the FDA did not require Pfizer to assess whether the jab could protect against asymptomatic infection or prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

What Was It All For?

With each passing week, the cracks in the official COVID narrative keep multiplying and widening. It’ll be interesting to see what finally breaks the proverbial dam.

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla is now out there pushing for a fourth shot,15 saying a second booster will be “necessary for most,” as three shots not only can’t protect against variants, but they rapidly wane in strength. For those same reasons, Americans must expect to get an annual booster each fall.

Under normal circumstances, that should have ripped the wool off of people’s eyes, but the COVID brainwashing has been so successful, many still can’t see just how badly they’ve been lied to. I believe the final salvo that will wake up the masses will either be revelations about harms, or the realization of what the planned social credit system would actually mean for the average American.

In 2018, Pfizer proudly partnered with a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) payment platform, Alipay, which was used to implement an early Chinese version of vaccine passports, called the “Internet + Vaccination” initiative, aimed at creating “Disease awareness via mobile devices.”16

According to the U.S. State Department, Alipay is a “tool” used by the CCP in its build-up of “technology-facilitated surveillance and social control” network, also known as a social credit system. The same sort of system is now being rolled out in other parts of the world, including the U.S., so it’s interesting to note Pfizer’s involvement with that early digital vaccine passport initiative.

Mid-March 2022, Bourla gave an interview with Washington Post Live (above), admitting the decision to use mRNA technology in the creation of a COVID “vaccine” was “counterintuitive,” as Pfizer has “good experience” with several other vaccine technologies, but only two years’ worth of experience with mRNA, which had never been used in a commercially available medicine before.

In the end, Bourla may come to regret that decision, as it has turned out to be an incredibly lethal one. Although I guess it will depend on whether he’s ever held to account for those choices.

Originally published March 22, 2022 on Mercola.com

Sources and References

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times

Heart Issues Detected Months After COVID-19 Vaccination: Study

By Zachary Stieber

 

March 27, 2022 Updated: March 28, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

Heart abnormalities were detected in some adolescents months after COVID-19 vaccination, according to a study.

Researchers at Seattle Children’s Hospital reviewed cases of patients younger than 18 who went to the hospital with chest pain and elevated serum troponin levels, two key markers of heart inflammation, within a week of getting a second dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

While 35 patients fit the criteria, 19 were excluded for various reasons, including receiving care in another state after the initial visit. Cardiac imaging of the remaining 16 patients, performed three to eight months after they were first examined, showed 11 had persistent late gadolinium enhancement, a heart abnormality, though at lower levels than months earlier.

The follow-up imaging also revealed abnormal global longitudinal strain, a measure of heart function, in three-quarters of the patients, with little change from the initial examinations, as well as “significantly improved” measures of blood pumping and no detected regional wall motion issues, another abnormality.

Researchers said that while symptoms “were transient and most patients appeared to respond to treatment,” the study showed a “persistence of abnormal findings,” noting that late gadolinium enhancement is known as an indicator of heart injury and is associated with a worse prognosis in patients with typical myocarditis.

The findings “rais[e] concerns for potential longer-term effects,” they wrote, adding that they plan to repeat imaging at one year after the vaccine to assess whether problems are still present.

The findings were published following peer review in The Journal of Pediatrics. The researchers said no funding was received for the paper.

Pfizer and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) didn’t respond by press time to requests for comment.

Dr. Anish Koka, a cardiologist who wasn’t involved with the study, said it suggests that 60 to 70 percent of teenagers who get myocarditis from a COVID-19 vaccine may be left with a scar in their heart.

“Certainly, children who had chest pain severe enough to merit seeking medical attention need to at least make sure they get a follow up MRI,” he told The Epoch Times in a message on Twitter, adding that the findings “should have clear implications for the discussion around vaccines, especially for high risk male teenagers … and definitely for vaccine mandates.”

The Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, both built on messenger RNA technology, have been linked with several forms of heart inflammation, including myocarditis and pericarditis, according to data from multiple countries.

The conditions have been seen at much higher than expected rates in youths, especially young men, according to data reported to the CDC. The most at-risk group is 16- and 17-year-old males, who have reported rates of 69 per million after second doses of Pfizer’s two-dose primary series in the United States. The problems are likely underreported.

The heart inflammation often leaves people short of breath, with chest pain and other symptoms. Many patients are admitted to the hospital, and a small number of deaths have been reported.

A survey conducted among some of the youth whose conditions were reported to the CDC at least 90 days after they first experienced symptoms found that about half were still suffering from at least one symptom, such as chest pain.

About 4 in 10 patients were still on exercise restrictions months after experiencing the inflammation, a parallel survey with the patients’ health care providers found.

Providers also disclosed that cardiac imaging done months after symptoms appeared still showed abnormalities for some patients, with late gadolinium enhancement being the most frequent.

 

 

 

mRNA Vaccines Put You at Risk for Acute Coronary Syndrome

BY JOSEPH MERCOLA TIMEMARCH 28, 2022 PRINT

If you’ve taken a two-dose regimen, you’ve more than doubled your five-year risk of this – driving it up to the odds of 1 in 4. Here are nine symptoms to watch out for.

 

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Using the PULS cardiac test, researchers have found Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID shots dramatically increase biomarkers associated with thrombosis, cardiomyopathy and other vascular events following vaccination

  • Pre- and post-injection PULS tests for 566 patients were compared. On average, their PULS scores went from an 11% five-year risk for acute coronary syndrome, to a more than double, 25%, five-year risk

  • Those who got the injection for fear that COVID-19 might adversely affect their heart now face the grim reality that they’ve exchanged a potential risk for a more certain one

  • Another paper details how the mRNA shot can cause thrombocytopenia (low platelet count) through a mechanism that involves the activation of platelets by antibodies against the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies)

  • A mystery that remains to be solved is why only certain people with antibodies to the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies) go on to develop symptoms of platelet activation and thrombocytopenia. One hypothesis is that only a subset of the anti-spike antibodies formed after vaccination can activate platelets and cause thrombocytopenia

In a November 21, 2021, tweet, cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra writes:(1)

“Extraordinary, disturbing, upsetting. We now have evidence of a plausible biological mechanism of how mRNA vaccine may be contributing to increased cardiac events. The abstract is published in the highest impact cardiology journal so we must take these findings very seriously.”

The abstract he’s talking about is “mRNA COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: A Warning,” published in the November 16, 2021, issue of the journal Circulation.(2) (ACS is Acute Coronary Syndrome).

Cardiac Risk Warning

The PULS (Protein Unstable Lesion Signature) cardiac test(3) is a simple blood test that detects unstable cardiac lesion rupture, one of the leading causes of heart attacks. As noted by the authors of that paper, this is “a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers,” which include:

  • IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine

  • Soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis

  • Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue

These and several other proteins are indicative of your immune system’s response to arterial injuries that can result in cardiac lesions. These lesions can become unstable, and if they rupture, they can lead to a heart attack.

“We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.” ~ Circulation November 16, 2021

So, based on the levels of these biomarkers, the test gives you a score that predicts your 5-year risk, as a percentage chance, of developing acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Elevated levels raise your PULS score while levels below the norm lower it.

COVID-Jabbed Patients More Than Double Their ACS Risk

According to the authors of the Circulation report:(4)

“The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients. This report summarizes those results.

A total of 566 [patients], aged 28 to 97, M:F ratio 1:1 seen in a preventive cardiology practice had a new PULS test drawn from 2 to 10 weeks following the 2nd COVID shot and was compared to the previous PULS score drawn 3 to 5 months previously pre- shot.

Baseline IL-16 increased from 35=/-20 above the norm to 82 =/- 75 above the norm post-vac; sFas increased from 22+/- 15 above the norm to 46=/-24 above the norm post-vac; HGF increased from 42+/-12 above the norm to 86+/-31 above the norm post-vac.

These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5-year ACS risk to 25% 5-year ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac.

We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.”

As noted by Malhotra, this is indeed extraordinarily disturbing. Patients who received a two-dose regimen of mRNA more than doubled their five-year ACS risk, driving it from an average of 11% to 25%. Just imagine the shape our medical system and society at large will be in if 1 of every 4 people who got the two-dose regimen ends up with acute heart failure.

Signs and Symptoms to Watch For

ACS is an umbrella term that doesn’t just include heart attacks, but also a range of other conditions involving abruptly reduced blood flow to your heart. Signs and symptoms of ACS typically begin very suddenly, and include:(5)

  • Chest pain/discomfort, often described as aching, pressure, tightness or burning sensations

  • Pain that radiates from your chest to your shoulders, arms, upper abdomen, back, neck and/or jaw

  • Nausea and/or vomiting

  • Indigestion

  • Shortness of breath

  • Sudden heavy sweating

  • Lightheadedness, dizziness and/or fainting

  • Unusual or inexplicable fatigue

  • Restlessness and/or apprehensiveness

If you suspect ACS, do not drive yourself to the hospital. Call for an ambulance, as it is a true medical emergency that may need prompt medical attention. Risk factors for ACS have historically included older age, high blood pressure, cigarette smoking, lack of exercise, unhealthy diet, excess body weight and diabetes.

SARS-CoV-2 infection was recently added to that list, but it seems we must also add the COVID jab as well. Those who got the injection for fear that COVID-19 might adversely affect their heart now face the grim reality that they’ve exchanged a potential risk for a more certain one.

Vaccine-Induced Thrombocytopenia

In related news, a paper published in the journal Blood Advances reviews “SARS-CoV-2 Spike-Dependent Platelet Activation in COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Thrombocytopenia.”(6) Thrombocytopenia is the medical term for low platelet count.

The authors point out that following the rollout of the mRNA and DNA-based COVID shots, more than 150 cases of thrombocytopenia have been reported. The reference for that statistic is a March 9, 2021, paper in the American Journal of Hematology,(7) and injuries are stacking up at breakneck speed.

As of November 12, 2021, there were 4,387 cases of thrombocytopenia reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS),(8) so it’s far more frequent than what they’re stating. (There are also 9,332 reports of heart attacks, which we just discussed, and 13,237 reports of myopericarditis, i.e., inflammation of the heart and/or heart sack.(9))

According to the authors, identifying the mechanism by which the shots cause thrombocytopenia would facilitate the development of a diagnostic test. Historically, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia has been diagnosed using a serotonin release assay (SRA).

Using SRA, a subset of critically ill COVID-19 patients have tested positive for platelet-activating immune complexes that can cause thrombosis. Other researchers have also showed IgG antibodies from critically ill COVID-19 patients can activate platelets, resulting in a thrombotic event.

Here, using a modified SRA, they discovered spike-dependent, platelet-activating immune complexes in a patient with vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia, suggesting the spike protein is the causative factor. They explain:(10)

“Our patient was a 25-year-old woman who presented to hospital 10 days after receiving the Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with fatigue, petechiae and wet purpura. The initial platelet count was 1,000 per cubic millimeter without evidence of schistocytes on blood smear.

Coagulation studies were within the normal range … This also likely excludes the presence of a lupus anticoagulant, given the use of a lupus-sensitive reagent for PTT testing. Anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin antibodies were not detected … and the classic SRA test, with or without heparin or exogenous PF4, was negative.

Assays for drug-induced immune thrombocytopenia with washed donor platelets were also negative for platelet binding with vaccine, PEG2000, or SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein … The patient was treated with dexamethasone and intravenous immune globulin (IVIg) for a presumed immune thrombocytopenic purpura. The platelet count normalized by day seven of treatment.

Additional serum testing identified SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein antibodies of the IgG … IgA … and IgM … classes. Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein were absent, confirming vaccine-induced antibodies without prior infection.

To further investigate the mechanism of thrombocytopenia, we tested the patient’s serum using a modified SRA with addition of recombinant SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein (Spike-SRA). We observed dose-dependent platelet activation with increasing SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein …

The reaction was inhibited by an FcγRIIa blocker … and IVIg … confirming FcγRIIa-dependent platelet activation. Platelet activation was also demonstrated to a lesser degree with increasing amounts of Moderna vaccine … and the excipient PEG2000 …

Furthermore, platelet activation was not detected in a control sample from a patient who had received the Moderna vaccine and had not developed thrombocytopenia …

Circulating Spike protein was detected in our patient’s serum using enzyme immunoassay testing … Together, these results suggest that the thrombocytopenia in this patient was secondary to FcγRIIa-mediated platelet activation by SARS-CoV-2 Spike immune complexes.”

Potential Mechanism Identified

If you found the section quoted above to be too complex, here’s the take-home message: The mRNA shot may be causing an exceptionally low level of platelets through a mechanism that involves antibodies against the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies) resulting in depletion of platelets by activating them.

Platelets are specialized cells that stop bleeding, and they have ACE2 receptors, which is what the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binds to. When the spike protein binds to the ACE2 receptor on the platelets, it activates them.

This platelet activation can lead to disseminated intravascular coagulation, i.e., a pathological overstimulation of your coagulation system that can result in abnormal, and life threatening, blood clotting, as well as thrombocytopenia (low platelet count) and hemorrhaging.

Doctors for COVID Ethics described this mechanism in a February 28, 2021, letter(11) to the European Medicines Agency (EMA). In that letter, they warned that, based on this mechanism, spike protein-based COVID shots are likely to cause blood clots, cerebral vein thrombosis and sudden death, which is precisely what we’ve been seeing ever since.

In essence, you basically end up with so many blood clots throughout your vascular system that your coagulation system is exhausted, hence the low platelet count. The low platelet count, in turn, is what allows for hemorrhaging (abnormal bleeding).

Questions Remain

A mystery that remains to be solved is why only certain people with antibodies to the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies) go on to develop symptoms of platelet activation and thrombocytopenia. Why not all of them? “One hypothesis is that platelet activation is dependent on unique spike protein epitopes, which are only recognized by a minority of identified antibodies,” the authors suggest.(12) In closing, they state:

“Our case … highlights the applicability of the SRA to detect platelet activation disorders aside from HIT [heparin-induced thrombocytopenia]. Although classically done in the presence of heparin, it can be modified to include various antigens to elicit immune complex formation and identify platelet activation …

Ultimately, the role of SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein requires further clarification in regards to platelet activation, as well as the role of vaccine- and PEG-dependent platelet activation. We postulate that a small subset of antibodies against the Spike protein, formed after vaccination, can activate platelets and cause thrombocytopenia.

The prevalence of this phenomenon remains to be clinically determined. Regardless, the modified SRA presented here may be a useful diagnostic test as more cases of vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia are recognized.”

COVID Jab Risks Clearly Outweigh Any Potential Benefit

Since well before the rollout of these COVID shots, scientists and doctors have sounded the alarm, pointing out a host of potential mechanisms by which they may cause harm. Now, nearly a year into it, many of our fears are turning out to have been warranted. They’re causing very serious cardiovascular damage, blood disorders, and reproductive dysfunction.

Worst of all, our health authorities have abandoned the mandate to protect public health and are covering up the wreckage on behalf of the profit makers. On top of that, doctors and nurses who speak out about the collateral damage they’re seeing are being silenced and persecuted by medical boards and government officials alike.

Now, we’re injecting these kill shots into children as young as 5. I see no way for this to end on a pleasant note. As a society, as the deaths and injuries, especially in children, continue to escalate, we’re going to face some excruciatingly difficult times.

To remind you of where this article started, people who have received two mRNA shots have more than doubled their five-year risk of acute coronary events, on average. If you’ve not yet taken the jab, I reckon you probably won’t at this point. But if you’ve already taken one or two, I strongly urge you to review the mechanisms of harm, and evaluate whether it’s worth it to continue with a third.

The adverse changes caused by the shots persist for at least 2.5 months. That’s the low end. We still do not know what the upper time limit is. It could be a year or more, and the risks certainly do not diminish with subsequent additional doses. In the November 12, 2021, OpenVAERS report,(13) they added a graph showing vaccination rates and VAERS reports by state.

As you can see, there’s a clear correlation between the rate of “fully vaccinated” in a given state and the number of COVID injuries reported from that state. (Indiana, for some reason, sticks out as a lone exception with a disproportionately high number of reports to the number of fully “vaccinated.”)

The gray zones are population; blue bars are the number of fully vaccinated; the red bars are the number of reported injuries. (All numbers have been divided by 1,000.) This is yet another piece of evidence that we have a serious problem on our hands.

 

What Can You Do if You Have Jab Remorse?

If you now believe that getting the COVID jab was a mistake and wish to lessen your doubled risk of cardiac complications, there a few basic strategies I would advise.

  1. Make certain you measure your blood vitamin D level and take enough vitamin D orally (typically about 8,000 units/day for most adults) to make sure your level is 60 to 80 ng/ml (150 to 2000 nmol/l).

  2. Eliminate all vegetable (seed) oils in your diet, which involves eliminating nearly all processed foods and most meals in restaurants unless you convince the chef to only cook with butter. Avoid any sauces or salad dressings in restaurants as they are loaded with seed oils. Also avoid chicken and pork as they are very high in linoleic acid, the omega-6 fat that is far too high in nearly everyone and contributes to oxidative stress that causes heart disease.

  3. Consider taking around 500 mg/day of NAC, as it helps prevent blood clots and is a precursor for your body to produce the important antioxidant glutathione.

  4. Consider fibrinolytic enzymes that digest the fibrin that leads to blood clots, strokes and pulmonary embolisms. The dose is typically two, twice a day, but must be taken on an empty stomach, either an hour before or two hours after a meal. Otherwise, the enzymes will digest your food and not the fibrin in the blood clot.

Originally published Dec 2, 2021 on Mercola .com

References

(1) Twitter Aseem Malhotra November 21, 2021

(2) Circulation November 16, 2021; 144(Suppl_1)

(3) PULS Cardiac Test

(4) Circulation November 16, 2021; 144(Suppl_1)

(5) Mayo Clinic ACS

(6) Blood Advances November 1, 2021 DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2021005050

(7) American Journal of Hematology March 9, 2021: 10.1002/ajh.26132

(8) OpenVAERS Report as of November 12, 2021

(9) OpenVAERS Report as of November 12, 2021

COVID Jab Is Far More Dangerous Than Advertised

And that's for those over the age of 65.

BY JOSEPH MERCOLA TIMEAPRIL 4, 2022 PRINT

October 26, 2021, Global Research published an interview with Dr. Peter McCullough, in which he reviews and explains the findings of a September 2021 study published in the journal Toxicology Reports.

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • According to a September 2021 analysis, based on conservative, best-case scenarios, the COVID shots have killed five times more seniors (65+) than the infection

  • In younger people and children, the risk associated with the COVID shot, compared to the risk of COVID-19, is bound to be even more pronounced

  • Data show higher vaccination rates do not translate into lower COVID-19 case rates

  • 50% of reported deaths after COVID-19 “vaccination” occur within 24 hours; 80% occur within the first week. According to one report, 86% of deaths have no other explanation aside from a vaccine adverse event. A Scandinavian study concluded about 40% of post-jab deaths among seniors in assisted living homes are directly due to the injection

The study in the journal Toxicology Reports, states: (1)

“A novel best-case scenario cost-benefit analysis showed very conservatively that there are five times the number of deaths attributable to each inoculation vs those attributable to COVID-19 in the most vulnerable 65+ demographic.

The risk of death from COVID-19 decreases drastically as age decreases, and the longer-term effects of the inoculations on lower age groups will increase their risk-benefit ratio, perhaps substantially.”

“A novel best-case scenario cost-benefit analysis showed very conservatively that there are five times the number of deaths attributable to each inoculation vs those attributable to COVID-19 in the most vulnerable 65+ demographic.

The risk of death from COVID-19 decreases drastically as age decreases, and the longer-term effects of the inoculations on lower age groups will increase their risk-benefit ratio, perhaps substantially.”

McCullough has impeccable academic credentials. He’s an internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist and a full professor of medicine at Texas A&M College of Medicine in Dallas. He also has a master’s degree in public health and is known for being one of the top five most-published medical researchers in the United States, in addition to being the editor of two medical journals.

Authors Defend Their Paper

Not surprisingly, the Toxicology Reports paper has received scathing critique from certain quarters. Still, corresponding author Ronald Kostoff told Retraction Watch that the criticism has actually been “an extremely small fraction” of the overall response, which by and large has been overwhelmingly positive and supportive. Kostoff went on to say: (2)

“Given the blatant censorship of the mainstream media and social media, only one side of the COVID-19 ‘vaccine’ narrative is reaching the public. Any questioning of the narrative is met with the harshest response …

I went into this with my eyes wide open, determined to identify the truth, irrespective of where it fell. I could not stand idly by while the least vulnerable to serious COVID-19 consequences were injected with substances of unknown mid and long-term safety.

We published a best-case scenario. The real-world situation is far worse than our best-case scenario, and could be the subject of a future paper.

What these results show is that we 1) instituted mass inoculations of an inadequately-tested toxic substance with 2) non-negligible attendant crippling and lethal results to 3) potentially prevent a relatively small number of true COVID-19 deaths. In other words, we used a howitzer where an accurate rifle would have sufficed!”

COVID Jab Campaign Has Had No Discernible Impact

Certainly, data very clearly show the mass “vaccination” campaign has not had a discernible impact on global death rates. On the contrary, in some cases the death toll shot up after the COVID shots became widely available. You can browse through covid19.healthdata.org (3) to see this for yourself. Several examples are also included at the very beginning of the video.

This trend has also been confirmed in a September 2021 study(4) published in the European Journal of Epidemiology. It found COVID-19 case rates are completely unrelated to vaccination rates.

Using data available as of September 3, 2021, from Our World in Data for cross-country analysis, and the White House COVID-19 Team data for U.S. counties, the researchers investigated the relationship between new COVID-19 cases and the percentage of the population that had been fully vaccinated.

Sixty-eight countries were included. Inclusion criteria included second dose vaccine data, COVID-19 case data and population data as of September 3, 2021. They then computed the COVID-19 cases per 1 million people for each country, and calculated the percentage of population that was fully vaccinated.

According to the authors, there was “no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last seven days.” If anything, higher vaccination rates were associated with a slight increase in cases. According to the authors: (5)

“[T]he trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.”

The Kostoff Analysis

Getting back to the Toxicology Reports paper, (6) which is being referring to as “the Kostoff analysis,” McCullough says the analysis is definitely making news in clinical medicine. The paper focuses on two factors: assumptions and determinism.

Determinism describes how likely something is. For example, if a person takes a COVID shot, it’s 100% certain they got the injection. It’s not 50% or 75%. It’s an absolute certainty. As a result, that person has a 100% chance of being exposed to whatever risk is associated with that shot.

On the other hand, if a person says no to the injection, it’s not 100% chance they’ll get COVID-19, let alone die from it. You have a less than 1% chance of being exposed to SARS-CoV-2 and getting sick. So, it’s 100% deterministic that taking the shot exposes you to the risks of the shot, and less than 1% deterministic that you’ll get COVID if you don’t take the shot.

The other part of the equation is the assumptions, which are based on calculations using available data, such as pre-COVID death statistics and death reports filed with the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reports System (VAERS).

Mortality Data

As noted by McCullough, two reports have detailed COVID jab death data, showing 50% of deaths occur within 24 hours and 80% occur within the first week. In one of these reports, 86% of deaths were found to have no other explanation aside from a vaccine adverse event. McCullough also cites a Scandinavian study that concluded about 40% of post-jab deaths among seniors in assisted living homes are directly due to the injection. He also cites other eye-opening figures:

  • The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention reports having more than 30,000 spontaneous reports of either hospitalizations and/or deaths among the fully vaccinated

  • Data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services show 300,000 vaccinated CMS recipients have been hospitalized with breakthrough infections

  • 60% of seniors over age 65 hospitalized for COVID-19 have been vaccinated

COVID Shots Are ‘Failing Wholesale’

“When we put all these data together, we have clear-cut science that the vaccines are failing wholesale,” McCullough says. The shots are particularly useless in seniors.

Again, based on a best-case conservative scenario, seniors are five times more likely to die from the shot than they are from the natural infection. This scenario includes the assumption that the PCR test is accurate and reported COVID deaths were in fact due to COVID-19, which we know is not the case, and the assumption that the shots actually prevent death, which we have no proof of.

All things considered, you are FAR better off taking your chances with the natural infection, as McCullough says. The Kostoff analysis also does not take into account the fact that there are safe and effective treatments.

It bases its assumptions on the notion that there aren’t any. It also doesn’t factor in the fact that the COVID shots are utterly ineffective against the Delta and other variants. If you take into account vaccine failure against variants and alternative treatments, it skews the analysis even further toward natural infection being the safest alternative.

FDA and CDC Should Not Run Vaccine Programs

While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the CDC claim not a single death following COVID inoculation was caused by the shot, they should not be the ones making that determination, as they are both sponsoring the vaccination campaign.

They have an inherent bias. When you conduct a trial, you would never allow the sponsor to tell you whether the product was the cause of death, because you know they’re biased.

“We have actually fulfilled all of the Bradford Hill criteria. I’ll tell you right now that COVID-19 vaccine is, from an epidemiological perspective, causing these deaths or a large fraction.” ~ Dr. Peter McCullough

What we need is an external group, a critical event committee, to analyze the deaths being reported, as well as a data safety monitoring board. These should have been in place from the start, but were not.

Had they been, the program would most likely have been halted in February, as by then the number of reported deaths, 186, already exceeded the tolerable threshold of about 150 (based on the number of injections given). Now, we’re well over 17,000. (7) There’s no normal circumstance under which that would ever be allowed.

“The CDC and FDA are running the [vaccination] program. They are NOT the people who typically run vaccine programs,” McCullough says. “The drug companies run vaccine programs.

When Pfizer, Moderna, J&J ran their randomized trials, we didn’t have any problems. They had good safety oversight. They had data safety monitoring boards. The did OK. I mean I have to give the drug companies [credit].

But the drug companies are now just the suppliers of the vaccine. Our government agencies are now just running the program. There’s no external advisory committee. There’s no data safety monitoring board. There’s no human ethics committee. NO one is watching out for this!

And so, the CDC and FDA pretty clearly have their marching orders: ‘Execute this program; the vaccine is safe and effective.’ They’re giving no reports to Americans. No safety reports. We needed those once a month. They haven’t told doctors which is the best vaccine, which is the safest vaccine.

They haven’t told us what groups are to watch out for. How to mitigate risks. Maybe there are drug interactions. Maybe it’s people with prior blood clotting problems or diabetes. They’re not telling us anything!

They literally are blindsiding us, and with no transparency, and Americans now are scared to death. You can feel the tension in America. People are walking off the job. They don’t want to lose their jobs, but they don’t want to die of the vaccine! It’s very clear. They say, ‘Listen, I don’t want to die. That’s the reason I’m not taking the vaccine.’ It’s just that clear.”

Bradford Hill Criteria Are Met — COVID Jabs Cause Death

McCullough goes on to explain the Bradford Hill criterion for causation, which is one of the ways by which we can actually determine that, yes, the shots are indeed killing people. We’re not dealing with coincidence.

“The first question we’d ask is: ‘Does the vaccine have a mechanism of action, a biological mechanism of action, that can actually kill a human being?’ And the answer is yes! because the vaccines all use genetic mechanisms to trick the body into making the lethal spike protein of the virus.

It is very conceivable that some people take up too much messenger RNA; they produce a lethal spike protein in sensitive organs like the brain or the heart or elsewhere. The spike protein damages blood vessels, damages organs, causes blood clots. So, it’s well within the mechanism of action that the vaccine could be fatal.

Someone could have a fatal blood clot. They could have fatal myocarditis. The FDA has official warnings of myocarditis. They have warnings on blood clots. They have warnings on a fatal neurologic condition called Guillain-Barré syndrome. So, the FDA warnings, the mechanism of action, clearly say it’s possible.

The second criteria is: ‘Is it a large effect?’ And the answer is yes! This is not a subtle thing. It’s not 151 versus 149 deaths. This is 15,000 deaths. So, it’s a very large effect size, a large effect.

The third [criteria] is: ‘Is it internally consistent?’ Are you seeing other things that could potentially be fatal in VAERS? Yes! We’re seeing heart attacks. We’re seeing strokes. We’re seeing myocarditis. We’re seeing blood clots, and what have you. So, it’s internally consistent.

‘Is it externally consistent?’ That’s the next criteria. Well, if you look in the MHRA, the yellow card system in England, the exact same thing has been found. In the EudraVigilance system in [Europe] the exact same thing’s been found.

So, we have actually fulfilled all of the Bradford Hill criteria. I’ll tell you right now that COVID-19 vaccine is, from an epidemiological perspective, causing these deaths or a large fraction.”

Zero Tolerance for Elective Drugs Causing Death

There may be cases in which a high risk of death from a drug might be acceptable. If you have a terminal incurable disease, for example, you may be willing to experiment and take your chances. Under normal circumstances however, lethal drugs are not tolerated.

After five suspected deaths, a drug will receive a black box warning. At 50 deaths, it will be removed from the market. Considering COVID-19 has a less than 1% risk of death across age groups, the tolerance for a deadly remedy is infinitesimal. At over 17,000 reported deaths, which in real numbers may exceed 212,000,(8) the COVID shots far surpass any reasonable risk to protect against symptomatic COVID-19. As noted by McCullough:

“There is zero tolerance for electively taking a drug or a new vaccine and then dying! There’s zero tolerance for that. People don’t weigh it out and say, ‘Oh well, I’ll take my chances and die.’ And I can tell you, the word got out about vaccines causing death in early April [2021], and by mid-April the vaccination rates in the United States plummeted …

We hadn’t gotten anywhere near our goals. Remember, President Biden set a goal [of 70% vaccination rate] by July 1. We never got there because Americans were frightened by their relatives, people in their churches and their schools dying after the vaccine.

They had heard about it, they saw it. There was an informal internet survey done several months ago, where 12% of Americans knew somebody who had died after the vaccine.

I’m a doctor. I’m an internist and cardiologist. I just came from the hospital … I had a woman die of the COVID-19 vaccine … She had shot No. 1. She had shot No. 2. After shot No. 2, she developed blood clots throughout her body. She required hospitalization. She required intravenous blood thinners. She was ravaged. She had neurologic damage.

After that hospitalization, she was in a walker. She came to my office. I checked for more blood clots. I found more blood clots. I put her back on blood thinners. I saw her about a month later. She seemed like she was a little better. Family was really concerned. The next month I got called by the Dallas Coroner office saying she’s found dead at home.

Most of us don’t have any problem with vaccines; 98% of Americans take all the vaccines … I think most people who are still susceptible would take a COVID vaccine if they knew they weren’t going to die of it or be injured. And because of these giant safety concerns, and the lack of transparency, we’re at an impasse.

We’ve got a very labor-constrained market. We’ve got people walking off the job. We’ve got planes that aren’t going to fly, and it’s all because our agencies are not being transparent and honest with America about vaccine safety.”

Early Treatment Is Crucial, Vaxxed or Not

As noted by McCullough, the vast majority of patients require hospitalization for COVID-19 is because they’ve not received any treatment and the infection has been allowed free reign for days on end.

“To this day, the patients who get hospitalized are largely those who receive no early care at home,” he says. “They’re either denied care or they don’t know about it, and they end up dying.

The vast majority of people who die, die in the hospital; they don’t die at home. And the reason why they end up in the hospital, it’s typically two weeks of lack of treatment. You can’t let a fatal illness brew for two weeks at home with no treatment, and then start treatment very late in the hospital. It’s not going to work.

There’s been a very good set of analyses, one in the Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases … that showed, day by day, one loses the opportunity of reducing the hospitalization when monoclonal antibodies are delayed … No doctor should be considered a renegade when they order FDA [emergency use authorized] monoclonal antibody. The monoclonal antibodies are just as approved as the vaccines.

I just had a patient over the weekend, fully vaccinated, took the booster. A month after the booster she went on a trip to Dubai. She just came back, and she got COVID-19! … I got her a monoclonal antibody infusion that day. [The following day] she started the sequence of multidrug therapy for COVID-19. I am telling you, she is going to get through this illness in a few days …

Podcaster Joe Rogan just went through this. Governor Abbott was also a vaccine failure. He went through it. Former President Trump went through it. Americans should see the use of monoclonal antibodies in high risk patients, followed by drugs in an oral sequenced approach. This is standard of care!

It is supported by the Association of Physicians and Surgeons, the Truth for Health Foundation, the American Front Line Doctors, and the Front Line Critical Care Consortium. This is not renegade medicine. This is what patients should have. This is the correct thing! …

If we can’t get the monoclonal antibodies, we certainly use hydroxychloroquine, supported by over 250 studies, ivermectin, supported by over 60 studies, combined with azithromycin or doxycycline, inhaled budesonide … full-dose aspirin … nutraceuticals including zinc, vitamin D, vitamin C, quercetin, NAC … we do oral and nasal decontamination with povidone-iodine.

In acutely sick patients we do it every four hours, [and it] massively reduces the viral load … Fortunately, we have enough doctors now and enough patient awareness, patients who … understand that early treatment is viable, is necessary, and it should be executed.”

Originally published Nov 18, 2021 on Mercola.com

References

(1) Toxicology Reports September 2021; 8: 1665-1684

(2) Retraction Watch October 4, 2021

(3) Covid19.healthdata.org

(4) European Journal of Epidemiology September 30, 2021

(5) European Journal of Epidemiology September 30, 2021

(6) Toxicology Reports September 2021; 8: 1665-1684

(7) OpenVAERS Data as of October 15, 2021

(8) SKirsch.io/vaccine-resources

44 Studies on Vaccine Efficacy That Raise Doubts on Vaccine Mandates


BY PAUL E. ALEXANDER TIMEMARCH 19, 2022 PRINT
As some people have now been vaccinated for more than half a year, evidence is pouring in about Covid vaccine efficacy. When evaluating vaccine efficacy, it is important to distinguish between efficacy against infection, symptomatic disease, and transmission versus efficacy against hospitalization and death. For infection and symptomatic disease, the COVID-19 vaccines are not as efficacious as hoped, with immunity gradually waning after a few months. For hospitalization and death, immunity is stronger, lasting for at least six months.

The gestalt of the findings implies that the infection explosion globally that we have been experiencing—post double vaccination in e.g. Israel, UK, United States, etc.—may be due to the vaccinated spreading Covid as much or more than the unvaccinated.

A natural question to ask is whether vaccines with limited capacity to prevent symptomatic disease may drive the evolution of more virulent strains? In a PLoS Biology article from 2015, Read et al. observed that:

“Conventional wisdom is that natural selection will remove highly lethal pathogens if host death greatly reduces transmission. Vaccines that keep hosts alive but still allow transmission could thus allow very virulent strains to circulate in a population.”

Hence, rather than the unvaccinated putting the vaccinated at risk, it could theoretically be the vaccinated that are putting the unvaccinated at risk, but we have not yet seen any evidence for that.

Here I summarize studies and reports that shed light on vaccine induced immunity against Covid. They highlight the problems with vaccine mandates that are currently threatening the jobs of millions of people. They also raise doubts about the arguments for vaccinating children.

1) Gazit et al. out of Israel showed that “SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13-fold (95% CI, 8-21) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected.” When adjusting for the time of disease/vaccine, there was a 27-fold increased risk (95% CI, 13-57).

2) Ignoring the risk of infection, given that someone was infected, Acharya et al. found “no significant difference in cycle threshold values between vaccinated and unvaccinated, asymptomatic and symptomatic groups infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta.”

3) Riemersma et al. found “no difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine “breakthrough” infections. Furthermore, individuals with vaccine breakthrough infections frequently test positive with viral loads consistent with the ability to shed infectious viruses.” Results indicate that “if vaccinated individuals become infected with the delta variant, they may be sources of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to others.” They reported “low Ct values (<25) in 212 of 310 fully vaccinated (68%) and 246 of 389 (63%) unvaccinated individuals. Testing a subset of these low-Ct samples revealed infectious SARS-CoV-2 in 15 of 17 specimens (88%) from unvaccinated individuals and 37 of 39 (95%) from vaccinated people.”

4) In a study from Qatar, Chemaitelly et al. reported vaccine efficacy (Pfizer) against severe and fatal disease, with efficacy in the 85-95% range at least until 24 weeks after the second dose. As a contrast, the efficacy against infection waned down to around 30% at 15-19 weeks after the second dose.

5) From Wisconsin, Riemersma et al. reported that vaccinated individuals who get infected with the Delta variant can transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others. They found an elevated viral load in the unvaccinated and vaccinated symptomatic persons (68% and 69% respectively, 158/232 and 156/225). Moreover, in the asymptomatic persons, they uncovered elevated viral loads (29% and 82% respectively) in the unvaccinated and the vaccinated respectively. This suggests that the vaccinated can be infected, harbor, cultivate, and transmit the virus readily and unknowingly.

6) Subramanian reported that “at the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases.” When comparing 2947 counties in the United States, there were slightly less cases in more vaccinated locations. In other words, there is no clear discernable relationship .

7) Chau et al. looked at transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among vaccinated healthcare workers in Vietnams. Of 69 healthcare workers that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 62 participated in the clinical study, all of whom recovered. For 23 of them, complete-genome sequences were obtained, and all belonged to the Delta variant. “Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020”.

8) In Barnstable, Massachusetts, Brown et al found that among 469 cases of COVID-19, 74% were fully vaccinated, and that “the vaccinated had on average more virus in their nose than the unvaccinated who were infected.”

9) Reporting on a nosocomial hospital outbreak in Finland, Hetemäli et al. observed that “both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections were found among vaccinated health care workers, and secondary transmission occurred from those with symptomatic infections despite use of personal protective equipment.”

10) In a hospital outbreak investigation in Israel, Shitrit et al. observed “high transmissibility of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among twice vaccinated and masked individuals.” They added that “this suggests some waning of immunity, albeit still providing protection for individuals without comorbidities.”

11) In the UK COVID-19 vaccine Surveillance Report for week #42, it was noted that there is “waning of the N antibody response over time” and “that N antibody levels appear to be lower in individuals who acquire infection following 2 doses of vaccination.” The same report (Table 2, page 13), shows the in the older age groups above 30, the double vaccinated persons have greater infection risk than the unvaccinated, presumably because the latter group include more people with stronger natural immunity from prior Covid disease. As a contrast, the vaccinated people had a lower risk of death than the unvaccinated, across all age groups, indicating that vaccines provide more protection against death than against infection.  See also UK PHE reports 43, 44, 45, 46 for similar data.

12) In Israel, Levin et al. “conducted a 6-month longitudinal prospective study involving vaccinated health care workers who were tested monthly for the presence of anti-spike IgG and neutralizing antibodies”. They found that “six months after receipt of the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine, humoral response was substantially decreased, especially among men, among persons 65 years of age or older, and among persons with immunosuppression.”

13) In a study from New York State, Rosenberg et al. reported that “During May 3–July 25, 2021, the overall age-adjusted vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization in New York was relatively stable 89.5%–95.1%). The overall age-adjusted vaccine effectiveness against infection for all New York adults declined from 91.8% to 75.0%.”

14) Suthar et al. noted that “Our data demonstrate a substantial waning of antibody responses and T cell immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, at 6 months following the second immunization with the BNT162b2 vaccine.”

15) In a study from Umeå University in Sweden, Nordström et al. observed that “vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 against infection waned progressively from 92% (95% CI, 92-93, P<0·001) at day 15-30 to 47% (95% CI, 39-55, P<0·001) at day 121-180, and from day 211 and onwards no effectiveness could be detected (23%; 95% CI, -2-41, P=0·07).”

16) Yahi et al. have reported that “in the case of the Delta variant, neutralizing antibodies have a decreased affinity for the spike protein, whereas facilitating antibodies display a strikingly increased affinity. Thus, antibody dependent enhancement may be a concern for people receiving vaccines based on the original Wuhan strain spike sequence.”

17) Goldberg et al. (BNT162b2 Vaccine in Israel) reported that “immunity against the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 waned in all age groups a few months after receipt of the second dose of vaccine.”

18) Singanayagam et al. examined the transmission and viral load kinetics in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with mild delta variant infection in the community. They found that (in 602 community contacts (identified via the UK contract-tracing system) of 471 UK COVID-19 index cases were recruited to the Assessment of Transmission and Contagiousness of COVID-19 in Contacts cohort study and contributed 8145 upper respiratory tract samples from daily sampling for up to 20 days) “vaccination reduces the risk of delta variant infection and accelerates viral clearance. Nonetheless, fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts.”

19) Keehner et al. in NEJM, has recently reported on the resurgence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a highly vaccinated health system workforce. Vaccination with mRNA vaccines began in mid-December 2020; by March, 76% of the workforce had been fully vaccinated, and by July, the percentage had risen to 87%. Infections had decreased dramatically by early February 2021…”coincident with the end of California’s mask mandate on June 15 and the rapid dominance of the B.1.617.2 (delta) variant that first emerged in mid-April and accounted for over 95% of UCSDH isolates by the end of July, infections increased rapidly, including cases among fully vaccinated persons…researchers reported that the “dramatic change in vaccine effectiveness from June to July is likely to be due to both the emergence of the delta variant and waning immunity over time.”

20) Juthani et al. sought to describe the impact of vaccination on admission to hospital in patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection using real-world data collected by the Yale New Haven Health System. “Patients were considered fully vaccinated if the final dose (either second dose of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, or first dose of Ad.26.COV2.S) was administered at least 14 days before symptom onset or a positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. In total, we identified 969 patients who were admitted to a Yale New Haven Health System hospital with a confirmed positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2”…Researchers reported “a higher number of patients with severe or critical illness in those who received the BNT162b2 vaccine than in those who received mRNA-1273 or Ad.26.COV2.S…”

21) A very recent study published by the CDC reported that a majority (53%) of patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19-like illnesses were already fully vaccinated with two-dose RNA shots. Table 1 reveals that among the 20,101 immunocompromised adults hospitalized with Covid-19, 10,564 (53%) were fully-vaccinated with the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine (Vaccination was defined as having received exactly 2 doses of an mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine ≥14 days before the hospitalization index date, which was the date of respiratory specimen collection associated with the most recent positive or negative SARS-CoV-2 test result before the hospitalization or the hospitalization date if testing only occurred after the admission). This highlights the ongoing challenges faced with Delta breakthrough when vaccinated.

22) Eyre, 2021 looked at The impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on Alpha & Delta variant transmission. They reported that “while vaccination still lowers the risk of infection, similar viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals infected with Delta question how much vaccination prevents onward transmission… transmission reductions declined over time since second vaccination, for Delta reaching similar levels to unvaccinated individuals by 12 weeks for ChAdOx1 and attenuating substantially for BNT162b2. Protection from vaccination in contacts also declined in the 3 months after second vaccination…vaccination reduces transmission of Delta, but by less than the Alpha variant.”

23) Levine-Tiefenbrun, 2021 looked at Viral loads of Delta-variant SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections after vaccination and booster with BNT162b2, and reported the viral load reduction effectiveness declines with time after vaccination, “significantly decreasing at 3 months after vaccination and effectively vanishing after about 6 months.”

24) Puranik, 2021 looked at a Comparison of two highly-effective mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 during periods of Alpha and Delta variant prevalence, reporting “In July, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization has remained high (mRNA-1273: 81%, 95% CI: 33–96.3%; BNT162b2: 75%, 95% CI: 24–93.9%), but effectiveness against infection was lower for both vaccines (mRNA-1273: 76%, 95% CI: 58–87%; BNT162b2: 42%, 95% CI: 13–62%), with a more pronounced reduction for BNT162b2.”

25) Saade, 2021 looked at Live virus neutralization testing in convalescent patients and subjects vaccinated against 19A, 20B, 20I/501Y.V1 and 20H/501Y.V2 isolates of SARS-CoV-2, and reported as “Assessed the neutralizing capacity of antibodies to prevent cell infection, using a live virus neutralization test with different strains [19A (initial one), 20B (B.1.1.241 lineage), 20I/501Y.V1 (B.1.1.7 lineage), and 20H/501Y.V2 (B.1.351 lineage)] in serum samples collected from different populations: two-dose vaccinated COVID-19-naive healthcare workers (HCWs; Pfizer-BioNTech BNT161b2), 6-months post mild COVID-19 HCWs, and critical COVID-19 patients… finding of the present study is the reduced neutralizing response observed towards the 20H/501Y.V2 variant in fully immunized subjects with the BNT162b2 vaccine by comparison to the wild type and 20I/501Y.V1 variant.”

26) Canaday, 2021 looked at Significant reduction in humoral immunity among healthcare workers and nursing home residents 6 months after COVID-19 BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination, reporting “Anti-spike, anti-RBD and neutralization levels dropped more than 84% over 6 months’ time in all groups irrespective of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. At 6 months post-vaccine, 70% of the infection-naive NH residents had neutralization titers at or below the lower limit of detection compared to 16% at 2 weeks after full vaccination. These data demonstrate a significant reduction in levels of antibody in all groups. In particular, those infection-naive NH residents had lower initial post-vaccination humoral immunity immediately and exhibited the greatest declines 6 months later.”

27) Israel, 2021 looked at Large-scale study of antibody titer decay following BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine or SARS-CoV-2 infection, and reported as “To determine the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies following administration of two doses of BNT162b2 vaccine, or SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated individuals…In vaccinated subjects, antibody titers decreased by up to 40% each subsequent month while in convalescents they decreased by less than 5% per month. Six months after BNT162b2 vaccination 16.1% subjects had antibody levels below the sero-positivity threshold of <50 AU/mL, while only 10.8% of convalescent patients were below <50 AU/mL threshold after 9 months from SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

28) Eyran, 2020 examined The longitudinal kinetics of antibodies in COVID-19 recovered patients over 14 months, and found “a significantly faster decay in naïve vaccinees compared to recovered patients suggesting that the serological memory following natural infection is more robust compared to vaccination. Our data highlights the differences between serological memory induced by natural infection vs. vaccination.”

29) Salvatore et al. examined the transmission potential of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant in a federal prison, July-August 2021. They found a total of 978 specimens were provided by 95 participants, “of whom 78 (82%) were fully vaccinated and 17 (18%) were not fully vaccinated….clinicians and public health practitioners should consider vaccinated persons who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 to be no less infectious than unvaccinated persons.”

30) Andeweg et al. analyzed 28,578 sequenced SARS-CoV-2 samples from individuals with known immune status obtained through national community testing in the Netherlands from March to August 2021. They found evidence for an “increased risk of infection by the Beta (B.1.351), Gamma (P.1), or Delta (B.1.617.2) variants compared to the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant after vaccination. No clear differences were found between vaccines. However, the effect was larger in the first 14-59 days after complete vaccination compared to 60 days and longer. In contrast to vaccine-induced immunity, no increased risk for reinfection with Beta, Gamma or Delta variants relative to Alpha variant was found in individuals with infection-induced immunity.”

31) Di Fusco et al. conducted an evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections among immunocompromised patients fully vaccinated with BNT162b2. “COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections were examined in fully vaccinated (≥14 days after 2nd dose) IC individuals (IC cohort), 12 mutually exclusive IC condition groups, and a non-IC cohort.” They found that“of 1,277,747 individuals ≥16 years of age who received 2 BNT162b2 doses, 225,796 (17.7%) were identified as IC (median age: 58 years; 56.3% female). The most prevalent IC conditions were solid malignancy (32.0%), kidney disease (19.5%), and rheumatologic/inflammatory conditions (16.7%). Among the fully vaccinated IC and non-IC cohorts, a total of 978 breakthrough infections were observed during the study period; 124 (12.7%) resulted in hospitalization and 2 (0.2%) were inpatient deaths. IC individuals accounted for 38.2% (N = 374) of all breakthrough infections, 59.7% (N = 74) of all hospitalizations, and 100% (N = 2) of inpatient deaths. The proportion with breakthrough infections was 3 times higher in the IC cohort compared to the non-IC cohort (N = 374 [0.18%] vs. N = 604 [0.06%]; unadjusted incidence rates were 0.89 and 0.34 per 100 person-years, respectively.”

32) Mallapaty (NATURE) reported that the protective effect of being vaccinated if you already had infection is “relatively small, and dwindles alarmingly at three months after the receipt of the second shot.” Mallapaty further adds what we have been warning the public health community which is that persons infected with Delta have about the same levels of viral genetic materials in their noses “regardless of whether they’d previously been vaccinated, suggesting that vaccinated and unvaccinated people might be equally infectious.” Mallapaty reported on testing data from 139,164 close contacts of 95,716 people infected with SARS-CoV-2 between January and August 2021 in the United Kingdom, and at a time when the Alpha and Delta variants were competing for dominance. The finding was that “although the vaccines did offer some protection against infection and onward transmission, Delta dampened that effect. A person who was fully vaccinated and then had a ‘breakthrough’ Delta infection was almost twice as likely to pass on the virus as someone who was infected with Alpha. And that was on top of the higher risk of having a breakthrough infection caused by Delta than one caused by Alpha.”

33) Chia et al. reported that PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were “similar between both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups at diagnosis, but viral loads decreased faster in vaccinated individuals. Early, robust boosting of anti-spike protein antibodies was observed in vaccinated patients, however, these titers were significantly lower against B.1.617.2 as compared with the wildtype vaccine strain.”

34) Wilhelm et al. reported on reduced neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant by vaccine sera and monoclonal antibodies. “in vitro findings using authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants indicate that in contrast to the currently circulating Delta variant, the neutralization efficacy of vaccine-elicited sera against Omicron was severely reduced highlighting T-cell mediated immunity as essential barrier to prevent severe COVID-19.”

35) CDC reported on the details for 43 cases of COVID-19 attributed to the Omicron variant. They found that “34 (79%) occurred in persons who completed the primary series of an FDA-authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine ≥14 days before symptom onset or receipt of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result.”

36) Dejnirattisai et al. presented live neutralisation titres against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, and examined it relative to neutralisation against the Victoria, Beta and Delta variants. They reported a significant drop in “neutralisation titres in recipients of both AZD1222 and BNT16b2 primary courses, with evidence of some recipients failing to neutralise at all.”

37) Cele et al. assessed whether Omicron variant escapes antibody neutralization “elicited by the Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in people who were vaccinated only or vaccinated and previously infected.” They reported that Omicron variant “still required the ACE2 receptor to infect but had extensive escape of Pfizer elicited neutralization.”

38) Holm Hansen et al.’s Denmark study looked at vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Omicron or Delta variants following a two-dose or booster BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination series. A key finding was reported as “VE against Omicron was 55.2% initially following primary BNT162b2 vaccination, but waned quickly thereafter. Although estimated with less precision, VE against Omicron after primary mRNA-1273 vaccination similarly indicated a rapid decline in protection. By comparison, both vaccines showed higher, longer-lasting protection against Delta.” In other words, the vaccine that has failed against Delta is even far worse for Omicron. The table and figure below paint a devastating picture. See where the green dot is (Omicron variant) in the vertical lines (blue is Delta) and the 2 edges of the bars (upper and lower lips) 91 days out for Omicron (3 months). Both Pfizer and Moderna show negative efficacy for Omicron at 31 days (both are below the ‘line of no effect’ or ‘0’). The comparative table is even more devastating for it shows how much less vaccine effectiveness there is for Omicron. For example, at 1-30 days, Pfizer showed 55.2% effectiveness for Omicron versus 86.7% for Delta, and for the same period, Moderna showed 36.7% effectiveness for Omicron versus 88.2% for Delta.

39) UK reporting showed that boosters protect against symptomatic COVID-19 caused by Omicron for about 10 weeks; the UK Health Security Agency reported protection against symptomatic COVID-19 caused by the variant dropped from 70% to 45% following a Pfizer booster for those initially vaccinated with the shot developed by Pfizer with BioNTech. Specifically reporting by the UK Health Security Agency showed “Among those who received an AstraZeneca primary course, vaccine effectiveness was around 60% 2 to 4 weeks after either a Pfizer or Moderna booster, then dropped to 35% with a Pfizer booster and 45% with a Moderna booster by 10 weeks after the booster. Among those who received a Pfizer primary course, vaccine effectiveness was around 70% after a Pfizer booster, dropping to 45% after 10-plus weeks and stayed around 70 to 75% after a Moderna booster up to 9 weeks after booster.”

40) Buchan et al. used a test-negative design to assess vaccine effectiveness against OMICRON or DELTA variants (regardless of symptoms or severity) during November 22 and December 19, 2021. They included persons who had received at least 2 COVID-19 vaccine doses (with at least 1 mRNA vaccine dose for the primary series) and applied multivariable logistic regression modelling analysis to “estimate the effectiveness of two or three doses by time since the latest dose.” They included 3,442 Omicron-positive cases, 9,201 Delta-positive cases, and 471,545 test-negative controls. Following 2 doses, “vaccine effectiveness against Delta infection declined steadily over time but recovered to 93% (95%CI, 92-94%) ≥7 days after receiving an mRNA vaccine for the third dose. In contrast, receipt of 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccines was not protective against Omicron. Vaccine effectiveness against Omicron was 37% (95%CI, 19-50%) ≥7 days after receiving an mRNA vaccine for the third dose.”

41) Public Health Scotland COVID-19 & Winter Statistical Report ( Publication date: 19 January 2022) provided startling data on page 38 (case rates), page 44 (hospitalization), and page 50 (deaths), showing that the vaccination has failed Delta but critically, is failing omicron. The 2nd inoculation data is of particular concern. Table 14 age-standardized case data is very troubling for it shows across the multiple weeks of study that across each dose (1 vs 2 vs 3 booster inoculations) that the vaccinated are greatly more infected than the unvaccinated, with the 2nd dose being alarmingly elevated (see grey rows). Age-standardized rates of acute hospital admissions are stunningly elevated after 2nd inoculation (over the unvaccinated) during January 2022. Looking at table 16 that reports on the number of confirmed COVID-19 related deaths by vaccination status, we again observe massive elevation in death at the 2ndinoculation. This data indicates to us that the vaccine is associated with infection and is not optimally working against omicron and that the protection is limited, waning rapidly.

42) The UK’s COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 3, 20 January 2022, raises very serious concern as to the failure of the vaccines on Delta (which is basically now being replaced by omicron for dominance) and omicron. When we look at table 9, page 34 (COVID-19 cases by vaccination status between week 51 2021 and week 2 2022), we see greater case numbers for the 2nd and 3rd inoculations.  The important table on page 38, Figure 12 (unadjusted rates of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization and death in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations) shows us a continual pattern in the UK data over the last 2 to 3 to 4 months, with the present reporting showing that persons in receipt of the 3rd inoculation (booster) at far greater risk of infection/cases than the unvaccinated (30 years of age and above age strata).

43) In the recent UK Public Health surveillance reports Week 9, Week 8, as well as week 7 (UK COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 7 17 February 2022), week 6 (COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 6 10 February 2022) and week 5 for 2022 (COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 5 3 February 2022) as well as the reports accumulated for 2021 since vaccine roll-out, we see that the vaccinated are at higher risk of infection and especially for age groups above 18 years old, as well as hospitalization and even death. This is particularly marked for those in receipt of double vaccinations. There is increased risk of death for those who are triple vaccinated and especially as age increases. The same pattern emerges in the Scottish data.

44.) Regev-Yochay et al. in Israel looked at (publication date March 16th 2022) the immunogenicity and safety of a fourth dose (4th) of either BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) administered 4 months after the third dose in a series of three BNT162b2 doses). This was an open-label, nonrandomized clinical study assessing the 4th dose in terms of need beyond the 3rd dose. Among the ‘1050 eligible health care workers enrolled in the Sheba HCW COVID-19 Cohort, 154 received the fourth dose of BNT162b2 and, 1 week later, 120 received mRNA-1273. For each participant, two age-matched controls were selected from the remaining eligible participants’.


Researchers further reported that ‘overall, 25.0% of the participants in the control group were infected with the omicron variant, as compared with 18.3% of the participants in the BNT162b2 group and 20.7% of those in the mRNA-1273 group. Vaccine efficacy against any SARS-CoV-2 infection was 30% (95% confidence interval [CI], −9 to 55) for BNT162b2 and 11% (95% CI, −43 to 44) for mRNA-1273…most of the infected participants were potentially infectious, with relatively high viral loads (nucleocapsid gene cycle threshold, ≤25)’. Results suggest that maximal immunogenicity of mRNA vaccines is achieved after three doses. More specifically, researchers ‘observed low vaccine efficacy against infections in health care workers, as well as relatively high viral loads suggesting that those who were infected were infectious. Thus, a fourth vaccination of healthy young health care workers may have only marginal benefits’.

These finding are not unknown to public health authorities. In fact, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky have said that the Covid vaccines are working “exceptionally well” against severe illness and death, but “what they can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.”

What these studies show, are that vaccines are important to reduce severe disease and death, but unable to prevent the disease from spreading and eventually infect most of us. That is, while the vaccines provide individual benefits to the vaccinee, and especially to older high-risk people, the public benefit of universal vaccination is in grave doubt. As such, Covid vaccines should not be expected to contribute to eliminating the communal spread of the virus or the reaching of herd immunity. This unravels the rationale for vaccine mandates and passports.

 

White House COVID Czar Zients to Step Down
By Nick Ciolino March 17, 2022 Updated: March 17, 2022biggersmaller Print
The White House announced Thursday its coronavirus response coordinator Jeff Zients is stepping down after managing the federal response to the spread of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus for more than a year, which included coordinating the largest-ever government distribution of vaccines.

In a statement, President Joe Biden announced that Zients will be replaced by the dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, Dr. Ashish Jha, to lead what the White House has characterized as “a new moment” in its fight against the virus.

Zients will leave the role next month and return to private life.

Biden praised Zients as a “man of service and an expert manager” adding that he will “miss his counsel and [is] grateful for his service.” Biden touted Zients’s role in the federal effort to vaccinate 80 percent of American adults, reopen schools, and distribute at-home COVID tests.

“Thanks to all the progress we’ve made, Americans are safely moving back to more normal routines, using the effective new tools we have to enable us to reduce severe COVID cases and make workplaces and schools safer,” Biden said. “But our work in combatting COVID is far from done.”

Critics of the Biden administration’s virus response have pointed to confusing messaging and ever-changing recommendations from public health officials on how Americans should adjust their lives with respect to COVID-19, the disease caused by the CCP virus.

Biden says he’s “excited” to name Jha as the new White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator, touting him as a “leading public health expert in America” with a “wise and calming public presence.”

In his statement, Jha made a promise to the American people to be “straightforward and clear in sharing what we know, in explaining what we don’t know and how we will learn more, and what the future will ask of all of us.”

The change in leadership comes as the White House is making the case to Congress to approve more funding to fight the virus. The Biden administration called for $22.5 billion in new funding that was negotiated down and then ultimately left out of the omnibus spending bill approved by Congress on March 11.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Tuesday that absent the new funding, fewer monoclonal antibodies will be sent to states, the federal government will not be able to purchase additional treatments and tests, surveillance for future variants will be limited, and it may create a shortage of vaccines.

“Waiting to provide funding until we’re in a worse spot with the virus will be too late,” Psaki said. “We need funding now, so we’re prepared for whatever comes.”

Zients and his team released the latest national COVID-19 strategy earlier this month that made calls for new funding and outlined plans to fight the virus while people return to their “normal routines” after two years of varying degrees of federal restrictions. The 90-page National COVID-19 Preparedness Plan seeks to drive limit serious illness and deaths from the virus and prepare for potential new variants while keeping schools and businesses open.

Republicans in Congress have fought against approving new COVID spending pending an accounting of already approved pandemic relief funds.

The number of new coronavirus deaths reported worldwide fell by 17 percent from the previous week as of March 15, while COVID-19 infections rose, according to the World Health Organization.

Before his service in the Biden administration, Zients served as vice-chair of Biden’s transition. In the Obama administration, he was the director of the National Economic Council, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, and led the effort to fix HealthCare.gov after its disastrous rollout in 2013. He was also a top executive at the Advisory Board Company.

SARS-COV-2 Vaccines and Neurodegenerative Disease

BY Stephanie Seneff and GreenMedInfo

 

TIMEJanuary 11, 2022

Since December 2020, when several novel unprecedented vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 began to be approved for emergency use, there has been a worldwide effort to get these vaccines into the arms of as many people as possible as fast as possible. These vaccines have been developed “at warp speed,” given the urgency of the situation with the COVID-19 pandemic. Most governments have embraced the notion that these vaccines are the only path towards resolution of this pandemic, which is crippling the economies of many countries.

Thus far, there are four different vaccines that have been approved for emergency use for protection against COVID-19 in the US and/or Europe. Two (the Moderna vaccine and the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine) are based on mRNA technology, whereas the other two (produced by Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca) are based on a double-stranded DNA recombinant viral vector. The mRNA vaccines contain only the code for the SARS-CoV-2 envelope spike protein, whereas the DNA-based vaccines both contain an adenovirus viral vector that has been augmented with DNA that codes for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The DNA-based vaccines have a certain advantage over the RNA-based vaccines in that they do not have to be stored at deep-freeze temperatures, because double-stranded DNA is much more stable than single-stranded RNA. But a disadvantage is that those who have been exposed to natural forms of the adenovirus have antibodies to the virus that will likely block the synthesis of the spike protein, and therefore not afford protection against SARS-CoV-2.

In this regard, the AstraZeneca (AZ) vaccine has a slight advantage over the Johnson & Johnson (J&J) vaccine because the virus normally infects chimpanzees rather than humans, so fewer people are likely to have been exposed to it. On the other hand, several studies have shown that viruses that normally infect one species can cause tumors if they are injected into a different species. For example, a human adenovirus injected into baboons caused retinoblastoma (cancer of the eye) in the baboons . So, it can’t be ruled out that the AZ vaccine could lead to cancer.

People don’t realize that these vaccines are vastly different from the many childhood vaccines we are now used to getting early in life. I find it shocking that the vaccine developers and the government officials across the globe are wrecklessly pushing these vaccines on an unsuspecting population. Together with Dr. Greg Nigh, I recently published a peer-reviewed paper on the technology behind the mRNA vaccines and the many potentially unknown consequences to health . Such unprecedented vaccines normally take twelve years to develop, with only a 2% success rate, but these vaccines were developed and brought to market in less than a year. As a consequence, we have no direct knowledge of any effects that the vaccines might have on our health over the long term. However, knowledge about how these vaccines work, how the immune system works and how neurodegenerative diseases come about can be brought to bear on the problem in order to predict potential devastating future consequences of the vaccines.

The mRNA in these vaccines codes for the spike protein normally synthesized by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, both the mRNA and the protein it produces have been changed from the original version in the virus with the intent to increase rate of production of the protein in an infected cell and the durability of both the mRNA and the spike protein it codes for. Additional ingredients like cationic lipids and polyethylene glycol are also toxic with unknown consequences. The vaccines were approved for emergency use based on grossly inadequate studies to evaluate safety and effectiveness.

Our paper showed that there are several mechanisms by which these vaccines could lead to severe disease, including autoimmune disease, neurodegenerative diseases, vascular disorders (hemorrhaging and blood clots) and possibly reproductive issues. There is also the risk that the vaccines will accelerate the emergence of new strains of the virus that are no longer sensitive to the antibodies produced by the vaccines. When people are immune compromised (e.g., taking chemotherapy for cancer), the antibodies they produce may not be able to keep the virus in check because the immune system is too impaired. Just as in the case of antibiotic resistance, new strains evolve within an infected immune-compromised person’s body that produce a version of the spike protein that no longer binds with the acquired antibodies. These new strains quickly come to dominate over the original strain, especially when the general population is heavily vaccinated with a vaccine that is specific to the original strain. This problem is likely going to necessitate the repeated rollout of new versions of the vaccine at periodic intervals that people will have to receive to induce yet another round of antibody production in an endless game of cat and mouse.

Like the mRNA vaccines, the DNA vaccines are based on novel biotech gene editing techniques that are brand new, so they too are a massive experiment unleashed on a huge unsuspecting population, with unknown consequences. Both DNA vector vaccines have been associated with a very rare condition called thrombocytopenia, in which platelet counts drop precipitously, resulting in system-wide blood clots and a high risk of cerebral hemorrhaging [5]. This is likely due to an autoimmune reaction to the platelets, and it comes with a high risk of mortality. In the case of the AZ vaccine, this has caused over 20 European countries to temporarily pause their vaccination programs [6]. And the United States called a temporary halt on the J&J vaccine.

Even experts don’t really understand the mechanism as of now, although a fascinating theory to explain this depends on the fact that DNA vector vaccines require the DNA to be copied into RNA in the nucleus, and this presents the possibility of producing an incomplete copy, generated through “splice variants,” that is missing the code for attaching to the membrane. These soluble partial sequences wander off to other parts of the body and bind to ACE2 receptors throughout the vasculature. Antibodies to these ACE2-bound partial spike fragments cause an acute inflammatory response that results in disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC).

How to Make an Adenovirus DNA Vector Vaccine

The adenovirus vaccines are created through techniques that the average citizen can’t possibly fathom could even exist. For the AZ vaccine, the bulk of the DNA in the vaccine codes for the various proteins that are needed by a strain of adenovirus that mainly infects chimpanzees and causes cold-like symptoms. However, it is not a “normal” version of this cold virus. First of all, it has been stripped of certain genes that it needs in order to replicate, and for this reason it is referred to as an “adenovirus vector.” This defect, it is argued, keeps it from actually infecting the vaccinated patient. Secondly, it is modified, through gene editing techniques, to create a recombinant version of the virus that contains the complete coding sequence for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, spliced into its DNA sequence – the same protein that the RNA vaccines code for. The recombinant DNA is a linear double-stranded DNA sequence where proteins from two different species are integrated through gene editing.

Since this virus can’t proliferate, it is difficult to manufacture large quantities of it. But they solved this problem by making use of a genetically modified version of a human cell line, called HEK (human embryonic kidney) 293 cells, where the human cell’s DNA was transfected long ago with fragments of the genome of an adenovirus – conveniently providing the defective recombinant virus with the missing proteins it needs to be able to proliferate. Within a culture of these HEK 293 cells, the virus can replicate, assisted by the proteins that are produced by the host cells. The HEK 293 cells originally came from a kidney of an aborted fetus, and it has been maintained in culture ever since the 1970s, because it was modified to become immortal, with the help of the adenovirus. Although it was obtained from a kidney, it is not a kidney cell. In fact, it has many properties that are characteristic of a neuronal stem cell. The fact is, they don’t really know what kind of cell it is. The ability of a cell line to survive indefinitely is a feature of tumor cells. Although the vaccine is “purified” during the processing, there is no guarantee that it is not contaminated with remnants from the host cells, i.e., human DNA of a neuronal tumor cell line. It does not seem like a good idea to inject the DNA of a human tumor cell into anyone.

The J&J vaccine has a very similar manufacturing process, except with a different adenovirus strain and a different human host cell. For J&J, the host cell is another fetal cell line harvested long ago and made immortal through the incorporation of adenovirus genes into the host human genome. This cell line was taken from the retina of the eye of the fetus.

The Spike Protein is Toxic

The COVID-19 vaccines are all based on supplying genetic code to produce the spike protein that is the main constituent of the SARS-CoV-2 protein cage that encloses its RNA contents. Both the DNA vector and the RNA vaccines induce the vaccine-infected cell to manufacture many copies of the spike protein according to the code. Through experimentation, researchers have determined that the spike protein is toxic even when introduced all by itself. In a revealing experiment, researchers injected spike protein into hamsters, and found that it was taken up by endothelial cells lining the blood vessels, via ACE2 receptors. This caused a downregulation of ACE2, which had significant effects on the metabolic policy in the cells. In particular, it inhibited the synthesis of mitochondria, and caused the existing mitochondria to fragment. Mitochondria are the organelles in the cell that produce large quantities of ATP (the energy currency of cells) by oxidizing nutrients, while consuming oxygen and producing water and carbon dioxide. The spike protein reduced the production of ATP by mitochondria and increased glycolysis — the alternative, much less efficient, way to produce ATP without using oxygen. This metabolic change towards getting energy through glycolysis is a characteristic feature of cancer cells and of neurons in neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s.

In another experiment, researchers showed that spike protein can cross the blood-brain barrier in mice and be taken up by neurons throughout the brain. This too is likely mediated by ACE2 receptors (which neurons also produce). These same researchers also showed that spike protein administered in the nose was able to reach the brain by traveling along the olfactory nerve. When they induced inflammation in the brain through exposure to lipopolysaccharide (LPS), they saw an increased uptake of spike protein into the brain, which they hypothesized was caused by increased leakiness in the barrier. As you will see, these points become important when we later consider what happens following a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, which is designed to induce inflammation.

Many people suffering from COVID-19 have experienced symptoms characteristic of the central nervous system such as headache, nausea, dizziness, fatal brain blood clots and encephalitis. In an advanced 3D microfluid model of the human BBB, researchers in the United States showed that the spike protein by itself disrupts the blood brain barrier by inducing an inflammatory state, and they proposed that this could be the source of such symptoms.

A published preprint found widespread expression of ACE2 in many parts of the brain. ACE2 was expressed in astrocytes, pericytes (cells that wrap around the endothelial cells lining capillary walls) and in endothelial cells — and all of these are key components of the blood-brain barrier. Perhaps of even greater concern is that ACE2 was highly expressed in the substantia nigra, a brain-stem nucleus where damaged dopaminergic neurons lead to Parkinson’s disease.

Bell’s Palsy, Autism and Parkinson’s Disease

In a paper aptly titled, “Is COVID-19 a Perfect Storm for Parkinson’s Disease?” researchers made a strong case for the possibility that we will see an increase in Parkinson’s disease in the future, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. They refer to three separate cases where acute Parkinsonism developed shortly after a COVID-19 infection. They proposed that systemic inflammation caused by severe COVID-19 could trigger neuroinflammation in the substantia nigra, killing off dopaminergic neurons. These neurons express high levels of the ACE2 receptor, making them highly vulnerable to the spike protein. A viral infection is known to upregulate α-synuclein, which, in high concentrations, forms soluble oligomers that then precipitate out as fibrils and accumulate within “Lewy bodies” that are tightly linked to Parkinson’s disease. Further corroboration of this idea comes from a paper which demonstrated that an infection with SARS-CoV-2 causes brain inflammation in macaques and induces the formation of Lewy bodies.

Parkinson’s disease is the second most common neurodegenerative disorder and the most common neurodegenerative motor disorder. The root cause of nearly 90% of cases remains unknown, but it has been theorized that viral infections are often involved. It can be argued that the loss of a sense of smell and/or taste in association with COVID-19 is a sign of a Parkinsonian link, since this symptom is also an early sign of Parkinson’s disease.

The mRNA vaccines appear to disrupt the body’s ability to keep latent viruses from “waking up” and causing disease symptoms. This observation is based on the fact that shingles and facial palsy (Bell’s palsy) are being commonly reported in side-effect reports in the FDA’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. As of May 21, 2021, over 2500 reports of Bell’s palsy following COVID-19 vaccines had appeared in VAERS. A primary cause of Bell’s palsy is the activation of latent viral infections, most notably Herpes simplex and Varicella zoster, Varicella zoster is also the virus responsible for shingles.

While Bell’s palsy usually resolves over time, there can be some serious longer-term consequences. Pregnant women who are diagnosed with active herpes infections during pregnancy have a 2-fold increased risk of having an autistic male child from that pregnancy. This should make a pregnant woman hesitate to get a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Bell’s palsy can also be a risk factor for Parkinson’s disease much later in life. A study on nearly 200 Parkinson’s disease patients compared with age- and gender-matched controls found that six of the Parkinson’s patients had had an earlier diagnosis of Bell’s palsy, whereas none of the control patients had. There’s also a link between autism and Parkinson’s disease. A study on autistic adults over 39 years old found that one third of them had symptoms that meet the criteria for a Parkinson’s diagnosis.

Prion Diseases

Prion diseases are a group of severe neurodegenerative diseases that are caused by misfolded prion proteins. The most common prion disease in humans is the always-fatal sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), which accounts for more than 85% of the cases. Prion diseases are more specifically called transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs), and infection can spread through exposure to misfolded proteins as “infective” agents, without requiring a live pathogen. PrP is the name given to the specific prion protein associated with these TSEs. Misfolded PrP proteins act as a seed or catalyst that then recruits other molecules of PrP to misfold in the same way and glom together into pathogenic fibrils.

MADCOW, the disease that affected a large number of cows in Europe beginning in the 1990s, is probably the best-known TSE. While eating beef from an infected animal is a very rare risk factor, most cases of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease occur for unknown reasons, and no other risk factors have been identified. A study based in Switzerland confirmed that many patients who died of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease had detectable levels of a prion protein in their spleen and muscles, in addition to the olfactory lobe and the central nervous system. More generally, diseases involving misfolded PrPs have consistently been found to involve an initial early phase of prion replication in the spleen which happens long before overt symptoms appear. This point becomes important when we consider whether the COVID-19 vaccines might cause prion diseases.

PrP has a unique feature that it contains multiple copies of a characteristic motif in its amino acid sequence that is called a “GxxxG” motif, also known as a “glycine zipper”. These proteins normally fold into a characteristic shape called an alpha helix, which allows the protein to penetrate the plasma membrane. The glycines in the zipper motif play an essential role in cross-linking and stabilizing alpha helices. This glycine zipper motif is also a common characteristic of many transmembrane proteins (proteins that cross the membrane of the cell).

Indeed, the coronavirus spike protein has a GxxxG motif in its transmembrane domain (specifically, GFIAG — glycine, phenylalanine, isoproline, alanine, glycine). There is a platform called “Uniprot” where you can look up the sequence of specific proteins. The Uniprot entry for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein has five glycine zipper sequences altogether. According to J. Bart Classen, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein has the ability “to form amyloid and toxic aggregates that can act as seeds to aggregate many of the misfolded brain proteins and can ultimately lead to neurodegeneration.”

Many neurodegenerative diseases have been linked to specific proteins that have prion-like properties, and these diseases are characterized as protein-misfolding diseases or proteopathies. Like PrP, prion-like proteins become pathogenic when their alpha helices misfold as beta sheets, and the protein is then impaired in its ability to enter the membrane. These diseases include Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), Huntington’s disease and Parkinson’s disease, and each of these is associated with a particular protein that misfolds and accumulates in inclusion bodies in association with the disease. We already saw that Parkinson’s disease is characterized by Lewy bodies in the substantia nigra that accumulate misfolded α-synuclein.

Glycines within the glycine zipper transmembrane motifs in the amyloid beta precursor protein (APP) play a central role in the misfolding of amyloid beta linked to Alzheimer’s disease (Decock et al., 2016). APP contains a total of four GxxxG motifs (one fewer than the spike protein).

A case study presented the case of a man who developed CKD simultaneously with symptomatic COVID-19. The authors proposed that infection with SARS-CoV-2 precipitates or accelerates neurodegenerative diseases. A theoretical paper published by researchers in India showed that the spike protein binds to a number of aggregation-prone prion-like proteins, including amyloid beta, α-synuclein, tau, PrP and TDP-43. They argued that this could initiate aggregation of these proteins in the brain, leading to neurodegeneration.

Tracing the Vaccine Trail to the Spleen

It is important to understand what happens to the contents of a vaccine after it is injected into the arm. Where does it travel in the body, and what does it do in the places where it settles in?

Vaccine developers are keen to know whether the vaccine induces a strong immune response, reflected in high antibody production against the spike protein, in the case of COVID-19 vaccines. And to do this, they need to trace its movement in the body.

CD8+ T-cells are cytotoxic immune cells that can kill cells that are infected with a virus. They detect an immune complex with viral proteins that are exposed on the surface of an infected cell. A study on an adenovirus-vector based vaccination of mice used clever methods to produce a marker that could track the activity of CD8+ T-cells in the lymph system and the spleen, in the days following vaccination. It can be inferred that immune cells (antigen-presenting cells, where the “antigen” is the spike protein) were initially present at the arm muscle injection site and synthesized the virus spike protein from the vaccine DNA code, exposing it on their surface. Once activated by the foreign protein, they translocated into the draining lymph nodes and finally made their way to the spleen via the lymph system. The CD8+ T-cells are idly waiting within the lymphatics until they spot an infected immune cell. Researchers could detect activation of CD8+ immune cells over time and inferred that this was caused by the arrival of the contents of the vaccine to the site where these immune cells reside. Activated CD8+ T-cells first appeared in the draining lymph nodes, but after five days began to show up in the spleen. Their numbers there peaked sharply by 12 days and then remained high with a slow decay up to 47 days, when the researchers stopped looking. What this means is that the vaccine is picked up by antigen-presenting cells at the injection site and carried to the spleen via the lymph system. The carrier cells then hang out in the spleen for a long time. And this is where the danger lies in terms of the potential to cause prion disease.

In the paper that Greg Nigh and I published recently on the mRNA vaccines, we argued that the mRNA vaccines are rather perfectly set up to produce a very dangerous situation in the spleen that is poised to launch a prion disease. Given the fact that the DNA vector vaccines also end up concentrated in the spleen, I think that the same thing holds true for them as well. The spleen is where the action is for seeding misfolded prion proteins. The vaccine-infected cells have been programmed to produce large amounts of spike proteins. Prion proteins misfold into damaging beta-sheet oligomers when there are too many of them in the cytoplasm. Might the spike protein do the same?

Three out of the four COVID-19 vaccines currently on the market in the U.S. and Europe (Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J) use a genetic code for the spike protein that has been slightly tweaked, in order to produce a more potent antibody response. Normally, after binding to the ACE2 receptor, the spike protein spontaneously changes its shape in a dramatic way in order to fuse with the membrane of the cell. In a Web publication, Ryan Cross described this action very graphically based on a spring-like model, as follows: “When the spike protein binds to a human cell, that spring is released, and the two helices and the loop straighten into one long helix that harpoons the human cell and pulls the virus and human membranes close together until they fuse.” As Cross explains, through trial and error, but taking structural information into account, researchers came up with the idea of swapping out two adjacent amino acids for prolines in the membrane fusion domain in order to stabilize the shape of the spike protein in its pre-fusion form. In this form, it exposes critical antigenic areas, and this assures more rapid formation of matching antibodies, the only goal of the vaccine design. This also prevents the protein from fusing with the plasma membrane of a host cell. I’d imagine that the spike protein attaches to the ACE2 receptor and then gets stuck there, like a sitting duck. But a worrisome thought is whether this open state, not fused with the membrane, might more closely resemble the shape of a misfolded prion-like protein like amyloid beta than does the collapsed shape it needs to go into the membrane?

Tetz and Tetz have argued in a published online preprint that prion-like domains in the spike protein enable higher affinity for the ACE2 receptor, making the virus more virulent than its earlier cousins. These same authors published an earlier peer-reviewed journal paper where they observed that many other viruses have proteins in their coat that have distinct features of prion proteins.

Germinal Centers and Parkinson’s Disease

Germinal centers in the spleen are a primary factory where antibodies against specific antigens (such as the spike protein) are manufactured and perfected. Makers of the mRNA vaccines were pleased to see that antigen-presenting cells (mainly dendritic cells), originally attracted to the site of the injection, take up the mRNA particles and then migrate via the lymph system to the spleen in high numbers and induce high levels of antibody production in these germinal centers.

Unfortunately, these same germinal centers are a primary site for the initiation of a process of producing and distributing misfolded prion proteins, often seeded by viral proteins, and triggered by an acute inflammatory response.

B cells, also known as B lymphocytes, are a type of immune cell that is the key player in the process that leads to the production of specific antibodies to a foreign antigen [38]. They originate from precursor cells in the bone marrow, and then migrate to the spleen and other lymphoid organs, where they bind to antigens presented to them by antigen-presenting cells, such as the dendritic cells. A maturation process beginning with a multipotent progenitor B cell ends with a mature “memory” B cell that has gone through a complex process to perfect its antibody production process to specifically match the antigen it has been assigned to (e.g., the spike protein). B cells also go through another process called class switching, which changes the type of antibody they produce from one class to another, without changing its specificity to the antigen.

Antibodies are also known as immunoglobulins (Igs), and the possible classes include IgM, IgG, IgA and IgE. IgM is the first immunoglobulin class that is produced (primarily in the spleen), and it is converted into IgG through class switching. IgG is the dominant class in the blood, making up 75% of the serum antibodies, and it is essential for clearing infections in the tissues. Long-lived mature memory B cells cruise the blood stream looking for any appearances of the antigen they have been assigned to, but they are useless for anything else. When the virus they’ve been trained to match mutates to the point where their antibodies no longer match well, they become useless even for the disease they’re trained to fight.

When mice are injected with PrP in the abdomen (intraperitoneal injection), the PrP shows up very quickly in the spleen. From there, the PrP travels along the spinal cord and the vagus nerve to reach the brain, causing prion disease [39]. As we will soon see, α-synuclein, the prion-like protein linked to Parkinson’s disease, also makes its way to the brain from the spleen along the vagus nerve. The mRNA vaccines set up perfect conditions in the spleen for the formation and distribution of conglomerates made up of misfolded α-synuclein, PrP and spike protein.

While α-synuclein causes neurodegenerative disease when it misfolds, in its normal shape it is an active participant in the immune response. α-Synuclein facilitates the processes that lead to antibody production in response to foreign antigens. Dendritic cells express α-synuclein, and it is upregulated (over-expressed) in response to stressors, such as the mRNA, the cationic lipids, and the PEG in the mRNA vaccines. Much can be learned by studying mice that have been genetically engineered to have a defective version of α-synuclein. These mice have a decreased capacity to clear pathogens through phagocytosis, and an impairment in the ability to generate B cells from precursor stem cells. They also had a four-fold reduction in progenitor B cells in the bone marrow. The amount of immunoglobulin G was reduced compared to wildtype, suggesting impaired class switching. Altogether, they are unable to mount an effective immune response to antigens, whether they come from a natural threat or a vaccine.

Dendritic cells under stress accumulate prion proteins and release them into small lipid particles called exosomes, which are then distributed throughout the body, either along nerve fibers or in the general circulation. There is reason to believe that these vaccines will accelerate the release of exosomes containing misfolded prion-like spike proteins that are being produced in large amounts under instruction from the vaccines. These spike proteins will act as seeds to cause α-synuclein and PrP to also misfold and form toxic oligomers together with the spike protein, which are released into the extracellular space as exosomes. These exosomes, released under the severe stress conditions induced by the vaccine, then carry prion proteins into the brain along the vagus nerve, to initiate prion diseases.

Impaired Immune Response due to Over-vaccination

A characteristic of the elderly is an impaired ability to mount antibodies against new pathogenic threats, and this is reflected in a failure to generate protective antibodies in response to vaccination. It has been demonstrated in experiments with mice that aged mice have an overabundance of long-lived memory (antigen-experienced) B cells, and this is paired with an inability to generate new B cells from progenitor cells in the bone marrow, as well as impairment in the process of refinement of the antibody response in germinal centers in the spleen and the associated class switching that produces effective IgG antibodies. A significant reduction in the number of naive follicular B cells, combined with an impaired ability to convert them into mature memory B cells leaves these aged mice highly vulnerable to new infections. It is likely that the same principle applies to humans. A plausible conclusion is that aggressive vaccination campaigns accelerate the pace at which an individual’s immune system reaches an “aged” status due to exuberant generation of memory B cells in response to the artificial stimuli induced by repeated vaccination.

It has now been confirmed that the S1 component of the spike protein shows up in the blood one day after the first mRNA vaccine and remains detectable for up to a month after vaccination, becoming cleared as IgA and IgG antibodies become available. For immune compromised people, it likely stays in the blood much longer, exposing all the tissues — the spleen, the heart, the brain, the gonads, etc. – to the toxic prion-like spike protein.

Today’s children are by far the most vaccinated generation in the history of humankind. If we decide in the near future to deliver a booster COVID-19 shot to them every year, as seems possible given the current climate of enthusiasm for these vaccines, are we inviting disaster for them in years to come? Will their immune system “age” much faster than that of previous generations, due to the exhaustion of the pool of progenitor B cells by all these vaccines? Will they succumb to Parkinson’s disease or other debilitating prion-based neurodegenerative diseases much sooner and in much greater numbers than previous generations? This is an experiment that I hope we finally decide not to carry out.

Summary

There are many reasons to be wary of the COVID-19 vaccines, which have been rushed to market with grossly inadequate evaluation and aggressively promoted to an uninformed public, with the potential for huge, irreversible, negative consequences. One potential consequence is to exhaust the finite supply of progenitor B cells in the bone marrow early in life, causing an inability to mount new antibodies to infectious agents. An even more worrisome possibility is that these vaccines, both the mRNA vaccines and the DNA vector vaccines, may be a pathway to crippling disease sometime in the future. Through the prion-like action of the spike protein, we will likely see an alarming increase in several major neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson’s disease, CKD, ALS and Alzheimer’s, and these diseases will show up with increasing prevalence among younger and younger populations, in years to come. Unfortunately, we won’t know whether the vaccines caused this increase, because there will usually be a long time separation between the vaccination event and the disease diagnosis. Very convenient for the vaccine manufacturers, who stand to make huge profits off of our misfortunes — both from the sale of the vaccines themselves and from the large medical cost of treating all these debilitating diseases.

Stephanie Seneff is a Senior Research Scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. She received the B.S. degree in Biophysics in 1968, the M.S. and E.E. degrees in Electrical Engineering in 1980, and the Ph.D degree in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in 1985, all from MIT. For over three decades, her research interests have always been at the intersection of biology and computation: developing a computational model for the human auditory system, understanding human language so as to develop algorithms and systems for human computer interactions, as well as applying natural language processing (NLP) techniques to gene predictions. She has published over 170 refereed articles on these subjects, and has been invited to give keynote speeches at several international conferences. She has also supervised numerous Master’s and PhD theses at MIT. In 2012, Dr. Seneff was elected Fellow of the International Speech and Communication Association (ISCA).

Originally published on GreenMedInfo.com

 

 

COVID-19 Vaccines May Be Enhancing Disease: Malone

By Zachary Stieber and Roman Balmakov

 

March 9, 2022 Updated: March 9, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

COVID-19 vaccines may be causing enhanced disease because they target an old version of the coronavirus, Dr. Robert Malone says.

“The data are showing that vaccination can actually increase the risk of being infected with the Omicron version of this virus,” Malone told The Epoch Times in a recent interview.

Malone was referring to how in some areas, including Scotland and New Zealand, patients hospitalized with COVID-19 are more likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccine than not.

A recent study, meanwhile, found that one dose of a vaccine boosted protection for people who recovered from COVID-19 but two or three doses seemed to lower protection; the authors said they weren’t sure why this was the case. Another study found higher protection among naturally immune who weren’t vaccinated versus those who were.

Vaccine-associated enhanced diseases (VAED) were identified (pdf) as an “important potential risk” of the COVID-19 vaccines by U.S. drug regulators, as was a similar event known as enhanced respiratory disease following COVID-19 vaccination. Some adverse events recorded following COVID-19 vaccination “could indicate” VAED (pdf), according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) team.

VAED refers to disease “resulting from infection in individuals primed with non-protective immune responses against the respective wild-type viruses,” researchers said last year as they set a case definition for the term. “Given that these enhanced responses are triggered by failed attempts to control the infecting virus, VAED typically presents with symptoms related to the target organ of the infection pathogen,” they added.

“That’s what the data has been showing now for a few months,” Malone, who helped invent the messenger RNA technology that two of the three COVID-19 vaccines cleared for use in the United States is built on, told The Epoch Times.

In a Pfizer document (pdf) released this month, the vaccine manufacturer said there were a potential 138 cases with 317 relevant events of VAED reported from December 2020 to February 2021. Of the 138 cases, 71 were medically significant, 16 required hospitalization, 13 were life-threatening, and there were 38 deaths.

The most frequently reported event out of the 317 potentially relevant events was drug ineffectiveness (135). Other events included COVID-19 pneumonia, diarrhea, respiratory failure, and seizure.

“VAED may present as severe or unusual clinical manifestations of COVID-19,” Pfizer concluded, adding that, “based on the current evidence, VAED/VAERD remains a theoretical risk for the vaccine” and that they will continue to monitor the syndrome.

Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson didn’t respond to requests for comment.

A CDC spokesperson said that the agency, along with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), are monitoring vaccine safety through surveillance systems such as the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and v-safe.

Monitoring to date “has not established a causal relationship between COVID-19 vaccination and vaccine-associated enhanced disease,” the spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email.

The CDC says the vaccines are largely safe and effective but also encourages people who experience side effects after getting one of them to report the issues to one of the systems.

The FDA, meanwhile, has not at this time identified an association between enhanced respiratory disease with the three vaccines the agency has cleared, a spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.

Meiling Lee contributed to this report.

Dr. Peter McCullough: Findings From Early COVID-19 Vaccine Studies Potentially Alarming

'This is getting into human chromosomes'

By Beth Brelje

 

March 8, 2022 Updated: March 8, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

How safe are COVID-19 vaccines? Should everyone be taking them? Are people who get vaccines more likely to get COVID-19? Can genetic material in the vaccines be incorporated into the human genome? These are some of the unknown questions that researchers around the world are currently investigating.

With more initial findings and hypotheses now released to the public, a group of free speech and information advocates last week during a presentation in Pennsylvania gave their “uncensored” take of the current science. They are currently traveling around the United States sharing concerns about how public health policy and debate throughout the COVID-19 pandemic has been handled.

The speakers were Dr. Peter McCullough, a renowned cardiologist whose own research is highly-cited; Dr. Bryan Ardis, a chiropractor; attorney Thomas Renz; and Steve Kirsch, a Silicon Valley philanthropist who supported early efforts searching for COVID-19 treatments in medicines already on the market. They were invited by the “Lions for Liberty,” a group of Penn State University students, faculty, and staff that sprang up in response to the university’s pandemic mitigation policies that require employees to get vaccinated for COVID-19.

The four spoke on numerous occasions; at Toftrees Resort in State College on March 3 and at Hershey Lodge on March 4 before which they testified at the Capitol Building in Harrisburg in a hearing hosted by state Sen. Doug Mastriano, who is a Republican running for governor.

They presented data from peer-reviewed studies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and government documents, and expressed their concerns that the COVID-19 vaccines recommended for all Americans were problematic from the start.

“It was clear vaccines weren’t sufficiently tested and important groups were excluded, like pregnant women,” McCullough said in Hershey. “With no data on safety and efficacy, pregnant women were encouraged, then later forced, to take the vaccines.”

He called the results of a newly released study disturbing. The study, titled  “Immune imprinting, breadth of variant recognition, and germinal center response in human SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination,” shows that messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) from the vaccine stays in the body much longer than expected. Messenger RNA is a single-stranded molecule that carries genetic code, usually from the DNA in a cell’s nucleus, to ribosomes, the cell’s protein-making area.

“It shows the messenger RNA is in the lymph nodes months after the vaccine had been received. This is proven,” McCullough said. “The vaccines are not leaving the body. It’s found in the lymph nodes at 60 days. The thought in the FDA briefing book was that these vaccines were going to be in the body for a day or two, generate immunity, and then be out.”

He cited another paper published in February by a team of researchers led by Associate Prof. Yang De Marinis at the Department of Clinical Sciences of Lund University, Sweden, that shows “reverse transcription” is happening—that is, an enzyme makes a copy of DNA from RNA.

“This is getting into human chromosomes, at least this segment is. If it turns out that the entire code goes into human chromosomes, and if it expresses spike protein within cells—spike protein is an abnormal protein, it is not a human protein— if this protein is expressed within human cells on a regular basis or on demand, and it’s passed from parent cells to daughter cells, and it’s passed to the developing embryo, we’re in trouble.”

Now, the race is on to confirm this finding with additional studies, McCullough said.

“On the CDC website, it says the vaccines don’t change the human genome. This paper that just broke in the last week is strongly suggesting the CDC was gravely wrong,” McCullough said. “We should have had monthly safety reports to America. If we’re going to ask Americans to take an experimental vaccine or investigational vaccine, there should have been a safety report.”

Coming out of the clinical trials, what was reported in the briefing booklet looked OK, McCullough said. Through October, over 220 million people took a vaccine.

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has now recorded as many as 24,000 reports of people dying shortly after taking a COVID-19 vaccine, over 34,000 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis after taking a vaccine, and 44,000 reports from people permanently disabled with a host of conditions after taking a vaccine. These reports, which can be made by any member of the public, have yet to be definitively linked to COVID-19 vaccines and further research is needed to quantify the risk.

Now, a new study in The Lancet is pointing to potential multi-inflammatory syndrome in COVID-19 vaccinated children, McCullough said. “Some kids are on ventilators. These were perfectly healthy kids and now they’re on the ventilator fighting for their life.”

State Legislation

During the hearing in Harrisburg, a number of COVID-related bills were mentioned.

Mastriano is the prime sponsor of Senate Bill 471, dubbed the Medical Freedom Act, which proposed that the state government shall not impose a vaccination requirement on adults or children without consent. It also proposed to make it illegal for the government to mandate employers to require vaccination of their staff and ensures unemployment compensation for unvaccinated workers. The bill moved out of the Health and Human Services Committee in November, committee chair state Sen. Michele Brooks said at the hearing. She also advocated for her own legislation, Senate Bill 937, which prohibits the state from requiring COVID-19 vaccines for students in kindergarten through grade 12. It is now in the House Education Committee, Brooks said.

A companion bill, SB 1091/HB 1741 would increase access to off-label FDA approved medications in the early stages of COVID-19. This would allow physicians and pharmacists to prescribe and dispense drugs already approved by the FDA for off-label treatment of COVID-19, without penalty from licensing boards. And it would clarify that a pharmacy may not decline to fill a prescription of a COVID-19 early treatment drug based solely on their opinion of the drug. Mastriano is the prime sponsor of this Senate bill and Rep. Dawn Keefer sponsors the House version.

Ardis made a plea to lawmakers at the hearing, on behalf of doctors.

“Please let them practice medicine. Never in the history of the world has there been one protocol for every human. We are all genetically different,” Ardis said. “Please allow doctors, once again, to be protected to practice medicine. They are the only ones that have known the history of their patients. You cannot tell me there’s one solution or protocol for every American who gets a respiratory infection right now; it’s impossible. And then you’re going to take their license from them, destroy their livelihood and then slander them with their reputation, because they’re holding to their oath to do no harm? Please. Put legislation in place that they can never be punished for doing their best to do no harm, to treat their patients.”

Penn State Snubbed Event

Lions for Liberty invited two university policy makers, Penn State President Eric Barron and Provost Nick Jones, to attend the forum. But Barron and Jones were not among the combined 700 attendees.

“It is disconcerting, to say the least, that leadership from the university’s administration were unwilling to attend or engage in either of these events,” Arielle Girouard, Lions for Liberty press secretary told The Epoch Times. “It is unfortunate that one of the nation’s top universities in research, education, and innovation has repeatedly denied our attempts to have a discussion on the science that has driven public health and institutional, including university, policies over the past two years. President Barron acknowledges a growing lack of public trust in higher education. It is hard to see how refusal to engage with credentialed academics and professionals, from both within and outside of the Penn State community, does anything but sow further distrust in the public. Regardless, Lions for Liberty isn’t going anywhere. We are committed to fostering a community, open to all who seek truth, so we may make well-informed decisions regarding our health, among other individual liberties.”

Penn State did not respond to a request from The Epoch Times to explain why they did not attend.

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and the Penn State chapter of Turning Point USA co-hosted the speakers with Lions for Liberty.

 

 

Bayer Executive Says mRNA Vaccines are Gene Therapy

The video of the October 2021 speech is making rounds on social media again

By Meiling Lee

 

March 5, 2022 Updated: March 5, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

A speech made last year by a Bayer executive mentioning that messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines are gene therapy is gaining traction on social media for the second time since it was initially posted online in October 2021.

Stefan Oelrich, a member of the Board of Management of Bayer and head of the Pharmaceuticals Division, gave a speech at the World Health Summit focused on biotechnological innovation. He said his company is “really taking that leap … in cell and gene therapy.”

“Ultimately, the mRNA vaccines are an example for that cell and gene therapy,” Oelrich said at the event’s opening in Berlin.

“I always like to say, if we had surveyed two years ago in the public—‘would you be willing to take gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body?’—we probably would have had a 95 percent refusal rate,” he added.

The pandemic has given the pharmaceutical industry innovation opportunities that may have not been possible before, Oelrich said.

“I think this pandemic has also opened many people’s eyes to innovation in the way that was maybe not possible before,” the Bayer executive said. “But it’s not just the industry that has to innovate, it’s across all the value chains starting with the academia and university, and again, the World Health Summit.”

Bayer did not reply to The Epoch Times’ request for comment by publishing time.

Fact-checkers argue that Oelrich’s speech was taken out of context and distorted, claiming Oelrich was pointing out that “mRNA-based vaccines are an example of technological innovation, just as the gene and cell therapy proposed by Bayer is an example of technological innovation.”

A Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine is transferred into a syringe at a mobile vaccination clinic in Worcester, Mass., on Dec. 2, 2021. (Steven Senne/AP Photo)

Skeptics of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines contend that they are gene therapy and not what true vaccines are since they do not protect against infection, viral replication, or transmission. Rather they work more like a medication that prevents severe disease and death.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has revised the definition of a vaccine as “a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against disease” in September 2021. The federal agency told The Epoch Times that the new definition was more transparent and would not be “misinterpreted to mean vaccines are 100% effective.”

Anyone calling the novel COVID-19 vaccines gene therapy or questioning their safety and effectiveness continues to get censored on social media.

A pioneer of the mRNA vaccine technology, Dr. Robert Malone, who calls the COVID-19 vaccine a genetic vaccine was de-platformed from all major social media sites, for raising concerns over the safety of the vaccines and the mandates.

The government and vaccine makers deny the claim that the mRNA vaccine is a gene or cell therapy and say there is no risk of the vaccines integrating with our DNA or entering the cell’s nucleus that houses our DNA.

Yet a Swedish study—conducted outside a living organism, or in vitro—has shown that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine can enter human liver cells and convert the mRNA to spike DNA within six hours. In addition, these spike DNA were found in the nucleus. More studies are needed to examine whether the spike DNA integrates into our genome.

Pfizer says its mRNA COVID-19 does not alter the DNA.

“Our COVID-19 vaccine does not alter the DNA sequence of a human cell,” a Pfizer spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email. “It only presents the body with the instructions to build immunity.”

Naturally Acquired Immunity Versus Vaccine Acquired Immunity

Science and public policy seem to disagree over which one is better

BY Jennifer Margulis

 

TIMENovember 9, 2021

“He’s got a pass!” said the dad sitting across from me at the airport in Bismarck, North Dakota, where we were both stranded due to flight delays. He gestured to his 5-year-old son.

“Had a slight fever and tested positive for COVID. We had to keep him home from school for a couple weeks. Then, he tested negative and was good to go. I got the vaccine. My wife did, too. But he can travel anywhere without any testing, and there’s no vaccine for his age anyway.”

In Germany Natural Immunity Counts

Since the beginning of July in Germany, where that family lives, if you can demonstrate proof of being COVID-recovered and then have a subsequent negative COVID test, you are considered immune. For six months anyway, according to the German government.

But in the United States, where my family lives, even those who are COVID-recovered (and show high protection via either antibody or T-cell testing) are being told they also must get vaccinated. Indeed, the CDC has been actively urging Americans who have already had COVID to get the vaccine.

America’s federal and state health officials, via the mainstream media and social media, as well as on their official channels, insist that COVID vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone.

CDC Urges Vaccination for COVID-Recovered

A CDC statement from August sums up the official position nicely: “New CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection Than Previous COVID-19 Infection.”

“If you have had COVID-19 before please still get vaccinated,” CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky urged the public in that release. “Getting the vaccine is the best way to protect yourself and others around you, especially as the more contagious Delta variant spreads around the country.”

But is it really?

Natural Immunity Versus Vaccine Immunity

Despite sensationalist headlines, reinfection with COVID-19 appears to be exceedingly rare. If you are unvaccinated and have had COVID, the chances of you getting it again are slim. A preliminary report from Israeli scientists shows that out of 149,735 people in Israel with confirmed COVID-19 cases (documented via positive PCR tests) only 154 people had evidence of reinfection, which is about 1 in 1,000.

Another study, however, suggests that the chances of reinfection are even lower than 1 in 1,000. Cleveland Clinic scientists who examined a cohort of 52,238 employees found no cases of reinfection among unvaccinated people with evidence of prior SARS-Co-V-2 infections.

The same study showed that vaccinated people who hadn’t had COVID-19 had a lower risk of infection than unvaccinated people. Still, the researchers concluded that “individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccines can be safely prioritized to those who have not been infected before.”

Sarbecovirus Infections Protect Against Future Disease

The benefits of naturally acquired immunity may go beyond protection against COVID. SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is part of a family of viruses known as sarbecoviruses. Symptoms vary widely in different people, but these viruses can create severe acute respiratory syndromes that usually begin with a fever and body aches, according to the CDC.

There have been two previous SARS outbreaks. A 2003 outbreak thought to have originated in China in 2002 infected about 8,098 people and led to about 774 deaths, according to the World Health Organization. Another smaller SARS outbreak occurred in 2004.

Both of these outbreaks were self-limiting: humans managed to overcome the illnesses naturally without mass vaccination campaigns. Research on these other sarbecovirus infections is limited, but it seems that when we acquire natural immunity to these viruses, it helps protect us against future disease.

To study this, scientists in San Francisco took blood from people who had had previous COVID infections (SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-Co-V) and assessed 12 antibodies in the blood. As reported in Nature, the California researchers found that one antibody in particular (S2H97) was able to bind to a range of sarbecovirus infections and keep the viruses from spreading in lab experiments. When they tested the antibody in hamsters, it kept the rodents from getting sick.

This “super antibody,” which was acquired naturally, essentially blocked SARS viruses from spreading to other cells. While the research is being used to promote the idea of developing a broad-ranging vaccine, it also shows that there may be long-lasting benefits to natural infection.

Viral Illness: Natural Immunity Provides Long-Lasting Protection

With other infectious diseases caused by viruses, we have seen that natural infection provides longer-lasting protection than vaccine immunity. For example, a 2017 study of adults in the Czech Republic published in the scientific journal PLOS One showed that the highest protection against the measles, as measured by antibody levels in people’s blood, was in people over 50 years of age who were naturally infected before the implementation of a measles vaccine.

Other research on swine flu (H1N1) published in the Journal of Experimental Medicine in 2011, found “extraordinarily” powerful antibodies in the blood of nine people who caught the swine flu naturally and recovered from it.

Though, again, this research was showcased by news reports as evidence that it may be possible to develop a one-size-fits-all vaccine against different strains of flu viruses, what it actually demonstrates is that recovering from naturally acquired viral infections not only gives people short-term immunity against other viruses but may also be of lasting benefit in fighting off other viral infections as well.

Because SARS-CoV-2 is a novel virus and the vaccines to protect against it only became available in January, it isn’t scientifically possible to know the long-term protection offered by either the infection or the vaccines.

As more data comes in, however, it appears that even mild infection can provide robust protection from COVID-19 infection. A study from July evaluated 254 COVID-19 patients for up to eight months and found “durable broad-based immune responses,” even among COVID-recovered patients who had only mild symptoms.

Other recent data also suggests that natural immunity is long-lasting. A study from Finland published in September in the European Journal of Immunology found that in COVID-recovered patients protection against reinfection persisted for over a year.

Immunologist: Natural Immunity Better Than Vaccination

Yet another large study from August looked at a database of 2.5 million Israelis and found that “natural immunity confers longer-lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.”

This Israeli study found that people who were vaccinated who hadn’t been previously infected were 6 to 13 times more likely to get infected with COVID-19 than unvaccinated people who had already had the illness.

“It’s a textbook example of how natural immunity is really better than vaccination,” Charlotte Thalin, an immunology researcher and specialist in internal medicine who is based in Stockholm, Sweden, told Science.org.

Where Is The Science Behind The CDC’s Vaccine Push?

Given the natural protection provided to people who recover from COVID, why is the CDC so eager to get every eligible American vaccinated, even those who have recovered and have naturally acquired immunity?

The CDC press release references only two reports. The first report showed that people in Kentucky who recovered from COVID who did not subsequently get vaccinated were nearly 2 1/2 times more likely to get re-infected with COVID compared to people who had recovered from COVID who were subsequently vaccinated.

The second CDC report, co-authored by more than 40 medical doctors and public health officials (several of whom disclose direct ties to the pharmaceutical companies manufacturing and profiting from these vaccines), looked at hospitalization rates of adults aged 65 and older. It concluded that “among adults aged 65-74 years, effectiveness of full vaccination for preventing hospitalization was 96 percent for Pfizer-BioNTech, 96 percent for Moderna, and 84 percent for Janssen COVID-19.”

The second report cited by the CDC excluded hospitalized patients who had only one dose of any COVID vaccine less than 14 days prior. It also didn’t specify if those who were vaccinated or those who were unvaccinated had a history of prior infection.

So that report sheds no light on whether vaccine immunity is more long-lasting than immunity from infection and offers no evidence to justify the idea that COVID-recovered patients should get vaccinated.

The CDC didn’t mention other studies that showed findings contrary to the Kentucky study. It’s unclear whether the agency reviewed those studies and found the Kentucky study to be stronger or only considered the Kentucky study in making their policy to recommend and require that the previously infected get the vaccine.

Meanwhile, much of the established science supports the superiority of acquired immunity. That fact has put some people, such as Laurie Lentz-Marino, in a difficult position as they try to balance the consequences of not complying with vaccine mandates against their understanding of what’s in the best interest of their health.

“Vaccine-induced immunity can never be as long-lasting and robust as naturally acquired immunity,” said Lentz-Marino, who taught chemistry and biology classes at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts, for more than 20 years. “The human immune system knows what it’s doing. We are an incredibly successful species. There would not be close to 8 billion people on the planet otherwise.”

Lentz-Marino, 61, recently resigned from her teaching position over vaccine and mask mandates at the college.

“It’s a sad joke to think that we know better than Mother Nature. We’re going in the wrong direction. It’s really arrogant to think that we can re-design our immune systems.”

Jennifer Margulis, Ph.D., is an award-winning science writer and book author. A Fulbright grantee, she is also a frequent contributor to The Epoch Times. Learn more and subscribe to her free weekly newsletter at her website JenniferMargulis.net.

 

 

 

Unintended Consequences of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19

BY Joseph Mercola

 

TIMEMarch 3, 2022

MIT scientist Stephanie Seneff’s paper, “Worse Than the Disease: Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19,” published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research in collaboration with Dr. Greg Nigh, is still one of the best, most comprehensive descriptions of the many possible unintended consequences of the mRNA gene transfer technologies incorrectly referred to as “COVID vaccines.”

December 9, 2021, their paper was reprinted in the Townsend Letter, the Examiner of Alternative Medicine. Seneff, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at MIT who has been conducting research at MIT for over five decades, has spent a large portion of her career investigating the hazards and mechanisms of action of glyphosate.

Her attention was diverted to the science of mRNA gene transfer technologies in early 2020, when Operation Warp Speed was announced. As noted in her paper, many factors that lacked precedent, yet were being implemented at breakneck speed, included:

  1. The first-ever use of PEG in an injection

  2. The first-ever use of mRNA gene transfer technology against an infectious agent

  3. The first-ever “vaccine” to make no clear claims about reducing infection, transmissibility or death

  4. The first-ever coronavirus vaccine ever tested on humans (and previous coronavirus vaccines all failed due to antibody-dependent enhancement, a condition in which the antibodies actually facilitate infection rather than defend against it)

  5. The first-ever use of genetically modified polynucleotides in the general population

An Insanely Reckless Process

In a May 2021 interview with me, Seneff said:

“To have developed this incredibly new technology so quickly, and to skip so many steps in the process of evaluating [its safety], it’s an insanely reckless thing that they’ve done. My instinct was that this is bad, and I needed to know [the truth].

So, I really dug into the research literature by the people who’ve developed these vaccines, and then more extensive research literature around those topics. And I don’t see how these vaccines can possibly be doing anything good …”

At the time, just five months into the mass inoculation campaign, Seneff suspected the COVID shots would end up killing far more people than the infection itself. Today, a full year into it, the statistics are grim beyond belief, proving her educated prediction to have been an astute one.

mRNA Jabs Are Shockingly Hazardous

As of December 3, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has logged an astounding 927,738 COVID jab related adverse events, including 19,886 deaths. VAERS can receive reports from vaccine manufacturers and other international sources, and if we exclude those, the death toll reported in U.S. territories exclusively stands at 9,136.

Of the total death reports, Pfizer — the only company that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has granted full licensing for an as-yet unavailable COVID shot — accounts for the vast majority: 13,268, compared to 4,894 for Moderna, 1,651 for Janssen and 73 for an undisclosed brand.

Pfizer also accounts for the vast majority of hospitalizations post-injection, and while those over the age of 66 make up the bulk of deaths, the 25-to-50 age group accounts for most of the hospitalizations. Key side effects that are now being reported in massive numbers include:

  • Miscarriages

  • Heart problems such as heart attacks and myopericarditis

  • Thrombocytopenia (low platelet count)

  • Shingles

  • Bell’s palsy

  • A variety of permanent disabilities, many of which involve neurological dysfunction

All of these consequences were predicted by Seneff and Nigh in their paper, which makes the events all the more tragic. Importantly, VAERS is notoriously underreported, so the real-world impact of these shots is far greater than what those data suggest.

The Cure Is Indeed Worse Than the Disease

Calculations performed by Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, and his team of statisticians suggest VAERS COVID-related reports are underreported by a factor of 41. This is a conservative estimate, supported by calculations using a variety of sources besides VAERS itself.

That means that in the U.S. alone (using the data for U.S. territories only), the actual death toll may be closer to 374,576 (including international deaths reported to VAERS would put the death toll at 815,326), and those are deaths that occurred within days or weeks post-injection.

As Seneff and Nigh explain in their paper, there’s overwhelming reason to suspect that these gene transfer injections will have devastating impacts in the long term, resulting in excess deaths over the next decade.

What’s more, it’s clear that the death toll from the COVID-19 infection itself in the U.S. has been vastly exaggerated, as it’s based on positive PCR tests and even mere suspicion of COVID in the absence of testing. Many died from other causes and just happened to have a positive COVID test at the time of death.

Kirsch estimates the real death tally from COVID-19 to be about 50% of the reported number (which is likely conservative). This means about 380,000 Americans died from COVID-19 (rather than with COVID), whereas the COVID shots may have killed more than 374,570 in the first 11 months alone.

“Seneff suspects that in the next 10 to 15 years, we’ll see a dramatic spike in prion diseases, autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases at younger ages, and blood disorders such as blood clots, hemorrhaging, stroke and heart failure.”

As predicted in the title of Seneff’s paper, it seems the cure may indeed end up being worse than the disease. This is particularly true for children and young adults, who have either died or been permanently disabled by the shots by the thousands, while having an extraordinarily low risk of dying from or being seriously harmed by the infection itself.

Seneff suspects that in the next 10 to 15 years, we’ll see a dramatic spike in prion diseases, autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases at younger ages, and blood disorders such as blood clots, hemorrhaging, stroke and heart failure.

The Spike Protein Is the Most Dangerous Part of SARS-CoV-2

The reason we’re seeing all these problems from the COVID shots is because they program your cells to continuously produce SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which we now know is the most dangerous part of the virus. Many experts noted this from the start, wondering what the vaccine developers could possibly be thinking, selecting this as the antigen for their shots.

While the mRNA injections can cause harm in many different ways, one basic problem is that they can overstimulate your immune system to the point of failure. In summary, as your cells start producing the viral spike proteins, your immune cells rally to mop up the proteins and dump them into your lymphatic system. (This is why many report swollen lymph nodes under the arms.)

The antibody response is part of your humoral immunity. You also have cellular immunity, which is part of your innate immune system. Your innate immune system is very powerful. If you’re healthy, it can clear viruses without ever producing a single antibody. Antibodies are actually a second-tier effect when your innate immune system fails.

The problem is that your innate immune system will not be activated and likely will fail to protect you if you get a COVID-19 shot, because it’s bypassing all of the areas where your innate immune system would be brought to bear.

Normally you breathe the virus in and stimulate the production secretory IgA antibodies that protect your respiratory system. When you bypass that route of exposure with a jab in the arm, no secretory IgA antibodies are produced, leaving you susceptible to the infection.

As explained by Ronald Kostoff in an excellent December 8, 2021, Trial Site News article, “COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’: The Wrong Bomb Over the Wrong Target at the Wrong Time”:

“An effective vaccine would focus on cellular immunity in the respiratory and intestinal tract, in which secretory IgA is produced by your lymphocytes that are located directly underneath the mucous membranes that line the respiratory and intestinal tract.

The antibodies produced by these lymphocytes are ejected through and to the surface of the linings. These antibodies are thus on site to meet air-borne viruses and they may be able to prevent viral binding and infection of the cells.

Unfortunately, the main inoculants used presently for COVID-19 focus on antibodies (IgG and circulating IgA) that occur in the bloodstream. These antibodies protect the internal organs of the body from infectious agents that try to spread via the bloodstream.”

When you are injected with the COVID jab, your body will only induce IgG and circulating IgA — not secretory IgA, and these types of antibodies do not effectively protect your mucous membranes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. So, as noted by Kostoff, the breakthrough infections we’re now seeing “confirm the fundamental design flaws” of this gene transfer technology.

“A natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus) will in most individuals remain localized to the respiratory tract,” Kostoff writes. “The vaccines used presently cause cells deep inside our body to express the viral spike protein, which they were never meant to do by nature.

Any cell which expresses this foreign antigen on its surface will come under attack by the immune system, which will involve both IgG antibodies and cytotoxic T-lymphocytes. This may occur in any organ, but the damage will be most severe in vital organs.

We are seeing now that the heart is affected in many young people, leading to myocarditis or even sudden cardiac arrest and death. In other words, we are dropping the wrong bomb on the wrong target at the wrong time!”

In the end, your body will essentially believe that your innate immune system has failed, which means it must bring in the backup cavalry. In essence, your body is now overreacting to something that isn’t true. You’re not actually infected with a virus and your innate immune system has not failed, but your body is forced to respond as if both are true.

Effects Likely to Persist Long Term

What’s more, the synthetic RNA in the mRNA vaccines contains a nucleotide called methyl-pseudouridine, which your body cannot break down, and the RNA is programmed to trigger maximum protein production. So, we’re looking at completely untested manipulation of RNA.

It is very important to recognize that this is a genetically engineered mRNA for the spike protein. It is not identical to the spike protein mRNA that SARS-Cov-2 produces. It’s been significantly altered to avoid being metabolized by your body.

The spike protein your body produces in response to the COVID-19 vaccine mRNA locks into your ACE2 receptor. This is because the genetically engineered new spike protein has additional prolines inserted that prevent the receptors from properly closing, which then cause you to downregulate ACE2. That’s partially how you end up with problems such as pulmonary hypertension, ventricular heart failure and stroke.

As noted in a 2020 paper, there’s a “pivotal link” between ACE2 deficiency and SARS-CoV-2 infection. People with ACE2 deficiency tend to be more prone to severe COVID-19. The spike protein suppresses ACE2, making the deficiency even worse. According to Seneff, the gene transfer injections essentially do the same thing, and we still don’t know how long the effects last.

Manufacturers initially guessed the synthetic RNA might survive in the human body for about six months. A more recent investigation found the spike protein persisted in recovered COVID patients for 15 months.

This raises the suspicion that the synthetic and more persistent mRNA in the COVID shots may trigger spike protein production for at least as long, and probably longer. What’s more, the number of spike proteins produced by the shots is far greater than what you experience in natural infection.

As explained by Dr. Peter McCullough, this means that after your first shot, your body will produce spike protein for at least 15 months. But, when you get shot No. 2 a few weeks later, that shot will cause spike protein production to go on for 15 months or longer. With shot No. 3 six months after that, you produce spike protein for yet another 15 months.

With regular boosters, you may never rid your body of the spike protein. All the while, it’s wreaking havoc with your biology. McCullough likens it to “a permanent install of an inflammatory protein in the human body,” and inflammation is at the heart of most if not all chronic diseases. There’s simply no possible way for these gene transfer shots to improve public health. They’re going to decimate it.

Long-Term Neurological Damage Is To Be Expected

In her paper, Seneff describes several key characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that suggests it acts as a prion. This could help explain why we’re seeing so many neurological side effects from the shots. According to Seneff, the spike protein produced by the COVID shot, due to the modifications made, may actually make it more of a prion than the spike protein in the actual virus, and a more effective one.

For a detailed technical description of this you can read through Seneff’s paper, but the take-home message is that COVID-19 shots are instruction sets for your body to make a toxic protein that will eventually wind up concentrated in your spleen, from where prion-like protein instructions will be sent out, radically increasing your risk of developing neurodegenerative diseases.

Lung, Heart and Brain Diseases Are Predictable Consequences

Seneff also goes into great detail describing how the spike protein acts as a metabolic poison. While I recommend reading Seneff’s paper in its entirety, I’ve extracted some key sections below, starting with how the spike protein can trigger pathological damage leading to lung damage and heart and brain diseases:

“The picture is now emerging that SARS-CoV-2 has serious effects on the vasculature in multiple organs, including the brain vasculature … In a series of papers, Yuichiro Suzuki in collaboration with other authors presented a strong argument that the spike protein by itself can cause a signaling response in the vasculature with potentially widespread consequences.

These authors observed that, in severe cases of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 causes significant morphological changes to the pulmonary vasculature … Furthermore, they showed that exposure of cultured human pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit was sufficient to promote cell signaling without the rest of the virus components.

Follow-on papers showed that the spike protein S1 subunit suppresses ACE2, causing a condition resembling pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), a severe lung disease with very high mortality … The ‘in vivo studies’ they referred to … had shown that SARS coronavirus-induced lung injury was primarily due to inhibition of ACE2 by the SARS-CoV spike protein, causing a large increase in angiotensin-II.

Suzuki et al. (2021) went on to demonstrate experimentally that the S1 component of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, at a low concentration … activated the MEK/ERK/MAPK signaling pathway to promote cell growth. They speculated that these effects would not be restricted to the lung vasculature.

The signaling cascade triggered in the heart vasculature would cause coronary artery disease, and activation in the brain could lead to stroke. Systemic hypertension would also be predicted. They hypothesized that this ability of the spike protein to promote pulmonary arterial hypertension could predispose patients who recover from SARS-CoV-2 to later develop right ventricular heart failure.

Furthermore, they suggested that a similar effect could happen in response to the mRNA vaccines, and they warned of potential long-term consequences to both children and adults who received COVID-19 vaccines based on the spike protein.

An interesting study by Lei et. al. (2021) found that pseudovirus — spheres decorated with the SARS-CoV-2 S1 protein but lacking any viral DNA in their core — caused inflammation and damage in both the arteries and lungs of mice exposed intratracheally.

They then exposed healthy human endothelial cells to the same pseudovirus particles. Binding of these particles to endothelial ACE2 receptors led to mitochondrial damage and fragmentation in those endothelial cells, leading to the characteristic pathological changes in the associated tissue.

This study makes it clear that spike protein alone, unassociated with the rest of the viral genome, is sufficient to cause the endothelial damage associated with COVID-19. The implications for vaccines intended to cause cells to manufacture the spike protein are clear and are an obvious cause for concern.”

The COVID Shots Activate Latent Viruses

As mentioned earlier, shingles infection is turning out to be a rather common side effect of the COVID shot, and like the neurological, vascular and cardiac damage we’re seeing, activation of latent viral infections was also predicted.

One reason why latent viral infections are cropping up in response to the shots is because the shots disable your type I interferon pathway. A second reason is because your immune system is overburdened trying to deal with the inflammatory spike proteins flowing through your body. Something’s got to give, so latent viruses are allowed to break through.

That’s not the end of your potential troubles, however, as these coinfections may worsen or accelerate other conditions, such as Bell’s Palsy, myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome.

Herpes viruses, for example, have been implicated as a trigger of both AIDS and chronic fatigue syndrome. Some research suggests these diseases don’t appear until viruses from different families partner up and the type 1 interferon pathway is disabled.

With all of that in mind, it seems inevitable that, long term, the COVID mass injection campaign will result in an avalanche of a wide range of debilitating chronic illnesses.

References

International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research May 10, 2021; 2(1): 38-79

Townsend Letter December 9, 2021

OpenVAERS data as of December 3, 2021

OpenVAERS data as of December 3, 2021. For US only data, flip the selection switch at top

OpenVAERS Adverse Event Reports Breakdown

SKirsch.io/vaccine-resources

Trial Site News December 8, 2021

Trial Site News December 8, 2021

European Heart Journal July 20, 2020: ehaa534

Circulation Research 2021; 128: 1323-1326

European Journal of Internal Medicine June 2020; 76:14-20

Circulation Research 2021; 128: 1323-1326

bioRxiv June 25, 2021 DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.25.449905

New American November 8, 2021 , video at circa 8 minutes

New American November 8, 2021 , video at circa 8 minutes

International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research May 10, 2021; 2(1): 402-444

International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research May 10, 2021; 2(1): 402-444

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1996 37. Suppl B, 87-95

ImmunoHorizons April 1, 2020

Inventor of mRNA Tech Used in Covid Vaccine Tells All on Podcast

BY Joseph Mercola

 

TIMEMarch 2, 2022

Not only are children at high risk for severe adverse events from the COVID shots, but having healthy, unvaccinated children in the population is crucial to achieving herd immunity.

December 30, 2021, Joe Rogan interviewed Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA gene transfer technology. YouTube and Twitter promptly deleted the interview and mainstream media published a rash of articles attacking Malone and Rogan in the most disparaging terms possible.

In addition to censoring Malone, Google has also been caught red-handed manipulating search results such that Malone’s Rogan interview won’t show up when searching for “mass formation psychosis.” That search term also won’t give you any of the interviews given by psychologist Mattias Desmet, who was the first to use that term as a diagnosis for why so many are buying an obviously flawed, if not ridiculous, COVID narrative.

In response to the obvious Big Tech censorship, Congressman Troy Nehls, R-Texas, entered the transcript of the podcast (the Joe Rogan Experience #1757) into the Congressional Record with the following statement:

“By deplatforming Dr. Robert Malone for voicing opposition and removing the interview, Twitter and YouTube are once again proving that they don’t work for their users but for big Pharma, big media, and the elites.

When we stray away from our core principles of freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of debate, democracy is lost. Today, I entered the transcript of the Joe Rogan Experience #1757 into the Congressional Record to preserve the podcast forever. Big Tech may be able to censor information on their own platforms, but they cannot censor the Congressional Record.”

Malone Permanently Banned From Twitter

Malone had been permanently banned from Twitter the day before, December 29, 2021. He suspects his ban was triggered by one of the two last posts he made. One was a link to the Canadian COVID Care Alliance’s website, with the comment:

“Pfizer 6 month data which shows that Pfizer’s Covid-19 inoculations cause more illness than they prevent. Plus, an overview of the Pfizer trial flaws in both design and execution.”

The video, featured on the Canadian COVID Care Alliance’s website, reviews that Pfizer data. We will feature this excellent video later and go into far more details of how they exposed the fraud of Pfizer’s clinical COVID jab trial.

The other tweet that might have triggered the ban was a post about how the World Economic Forum manages global media in a lockstep fashion. Either way, Malone was permanently banned from the social media platform either for highlighting Pfizer’s own science — the very science we’re told to “trust” — or highlighting the WEF’s central role in the global censorship campaign.

Mainstream Media Are Losing the Information War

Interestingly, Rogan has become something of a key workaround to the universal mainstream media censorship. While Malone lost 512,000 followers on Twitter when they suspended his account, it’s rumored his interview with Rogan has garnered some 50 MILLION views across alternative free-speech platforms. As noted in a January 3, 2022, ZeroHedge article:

“… nowadays when you make it on JRE, you’ve officially ‘made it.’ Putting aside the obvious irony of Twitter attempting to ban somebody and the person in question going viral as a result, I also thought about how, despite the fact that Malone’s opinions put him at odds with the mainstream media … Joe Rogan launched him past the usual media suspects and into the real ‘mainstream’ …

[In] 2022, the mainstream media as we know it today (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, etc.) is going to be forced to change its narrative on COVID. The idea of the media being forced to change its tune on Covid is something I touched upon a couple of days ago when I wrote about the Omicron variant and how the media is creating a mass hysteria mountain out of a mole hill.

But after listening to Dr. Robert Malone‘s well reasoned arguments, delivered for three straight hours, concisely and calmly, it became clear to me that the entire mainstream media machine could wind up falling at the hands of content creators like Joe Rogan.

Rogan generates so many views and has grown so quickly — strictly because he allows open dialogue, civil discourse and approaches things with honest intent … One issue for media and political elites to consider is the fact that Rogan has supporters on both sides of the aisle.

These supporters watch him because he routinely touches on topics that are considered faux pas or irreverent … Rogan has thrived, whether intentionally (bringing on people specifically because they are being censored) or unintentionally (shooting the shit with people he finds interesting), from the start, by shining light in the dark areas that the mainstream media refuses to discuss.”

While Malone’s Twitter feed has been erased, you can still follow him on GabGETTR and Substack. A Gab mirror with the last 400 tweets from Malone’s Twitter feed is also available. January 2, 2022, when Rogan joined GETTR, he urged his 7.8 million Twitter followers to join him there “in case s**t over at Twitter gets even dumber.”

Cliff Notes From the Rogan Interview

Many Rogan fans agree that Malone’s interview is among the best interviews Rogan has ever done. I know, many of you are saying to yourself, I don’t have three hours to watch this interview. Well, let me encourage you to find the time. If 50 million people have watched this video, it is likely you could find the time.

Trust me on this one. You won’t regret it. It is such a pure joy and pleasure to listen to Malone’s relaxed, eloquent, masterfully precise language as he destroys the mainstream COVID narrative. You can watch it in bits and pieces, but this is clearly the best interview Malone has done and is on par with the Peter McCullough interview with Rogan a few weeks ago.

“If it’s not OK for me to be part of the conversation … who can be allowed?” ~ Dr. Robert Malone

As explained by Malone, he has been involved in vaccine development and distribution for more than three decades, and played a crucial role in the development of the very technology that the Pfizer and Moderna COVID shots are based upon, so “If it’s not OK for me to be part of the conversation … who can be allowed?” Malone asked.

Indeed, as noted by Rogan, with its ban of Malone, Twitter basically banned “one of the most qualified people in the world to talk about vaccines.” Malone said he has attorneys looking at potentially filing some sort of lawsuit over the ban.

Of course, mainstream media and “fact checkers” (now legally defined by recent Facebook litigation as opinion promoters) call him a liar for saying he invented the mRNA technology currently used, but his name on 10 patents proves otherwise.

“No one can dispute that I played a major role in this tech,” Malone said. “And virtually all other voices that have that background have financial conflicts of interest. I think I’m the only one that doesn’t. I’m not getting any money out of this.”

Some of the cliff notes from Malone’s interview include the following:

  • Government responses — Malone believes the U.S. government is “out of control” and “lawless” in their COVID response and that their actions have resulted in, probably, half a million excess deaths. COVID jab mandates are “explicitly illegal” as the shots are experimental. What’s more, people are not getting the information they need to be able to make an informed decision about the risks they’re taking by participating in this experiment.

  • Social psychology of the times — Malone believes the irrational behavior we’re witnessing is the result of “mass formation psychosis,” a societal diagnosis first presented by Desmet at the end of 2021.

  • Natural immunity — Natural immunity is more robust than “vaccine” induced immunity, and people with natural immunity also have a higher risk of adverse events from the COVID jab.

  • COVID jab risks — Malone actually took the Moderna shot, thinking it might help with some long-COVID symptoms he was having after getting seriously ill with COVID-19 in February 2020. He says he suffered some side effects from the shot, but that those effects have since resolved.Malone expresses concern about post-jab myocarditis rates and the possibility of fertility problems. When it comes to reproductive health, he warns that the lipid nanoparticles in the COVID shots can have adverse effects on the ovaries.He also reviews how the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein can cause blood clots, regardless of whether they come from natural infection or the COVID jab, and how the spike protein can disrupt the blood-brain-barrier.Malone believes the reason some experience no or few adverse effects from the COVID shot has to do with phenotypic or genetic differences. He points out that diabetics and those with high blood sugar levels tend to be more affected by spike protein effects, for example.

  • Suppression of early treatment — Early treatment with drugs such as hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin is very effective and both drugs have also been safely administered for several decades. The Chinese anti-COVID protocol, obtained by Malone in February 2020, actually included hydroxychloroquine. When he got COVID-19, Malone also self-treated with femotadine (Pepsid). He’s now leading a clinical trial to assess its usefulness in the treatment of COVID.

  • Narrative management and global coordination of censorship — The Trusted News Initiative led by the BBC is central to the censorship campaign, according to Malone. It labels anyone who disagrees with the official narrative on vaccines as an “anti-vaxxer,” and suppresses anything that goes against “approved” sources such as Dr. Anthony Fauci and the World Health Organization.He also points out that Thomson-Reuters, which has ties to Pfizer, is a primary fact checker of Twitter. Since they in part decide what’s allowed to be discussed on Twitter, Pfizer has this hidden influence as well (not to mention that James C. Smith, chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation, also has been a director at Pfizer and chair of their compensation committee since 2014).

  • COVID jab efficacy — Malone notes the window of effectiveness is ever shrinking, with some studies, such as one from Denmark, showing negative effectiveness against Omicron.According to Malone, we’re administering a “mismatched vaccine” and driving the B and T memory cells toward a virus that is no longer in circulation. His hypothesis for why the shots stop working so quickly is because of this original antigenic sin. He explains:
     

“We’ve got a new pathogen [Omicron] but it’s got a series of overlaps with the old ones that we’ve seen before, and our immune system is biased to respond as if it’s the old one.

Now, to make matters worse, we’re taking the spike protein — only one of the proteins the dominant immunologically dominant protein — and we’re jabbing everybody multiple times, and driving memory cells and effector cells to a virus that is not the one we’re encountering.

So it could very well be that as you’re taking more jabs, you’re further skewing your immune response in a way that’s dysfunctional for infection to Omicron … When you see a signal this strong, it’s saying something’s going on you ought to pay attention to it in my opinion.”

References

Daily Mail January 3, 2021

Steve Kirsch Substack January 2, 2022

Spotify Joe Rogan Experience #1757

Nehls.house.gov January 3, 2022

Canadian COVID Care Alliance

Daily Mail January 3, 2021

ZeroHedge January 3, 2022

The Blaze January 3, 2022

ZeroHedge January 3, 2022, ZeroHedge January 3, 2022, Joe Rogan Joins GETTR In Anticipation Of Censorship On Twitter “Getting Even Dumber”

Twitter Acclaimed Journalist December 31, 2021

Pfizer Board Members 2021

medRxiv December 23, 2021

Freedom World News December 31, 2021

 

 

 

The Truth Is Coming Out About COVID Deaths

By Joseph Mercola

 

March 1, 2022 Updated: March 2, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

Hospitals receive payments for testing every patient for COVID, every COVID diagnosis and every ‘COVID death,’ as well as any time they use remdesivir and mechanical ventilation.

Early on in the COVID pandemic, people suspected that the deaths attributed to the infection were exaggerated. There was plenty of evidence for this. For starters, hospitals were instructed and incentivized to mark any patient who had a positive COVID test and subsequently died within a certain time period as a COVID death.

At the same time, we knew that the PCR test was unreliable, producing inordinate amounts of false positives. Now, the truth is finally starting to come out and, as suspected, the actual death toll is vastly lower than we were led to believe.

COVID Deaths Have Been Vastly Overcounted

In the video above, Dr. John Campbell reviews recent data released by the U.K. government in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. They show that the number of deaths during 2020 in England and Wales, where COVID-19 was the sole cause of death, was 9,400. Of those, 7,851 were aged 65 and older. The median age of death was 81.5 years.

During the first quarter of 2021, there were 6,483 deaths where COVID-19 was the sole cause of death, again with the vast majority, 4,923, occurring in seniors over 65.

A total of 346 died from COVID-19 alone during the second quarter of 2021, and in the third quarter, the COVID death toll was 1,142. Again, these are people with no other underlying conditions that might have caused their death.

So, in all, for the 21 months covering January 2020 through September 2021, the total COVID-19 death toll in England and Wales was 17,371 — a far cry from what’s been reported. As of the end of September 2021, the U.K. government reported there were 137,133 deaths within 28 days of a positive test, and these deaths were therefore all counted as “COVID deaths.”

In a January 19, 2022, press conference, U.K. health secretary Sajid Javid admitted that the daily government figures are unreliable as people have been and continue to die from conditions unrelated to COVID-19, but are included in the count due to a positive test.

He also admitted that about 40% of patients presently counted as hospitalized COVID patients were not admitted due to COVID symptoms. They were admitted for other conditions and simply tested positive.

COVID Has Primarily Killed Those Close to Death Anyway

Campbell also points out that of the 17,371 people who had COVID-19 as the sole cause of death, 13,597 were 65 or older. The average age of death in the U.K. from COVID in 2021 was 82.5 years. Compare that to the projected life expectancy in the U.K., which is 79 for men and 82.9 for women. This hardly constitutes an emergency, least of all for healthy school- and working-age individuals.

Campbell then goes on to review data on excess deaths from cancer. Estimates suggest there have been an extra 50,000 cancer deaths over the past 18 months — deaths that normally would not have occurred. Delayed diagnosis and inability to receive proper treatment due to COVID restrictions are thought to be primary reasons for this.

As noted by Campbell, when we’re looking at excess deaths, we really need to take things like age of death into account. COVID-19, apparently, killed mostly people who were close to the end of life expectancy anyway, so the loss of quality life years isn’t particularly significant.

That needs to be weighed against the deaths of people in their 30s, 40s and 50s who have died from untreated cancer and other chronic diseases, thanks to COVID restrictions.

CDC Highlights Role of Comorbidities in Vaxxed COVID Deaths

In the U.S., data suggest a similar pattern of exaggerated COVID death statistics. Most recently, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Dr. Rochelle Walensky cited research showing that 77.8% of people who had received the COVID jab yet died from/with COVID also had, on average, four comorbidities.

“So, really, these are people who were unwell to begin with,” Walensky said. But while Walensky points to this study as evidence that the COVID shot works wonders to reduce the risk of death, the exact same pattern has been shown in the unvaccinated. People without comorbidities have very little to worry about when it comes to COVID.

“COVID is a lethal risk only for the sickest among us, and that’s true whether you’re ‘vaccinated’ or not.”

For example, a 2020 study found 88% of hospitalized COVID patients in New York City had two or more comorbidities, 6.3% had one underlying health condition and 6.1% had none. At that time, there were no COVID jabs available.

Similarly, in late August 2020, the CDC published data showing only 6% of the total death count had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause of death. The remaining 94% had had an average of 2.6 comorbidities or preexisting health conditions that contributed to their deaths. So, yes, COVID is a lethal risk only for the sickest among us, just as Walensky said, but that’s true whether you’re “vaccinated” or not.

Most COVID Deaths Likely Due to Ventilator Malpractice

In addition to the issue of whether people die “from” COVID or “with” a SARS-CoV-2 positive test, there’s the issue of whether incorrect treatment is killing COVID patients. By early April 2020, doctors warned that putting COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation increased their risk of death.

One investigation showed a staggering 80% of COVID-19 patients in New York City who were placed on ventilators died, causing some doctors to question their use. U.K. data put that figure at 66% and a small study in Wuhan found 86% of ventilated patients died. In an April 8, 2020, article, STAT News reported:

“Many patients have blood oxygen levels so low they should be dead. But they’re not gasping for air, their hearts aren’t racing, and their brains show no signs of blinking off from lack of oxygen.

That is making critical care physicians suspect that blood levels of oxygen, which for decades have driven decisions about breathing support for patients with pneumonia and acute respiratory distress, might be misleading them about how to care for those with COVID-19.

In particular, more and more are concerned about the use of intubation and mechanical ventilators. They argue that more patients could receive simpler, noninvasive respiratory support, such as the breathing masks used in sleep apnea, at least to start with and maybe for the duration of the illness.”

At the time, emergency room physician Dr. Cameron Kyle-Sidell argued that patients’ symptoms had more in common with altitude sickness than pneumonia. Similarly, a paper by critical care Drs. Luciano Gattinoni and John J. Marini described two different types of COVID-19 presentations, which they refer to as Type L and Type H. While one benefited from mechanical ventilation, the other did not.

Despite that, putting COVID patients on mechanical ventilation is “standard of care” for COVID across the U.S. to this day. Without doubt, most of the early COVID patients were killed from ventilator malpractice, and patients continue to be killed — not from COVID but from harmful treatments.

Better Alternatives to Ventilation Exist

Mechanical ventilation can easily damage the lungs as it’s pushing air into the lungs with force. Hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) would likely be a better alternative, as it allows your body to absorb a higher percentage of oxygen without forcing air into the lungs. HBOT also improves mitochondrial function, helps with detoxification, inhibits and controls inflammation and optimizes your body’s innate healing capacity.

Doctors have also had excellent results using high-flow nasal cannulas in lieu of ventilators. As noted in an April 2020 press release from doctors at UChicago Medicine:

“High-flow nasal cannulas, or HFNCs, are non-invasive nasal prongs that sit below the nostrils and blow large volumes of warm, humidified oxygen into the nose and lungs.

A team from UChicago Medicine’s emergency room took 24 COVID-19 patients who were in respiratory distress and gave them HFNCs instead of putting them on ventilators. The patients all fared extremely well, and only one of them required intubation after 10 days …

The HFNCs are often combined with prone positioning, a technique where patients lay on their stomachs to aid breathing. Together, they’ve helped UChicago Medicine doctors avoid dozens of intubations and have decreased the chances of bad outcomes for COVID-19 patients, said Thomas Spiegel, MD, Medical Director of University of Chicago Medicine’s Emergency Department. The proning and the high-flow nasal cannulas combined have brought patient oxygen levels from around 40% to 80% and 90% …”

How to Use Prone Positioning at Home

You can also use prone positioning at home if you struggle with a cough or have trouble breathing. If you’re struggling to breathe, you should seek emergency medical care. However, in cases of cough or mild shortness of breath being treated at home, try to avoid spending a lot of time lying flat on your back.

Guidelines from Elmhurst Hospital suggest “laying [sic] on your stomach and in different positions will help your body to get air into all areas of your lung.” The guidelines recommend changing your position every 30 minutes to two hours, including:

  • Lying on your belly

  • Lying on your right side

  • Sitting up

  • Lying on your left side

This is a simple way to potentially help ease breathing difficulties at home. If you or a loved one is hospitalized, this technique can be used there too.

Hospital Incentives Are Driving Up COVID Deaths

You might wonder why doctors and hospital administrators insist on using treatments known to be ineffective at best and deadly at worst, while stubbornly refusing to administer anything that has been shown to work, be it intravenous vitamin C, hydroxychloroquine and zinc, ivermectin or corticosteroids.

The most likely answer is because they’re protecting their bottom line. In the U.S., hospitals not only risk losing federal funding if they administer these treatments, but they also get a variety of incentives for doing all the wrong things. Hospitals receive payments for:

  • COVID testing for all patients

  • COVID diagnoses

  • Admitting a “COVID patient”

  • Use of remdesivir

  • Use of mechanical ventilation

  • COVID deaths

What’s worse, there’s evidence that certain hospital systems, and perhaps all of them, have waived patients’ rights, making anyone diagnosed with COVID a virtual prisoner of the hospital, with no ability to exercise informed consent. In short, hospitals are doing whatever they want with patients, and they have every incentive to maltreat them, and no incentive to give them treatments other than that dictated to them by the National Institutes of Health.

As reported by Citizens Journal, the U.S. government actually pays hospitals a “bonus” on the entire hospital bill if they use remdesivir, a drug shown to cause severe organ damage. Even coroners are given bonuses for every COVID-19 death.

A Bounty Has Been Placed on Your Life

“What does this mean for your health and safety as a patient in the hospital?” Citizens Journal asks. Without mincing words, it means your health is in severe jeopardy. Citizen Journal likens government-directed COVID treatments to a bounty placed on your life, where payouts are tied to your decline, not your recovery.

“For Remdesivir, studies show that 71–75% of patients suffer an adverse effect, and the drug often had to be stopped after five to 10 days because of these effects, such as kidney and liver damage, and death,” Citizen Journal writes.

“Remdesivir trials during the 2018 West African Ebola outbreak had to be discontinued because death rate exceeded 50%. Yet, in 2020, Anthony Fauci directed that Remdesivir was to be the drug hospitals use to treat COVID-19, even when the COVID clinical trials of Remdesivir showed similar adverse effects.

In ventilated patients, the death toll is staggering … [attorney Thomas] Renz announced at a Truth for Health Foundation Press Conference that CMS data showed that in Texas hospitals, 84.9% percent of all patients died after more than 96 hours on a ventilator.

Then there are deaths from restrictions on effective treatments for hospitalized patients. Renz and a team of data analysts have estimated that more than 800,000 deaths in America’s hospitals, in COVID-19 and other patients, have been caused by approaches restricting fluids, nutrition, antibiotics, effective antivirals, anti-inflammatories, and therapeutic doses of anti-coagulants.

We now see government-dictated medical care at its worst in our history since the federal government mandated these ineffective and dangerous treatments for COVID-19, and then created financial incentives for hospitals and doctors to use only those ‘approved’ (and paid for) approaches.

Our formerly trusted medical community of hospitals and hospital-employed medical staff have effectively become ‘bounty hunters’ for your life.

Patients need to now take unprecedented steps to avoid going into the hospital for COVID-19. Patients need to take active steps to plan before getting sick to use early home-based treatment of COVID-19 that can help you save your life.”

Treat COVID Symptoms Immediately and Aggressively

Considering the uncertainties around diagnosis, it’s best to treat any cold or flu-like symptoms early. At first signs of symptoms, start treatment. Perhaps it’s the common cold or a regular influenza, maybe it’s the much milder Omicron, but since it’s hard to tell, your best bet is to treat symptoms as you would treat earlier forms of COVID.

Considering how contagious Omicron is, chances are you’re going to get it, so buy what you’ll need now, so you have it on hand if/when symptoms arise. And, remember, this applies for those who have gotten the jab as well, since you’re just as likely to get infected — and perhaps even more so. Early treatment protocols with demonstrated effectiveness include:

Based on my review of these protocols, I’ve developed the following summary of the treatment specifics I believe are the easiest and most effective.

 

References

The Telegraph January 19, 2022 (Archived)

Gov.UK National Life Tables 2018-2020

CDC MMWR January 7, 2022; 71(1): 19-25

Delta News January 10, 2022

Washington Examiner January 10, 2022

JAMA April 22, 2020 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.6775 [Epub ahead of print]

CDC.gov August 26, 2020, Comorbidities Table 3, updated October 14, 2020

Medscape April 6, 2020

Daily Mail April 9, 2020

Business Insider April 9, 2020

The Associated Press April 8, 2020

STAT News April 8, 2020

JAMA Insights April 24, 2020 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.6825

Newswise April 23, 2020

Elmhurst Hospital Self-Proning Positioning Guide

Citizens Journal December 20, 2021

The Daily Jot November 2, 2021

Woman Died of Rare Brain Bleed After Getting COVID-19 Vaccine: Coroner

By Jack Phillips

 

March 20, 2022 Updated: March 20, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

A coroner in the United Kingdom has determined that a woman died from a side effect caused by the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.

The woman was identified as 34-year-old Kim Lockwood, who had complained of a headache eight days after taking the shot in March of 2021, South Yorkshire Coroner Nicola Mundy told the BBC in a statement on March 16.

The coroner said her condition quickly deteriorated, and she was pronounced dead 17 hours after being admitted to the hospital, eight days after getting the shot.

Mundy said Lockwood was “extremely unlucky” in developing a “sudden and catastrophic” bleed on her brain. Her death was recorded at the Doncaster Coroner’s court as Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia (VITT), officials told the broadcaster.

An article published by the U.S. National Center for Biotechnology Information says VITT is “defined as a clinical syndrome” that entails the “development of thrombosis at uncommon sites” that include cerebral venous sinus thrombosis or splanchnic venous thrombosis. Thrombosis occurs when blood clots block veins or arteries.

The American Society of Hematology in January 2022 stated that VITT is marked by low platelet count, known as thrombocytopenia, and blood clots that usually occur in the splanchnic veins located in the abdomen and stomach or the cerebral veins located in the brain.

Lockwood’s husband, Damian, told news outlets that his wife, a mother of two, had complained that “her head felt like it was going to explode,” while her father, Wayne Merrill, recalled her last words, which he said were that her headache was “actually killing her.”

“Kim’s pain wasn’t appropriately managed, and the family should have been listened to,” Mundy said.

The UK government says there have been 438 reported cases of thromboembolic events (blood clotting) and 79 deaths to date after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Last year, officials in Edmonton, Canada, said a woman in her 50s died of VITT after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine, which entails two doses and uses adenovirus technology. AstraZeneca’s vaccine, while common across Europe, hasn’t been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for usage.

“I am sad to report … that we have confirmed Alberta’s first death from VITT following vaccination from the AstraZeneca [COVID-19] vaccine,” Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. Deena Hinshaw wrote on Twitter on May 4, 2021. “My sincere condolences go out to those grieving this loss.”

U.S. and UK government officials have repeatedly said that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks for most people.

COVID-19 is the illness caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

AstraZeneca officials didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

 

 

 

Pandemic Lessons Learned: CDC Versus Natural Immunity

 

Joe Wang

 

 

March 28, 2022 Updated: March 30, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

Commentary

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is one of the U.S. government’s major operating components, an agency under the Department of Health and Human Services.

The CDC’s mission statement reads, “CDC increases the health security of our nation. … CDC saves lives and protects people from health threats.”

The agency also pledges to the American people that it will “base all public health decisions on the highest quality scientific data that is derived openly and objectively.”

Well, COVID-19 has been the nation’s largest health threat for the past two years. It has had a huge impact on the life of every American. During those two years, thousands of scientists and health-care researchers have studied COVID and accumulated a huge amount of information on the disease.

We’ve now gradually come to realize that the most effective force that would eventually end the pandemic is natural immunity. Even Bill Gates has admitted that “the virus itself, particularly the variant called Omicron, is a type of vaccine.” With the rapid spread of Omicron and with many asymptomatic infections, millions of people have developed natural immunity, which is driving COVID-19 out of its pandemic stage and into endemicity.

With its $15.4 billion annual budget, one would think the CDC would have done a good job providing taxpayers with data on COVID-19. If cutting edge research is too challenging for the CDC, they at least should have provided the public with basic surveillance data, such as:

Who was infected with SARS-CoV-2, when, which variant, and what were the symptoms?
Who was vaccinated, with which vaccine, when, and were there any side effects?
Who was vaccinated, got infected, when, and recovered?
Who was never vaccinated, and never infected (never tested, or never tested positive)?

The CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) published on Jan. 28 presented some very interesting information from California and New York comparing immunity against COVID-19 from four groups of people, indicating natural immunity alone provides the best protection.

Since then, I have been anxiously waiting for more data, as there are 48 other states, and even for California and New York, important data like this should be updated monthly, if not weekly.

To my surprise and disappointment, I have not been able to find any more data on natural immunity from the MMWR since Jan. 28. I am sure they have the data—they just don’t want to share it with us.

I’m beginning to wonder if CDC stands for Center for Data Control.

Those Recovered From COVID Are Best Protected

On March 1, the scientific journal Clinical Infectious Diseases published a peer-reviewed article titled “Risk of reinfection after seroconversion to SARS-CoV-2: A population-based propensity-score matched cohort study.” This Swiss study “observed a 94% reduction in the hazard of being infected among SARS-CoV-2 seropositive participants, when compared to seronegative controls, >8 months after serology assessment.”

This level of protection (natural immunity) from SARS-CoV-2 infection (94 percent) is comparable to that of the Pfizer vaccine but lasts longer (eight months and counting).

In a peer-reviewed article published in the journal Science Immunology on Jan. 25, scientists from Oregon Health & Science University showed in raw data that antibodies derived from previous COVID-19 infection are at least 10 times more potent than that generated by vaccination alone. They still concluded, however, that “Vaccination is highly effective at preventing the most severe outcomes from COVID-19 and should be provided regardless of previous infection status and age.” I’m confused by their conclusion, but happy to see the raw data.

Similarly, in my Feb. 5 article “Pandemic Lessons Learned: Scientific Debate Silenced, With Deadly Consequences,” I wrote: “Now, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control admits in a report released on Jan. 28 that natural immunity against COVID-19 is superior to any of the available vaccine regimens.”

A reader commented that she “looked all over the CDC site and could find no such info. … Now who’s being ‘subjective’?”

The reader was right. I should have explained in my article that the conclusion I drew was not a direct quote but rather my own summary based on the CDC’s raw data.

The CDC’s Jan. 28 report included the following chart but neglected to provide a summary comparing protection between vaccinated people without natural immunity and unvaccinated people who recovered from COVID and now have natural immunity.

It seems that it’s necessary to dive a little deeper into the data to elaborate my point, as the authors of the report did not conclude the very obvious. Please bear with me.

 

The above CDC chart shows data from California on protection against COVID-19 collected from four groups of people between May 30, 2021, and Nov. 20, 2021:

1) The unvaccinated, with no previous COVID-19 diagnosis (top solid line)
2) The vaccinated, with no previous COVID-19 diagnosis (broken line below the solid line)
3) The unvaccinated, with previous diagnosis
4) The vaccinated, with previous diagnosis

It is obvious that the lines representing 3) and 4) are superimposing on one another, indicating that vaccination had virtually no impact on protection when a person has recovered from COVID-19 infection, meaning natural immunity dominates protection over vaccination to a level that made vaccination irrelevant.

Although the biggest difference lies between the unvaccinated with no previous infection and everyone else, the second biggest difference, however, is between the “Vaccinated, no previous COVID-19 diagnosis” line (vaccine immunity) and the “Unvaccinated, previous COVID-19 diagnosis” line (natural immunity), with the natural immunity line having a much lower “hazard rate,” meaning better protection.

The report also revealed similar findings for New York state.

Is CDC Censoring Data on Natural Immunity?

The CDC’s MMWR is a weekly report. The chart above is part of the report for the last week of January, and it was for only two of the 50 states, California and New York. When I was writing my Feb. 5 article, I thought that maybe it was a benign omission that the CDC did not conclude the obvious. For sure, more data would be coming from the CDC in February and March, I thought, as it would teach us so much more about natural immunity.

However, it hasn’t materialized. Since Jan. 28, there have been 10 MMWR reports published on the CDC website, totaling 29 articles in all. They cover topics ranging from vaccination by geographic locations, to vaccine confidence by sexual orientation, to isolation strategy for fully vaccinated NFL players, and so on. So far, the Jan. 28 report was the only one that included “unvaccinated, with previous diagnosis” in the data, and that’s unfortunate. All the other reports were to reinforce the conclusion that vaccines are effective, with almost nothing about natural immunity. Here is a screenshot of the MMWR website:

 

For example, one of CDC’s latest reports, published on March 18, includes the following chart:

 

Here, hospitalization data was plotted against 1) unvaccinated people, 2) vaccinated without a booster, 3) vaccinated with a booster. There is no information about people who had recovered from COVID-19. In other words, information on natural immunity is censored.

According to the CDC’s own information, the United States has had about 80 million COVID-19 cases. The vast majority of patients recovered from the disease. This huge part of the U.S. population now enjoys natural immunity. This is also true for Canada and many other parts of the world.

It seems that the CDC is avoiding anything and everything related to natural immunity. But why?

Maybe the CDC is like Bill Gates, who said at the Munich Security Conference last month: “Sadly, the virus itself, particularly the variant called Omicron, is a type of vaccine. That is, it creates both B-cell and T-cell immunity.” What he meant was it would be a sad thing if it is natural immunity, not Big Pharma’s vaccines, that defeats COVID-19.

Let the CDC and Mr. Gates feel sad. The rest of us are ready to move on with our lives.

Read Dr. Joe Wang’s series on Pandemic Lessons Learned here. 

 

 

 

‘100 Percent’ Vaccinated Cruise Ship Hit With COVID-19 Outbreak

By Jack Phillips

 

March 29, 2022 Updated: March 29, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

Princess Cruises confirmed that one of its cruise liners, the Ruby Princess, reported a COVID-19 outbreak before docking in San Francisco.

The cruise operator requires passengers and crew members to be fully vaccinated for COVID-19, which is caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus. Princess Cruises also mandates passengers to show a negative COVID-19 test and proof of vaccination to board, according to its website.

Those who tested positive were “isolated and quarantined while monitored and cared for by our shipboard medical team,” Princess Cruises said in a statement to news outlets Monday. It did not say how many people tested positive or when they tested positive during the cruise.

“They were all asymptomatic or only mildly symptomatic,” the firm said. Some of the passengers who contracted the CCP virus did not finish their quarantine and were either sent home or “were provided with accommodations ashore to hotels coordinated in advance for isolation and quarantine,” the statement added.

“As with all Princess itineraries, this cruise is operated as a vaccinated cruise, as defined by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” the company told the San Francisco Chronicle. “Guests and crew vaccination rates were at 100 percent.”

The Ruby Princess docked in San Francisco on Sunday, the company said, after the ship was on a 15-day cruise to the Panama Canal. The ship departed later that day on a 15-day cruise to Hawaii, said Negin Kamali, spokesperson for Princess Cruises, in a statement to USA Today.

Under the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) cruise ship monitoring website, the Ruby Princess is described as “under observation” by the federal health agency.

The development comes about two weeks after the CDC lowered its COVID-19 warning for cruise travel to “Level 2,” a “moderate” risk. Previously, the agency gave cruise travel a “Level 4” warning, which is the highest level, as the Omicron variant spread across the United States several months ago.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the cruise industry has been battered by lockdowns and federal restrictions on cruises—amid early speculation that cruise ships were “super spreaders” of the virus. Industry data suggests that cruise companies collectively lost $63 billion in 2020 and 2021.

On March 18, the CDC released new COVID-19 guidelines for the cruise industry, with a spokesman telling USA Today that it entails the agency’s suggestions on social distancing, quarantine requirements, and port agreements.

The Epoch Times has contacted Princess Cruises for comment.

 

 

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/premiering-at-730pm-who-plot-for-globalist-control-and-vaccine-passport-end-game-nick-corbishley_4376570.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-04-02-2&utm_medium=email&est=fMHlQtT%2Bmpa2chUdf21SUiKsc3w511vAhpr8WSo1QkMRMoBxnU2udNaQ0BS%2B

 

 

Nanotechnology Used in Covid Vaccines, 2,000 Foods, Goes Unlabeled

Extremely small particles of various compounds are being used as food additives, with unknown effects

BY JANIS SIEGEL TIMEMARCH 4, 2022 PRINT

If you’re one of those people that can often be found in the food aisles of grocery stores reading labels and looking for ingredients you can’t pronounce and don’t want to eat, you’ve most likely noticed several ingredients that, unbeknownst to you, are made using nanotechnology—a process that converts silver, copper, gold, aluminum, silicon, carbon, and metal oxides, among other metals, into atom-sized particles that are one-billionth of a meter in size.

Commonly used nano-sized ingredients include titanium dioxide, which may be the most well-known additive. Others, such as silicon oxide, calcium carbonate, iron oxides and hydroxides, calcium silicate, tricalcium phosphates, and synthetic silicas, are only a few of the additives that may be in your pantry right now.

A New Ingredient

Nanotechnology has become widely used in food production and manufacturing since the 1990s, and its components are unimaginably small—one-hundredth the size of a strand of human hair. They make our food more colorful, brighter, creamier, or crunchier, and they keep it fresher for longer as well.

Nano-sized additives also make some of our medicines more effective.

Nanotechnology is used in the manufacturing of everyday products, such as electronics, food and food packaging, medicine, toys, clothing, sunscreens, cosmetics, dietary supplements, and much more.

While they can provide a myriad of benefits, these increasingly popular product enhancers come at a price, according to consumer groups and health experts—and that price is our health.

Health Implications

Because these particles are so small, studies have shown that they can breach the blood-brain barrier. Researchers are already exploring this quality for drugs meant to treat neurological conditions. But when it comes to food, that’s not a feature anyone is asking for. These particles are also able to circulate throughout the body and get absorbed into the bloodstream and organs. They can penetrate cell walls and potentially create inflammation and disease.

“They may pass through the lining of the gut and enter the bloodstream, which may trigger an inflammatory or immune response,” Harvard School of Public Health’s Georgios Pyrgiotakis told WebMD. “They may also build up in various parts of the body, including the lungs, the heart, and reproductive organs.”

In a July 2020 study, a group of researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst found that titanium dioxide, which is commonly added to gum, candy, drinks, and desserts, caused changes in the gut microorganisms of two groups of mice.

Both were given doses of titanium oxide. One group was fed a low-fat diet and the other a high-fat diet. After further testing to isolate the titanium dioxide effect, both groups had inflamed colons, which can lead to abdominal pain and diarrhea. The obese mice had more pronounced symptoms.

Vaccine Technology

Nanotechnology is currently being used in two of the three mRNA COVID-19 vaccines being given in the United States today.

There’s a lipid nanoparticle coating surrounding the mRNA in the vaccines, which allows them to penetrate the cell’s wall.

“Lipid nanoparticles are a vital component of the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, playing a key role in protecting and transporting the mRNA effectively to the right place in cells,” stated the Chemical Abstracts Service, a division of the American Chemical Society.

“Of the many COVID-19 vaccines under development, the two vaccines that have shown the most promising results in preventing COVID-19 infection represent a new class of vaccine products: They are composed of messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) strands encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles (LNP).”

But scientists have continued to call for greater oversight of these substances by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) because of their size. Because they easily cross the blood-brain barrier, they may damage it by altering the layer of cells that line the inner wall of blood vessels.

FDA Looks Closer

The FDA, the agency charged with overseeing these additives, has begun to weigh the health risks from nano-sized additives.

The agency currently classifies nanoparticles in food with the designation Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) if the manufacturer is already using the same ingredient in its larger, conventional form.

“The particle size distribution of a food substance may affect its ability to be absorbed by the body or to migrate from food packaging into food,” the FDA stated in a 2007 guidance document on nanotechnology in food.

“The FDA does not categorically judge all products nanomaterial or otherwise involving application of nanotechnology as intrinsically benign or harmful. The FDA is monitoring the evolving science and has a robust research agenda to help assess the safety and effectiveness of products using nanotechnology.”

In 2011, the FDA Nanotechnology Task Force was created to coordinate its efforts with research scientists in the United States and internationally. Its goals are to train staff in the latest science at state-of-the-art facilities and to encourage collaborative research projects.

“Production and application of nanoparticles in consumer products is at an all-time high due to the emerging field of nanotechnology,” the FDA stated in a 2017 Grand Rounds webcast. “Direct detection and quantification of trace levels of nanoparticles within consumer products is very challenging and problematic.”

Tiny Particles, Growing Problem

By 2020, the FDA reported that applications for the approval of products containing nanotechnology had skyrocketed in the previous 10 years. According to many experts in the United States, there are 1,900 to 2,500 food products that use nanotechnology.

In response to health concerns about these products, countries around the world have taken steps to limit or ban some or all nanotechnology in their food.

In 2010, Canada banned nanotechnology in organic food production. Since 2011, the European Union has required all food to be labeled if it contains engineered nanomaterials. In 2015, the bloc required additional testing to ensure health safety.

In 2018, the European Food Safety Commission was petitioned by a group of scientists within the agency to reject the food additive silicon dioxide as safe for consumption because of nanoparticles in it, until a particle size distribution could be confirmed.

Beginning Jan. 1, 2020, France banned any foods containing titanium dioxide from entering the country.

In the United States, the FDA doesn’t require any products produced with nanoparticles to be labeled or banned, and its guidelines recommend oversight on a case-by-case basis. Research on the long-term effects of ingesting nanoparticles remains scant.

Study Links Increase in Emergency Heart Events With COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout

BY JACK PHILLIPS TIMEAPRIL 29, 2022 PRINT

0:005:08

 

A new study found a correlation between an increase in emergency cardiovascular events among people under 40 years of age during the launch of Israel’s COVID-19 vaccine program.

Published in the Nature journal, researchers utilized data from the Israel National Emergency Medical Services between 2019 and 2021 that evaluated emergency, or EMS, calls among 16- to 39-year-olds across Israel “with potential factors including COVID-19 infection and vaccination rates.”

They found that there was a 25 percent increase in EMS calls between January 2021 to May 2021, as compared with the years 2019 and 2020. Israel, which primarily uses Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine, launched its COVID-19 vaccine program in late December 2020.

“The weekly emergency call counts were significantly associated with the rates of 1st and 2nd vaccine doses administered to this age group but were not with COVID-19 infection rates,” they found. “While not establishing causal relationships, the findings raise concerns regarding vaccine-induced undetected severe cardiovascular side-effects and underscore the already established causal relationship between vaccines and myocarditis, a frequent cause of unexpected cardiac arrest in young individuals.”

They recommend that when evaluating possible vaccine side-effects and COVID-19 outcomes, officials should incorporate EMS data and relevant data to identify potential new health trends such as an increase in EMS calls, and “promptly investigate potential underlying causes.”

recent study carried out by Swedish researchers across populations in Finland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway suggested that heart inflammation requiring hospital care was more common among people who received COVID-19 vaccines than individuals who did not.

“These extra cases among men aged 16 to 24 correspond to a 5 times increased risk after Comirnaty and 15 times increased risk after Spikevax compared to unvaccinated,” Dr. Rickard Ljung, a professor and physician at the Swedish Medical Products Agency who was involved in the study, told The Epoch Times last week. Spikevax is the name for Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, while Comirnaty is Pfizer’s vaccine.

His team found that myocarditis or pericarditis rates are higher than the levels in an unvaccinated cohort, or 38 per 100,000 after second doses of the mRNA vaccines were administered.

The Israeli research team said in their study, published on April 28, that they believe the “benefits of COVID-19 vaccination are clear, especially for populations at great risk of developing serious and potentially life-threatening illness” such as older adults or immunocompromised individuals.  However, they noted, “it is important to better understand the potential risks to minimize potential harm.”

When conducting the research, the Israeli scientists made note of several potential flaws, including a “self-reporting bias” when individuals report symptoms via report systems including the U.S. federal government-run Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), including “under and over-reporting” of vaccine-related symptoms.

“Even the study from Israel that is based on more proactive data collection mentions that some of the potentially relevant cases were not fully investigated,” they said.

A second issue the researchers ran into is how the symptoms of myocarditis, a type of heart inflammation, present themselves.

“Myocarditis is a particularly insidious disease with multiple reported manifestations,” they noted. “There is vast literature that highlights asymptomatic cases of myocarditis, which are often underdiagnosed.”

Meanwhile, “myocardial injury and myocarditis [are] prevalent among patients with COVID-19 infection,” not just among those who received the vaccine, it said.

“As COVID-19 vaccine rollouts often take place with background community COVID-19 infections, it could be challenging to identify whether increased incidence of myocarditis and related cardiovascular conditions … is driven by COVID-19 infections or induced by COVID-19 vaccines,” it added.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and most health agencies worldwide have said that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines outweigh the potential risks. The CDC on its website says that most patients who develop myocarditis or pericarditis and got medical care have responded well to treatment.

Symptoms include chest pain, shortness of breath, and feelings of a fast-beating or fluttering heart.

The following is a collection of vaccine articles taken from The Epoch Times.
 

Mortality Among White-Collar Workers Jumped 24 Percent Between 2020 and 2021, Life Insurance Data Show

Less than 64 percent of excess deaths attributed to COVID-19

By Petr Svab

 

May 16, 2022 Updated: May 17, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

0:004:11

The increase in deaths not attributed to COVID-19 in the working-age population during the summer and into the fall of last year affected white-collar workers more than blue- and grey-collar employees, according to life insurance data.

In the white-collar sector, mortality jumped 24 percent in the period covered by the data (April 2020–September 2021); less than 64 percent of those were attributed to COVID-19. Among blue-collar workers, mortality rose 19 percent, of which over 80 percent was attributed to COVID-19.

As The Epoch Times previously reported, prime-age mortality was particularly elevated in the 12 months ending in October 2021, where there was an excess death spike of more than 40 percent in ages 18–49, compared with the same period in 2018–2019, based on death certificate data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The majority of the excess deaths weren’t attributed to COVID-19.

 

Health care workers tend to a patient in a January 2021 file photo. (Ariana Drehsler/AFP/Getty Images)

A recent study by the Society of Actuaries, an international professional organization, corroborates the CDC data. It relies on a survey of group term life insurance providers that yielded data on claims made from 2017 to 2021 and reported to insurers by Sept. 30, 2021 (pdf).

The life insurance data show an increase in excess mortality since the second quarter of 2020, along with the COVID-19 pandemic, including a particularly sharp increase in the third quarter of 2021—39 percent above what would have been expected based on 2017–2019 data. That quarter was exceptionally devastating for age groups 25–34, 35–44, 45–54, and 55–64, in which mortality soared 81 percent, 117 percent, 108 percent, and 70 percent, respectively, above the baseline.

Deaths attributed to COVID-19 accounted for about three-quarters of the excess mortality during the 18 months reviewed in the study. But among those under the age of 45, COVID-19 accounted for less than 38 percent of the excess deaths, the study says.

Among industries with the largest number of COVID-19 deaths, the worst hit was public administration with nearly 13,000 life insurance claims related to the disease. Yet those only accounted for less than 52 percent of the sector’s excess mortality.

Several other white-collar industries also experienced high excess mortality—22 percent in both doctors’ offices and educational services. COVID-19 claims accounted for nearly 80 percent and 70 percent, respectively, of the spike.

 

A paramedic prepares an ambulance at Hudson Regional Hospital in Secaucus, N.J., on Dec. 11, 2020. (Kena Betancur/AFP via Getty Images)

By contrast, in heavy and steel manufacturing mortality rose by 9 percent, with COVID-19 more than accounting for the entire spike. In fact, non-COVID-19 mortality dropped by a few percent in this sector.

The insurance data aren’t directly comparable to the CDC data because the population covered by group life insurance policies differs from the general population. Since the policies are commonly offered by employers, the overall population weighs disproportionately toward working-age adults.

The study didn’t go into detail on non-COVID-19 causes of the excess deaths.

While the CDC hasn’t yet released fully detailed cause-of-death data for the recent period, a previous analysis by The Epoch Times, informed by conversations with state authorities and experts, revealed several potential causes of the excess mortality, including undercounted COVID-19 deaths, drug overdoses, alcohol-related disease, and injuries possibly caused by COVID-19 vaccines.

 

 

Did Pfizer Commit Huge Fraud in Its COVID Vaccine Research?

BY JOSEPH MERCOLA TIMEMAY 17, 2022 PRINT

0:0021:51

It’s becoming more and more apparent as to why Pfizer tried – albeit unsuccessfully – to withhold their COVID jab trial data for 75 years. Now, with the release of the data, internet sleuths are uncovering problems suggestive of fraud and manipulation, including the suspicious site 4444.

Story at-a-glance

  • In November 2021, Brook Jackson, a whistleblower who worked on Pfizer’s Phase 3 COVID jab trial in the fall of 2020, warned she’d seen evidence of fraud in the trial

  • With the release of Pfizer trial data — which they tried to withhold for 75 years — additional problems suggestive of fraud and data manipulation are coming to light

  • Trial site 1231, located in Argentina, somehow managed to recruit 10% of the total trial participants, 4,501 in all, and they did so in just three weeks, and without a contract research organization — a feat that has many questioning whether fraud was committed

  • The lead investigator for trial site 1231 is Dr. Fernando Polack, who also happens to be a consultant for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (RBPAC), a current adjunct professor at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee, an investigator for Fundación Infant, funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, and the first author of Pfizer’s paper, “Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine,” published at the end of December 2021

  • Site 1231 held a second enrollment session, given the designation of “site 4444.” The 4444 trial site data raise another red flag. It supposedly enrolled 1,275 patients in a single week, from September 22 through 27, 2020 — the last week that recruitment could take place to meet the data cutoff for the FDA meeting in December 2020. Was “site 4444” fabricating data to create the appearance that the jab was having an effect?

In November 2021, Brook Jackson, a whistleblower who worked on Pfizer’s Phase 3 COVID jab trial in the fall of 2020, warned she’d seen evidence of fraud in the trial.

Data were falsified, patients were unblinded, the company hired poorly trained people to administer the injections, and follow-up on reported side effects lagged way behind. The revelation was published in The British Medical Journal. In his November 2, 2021, report, investigative journalist Paul Thacker wrote:1

“Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal COVID-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight …

[F]or researchers who were testing Pfizer’s vaccine at several sites in Texas during that autumn, speed may have come at the cost of data integrity and patient safety … Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding.”

Jackson, a former regional director of Ventavia Research Group, a research organization charged with testing Pfizer’s COVID jab at several sites in Texas, repeatedly “informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues,” Thacker wrote.

When her concerns were ignored, she finally called the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and filed a complaint via email. Jackson was fired later that day after just two weeks on the job. According to her separation letter, management decided she was “not a good fit” for the company after all.

She provided The BMJ with “dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings and emails” proving her concerns were valid, and according to Jackson, this was the first time she’d ever been fired in her 20-year career as a clinical research coordinator.

BMJ Report Censored

Disturbingly, social media actually censored this BMJ article and published pure falsehoods in an effort to “debunk” it. Mind you, the BMJ is one of the oldest and most respected peer-reviewed medical journals in the world! The Facebook “fact check” was done by Lead Stories, a Facebook contractor, which claimed the BMJ “did NOT reveal disqualifying and ignored reports of flaws in Pfizer’s” trials.2

In response, The BMJ slammed the fact check, calling it “inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible.”3,4,5 In an open letter6 addressed to Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, The BMJ urged Zuckerberg to “act swiftly” to correct the erroneous fact check, review the processes that allowed it to occur in the first place, and “generally to reconsider your investment in and approach to fact checking overall.” As noted by The BMJ in its letter, the Lead Stories’ fact check:7

  • Inaccurately referred to The BMJ as a “news blog”

  • Failed to specify any assertions of fact that The BMJ article got wrong

  • Published the fact check on the Lead Stories’ website under a URL that contains the phrase “hoax-alert”

Pfizer Trial Data Raises Suspicions of Fraud

Now, with the release of Pfizer trial data8 — which they tried to withhold for 75 years — internet sleuths are finding additional problems suggestive of fraud and data manipulation. May 9, 2022, a Twitter user named Jikkyleaks posted a series of tweets questioning data from Pfizer trial sites 1231 and 4444.9

Trial site 1231, located in Argentina, somehow managed to recruit 10% of the total trial participants, 4,501 in all, and they did so in just three weeks, and without a contract research organization (CRO). CROs like the Ventavia Research Group, which Jackson worked for, provide clinical trial management services. The lead investigator for trial site 1231 is Dr. Fernando Polack,10 who also happens to be:11

  • A consultant for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (RBPAC) since 2017

  • A current adjunct professor at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee

  • An investigator for Fundación Infant,12 which is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation13

  • The first author of Pfizer’s paper,14 “Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine,” published at the end of December 2021

As noted by Jikkyleaks, Polack “is literally the busiest doctor on the planet,” because in addition to all those roles, he also managed to single-handedly enroll 4,500 patients in three weeks, which entails filling out some 250 pages of case report forms (CRFs) for each patient. That’s about 1,125,000 pages total. (CRFs are documents used in clinical research to record standardized data from each patient, including adverse events.)

This recruitment also took place seven days a week, which is another red flag. “Weekend recruitment for a clinical trial would be odd. Staff are needed to fill out that many record forms (CRFs) and there are potential risks to the trial, so you need medical staff. It would be highly unusual,” Jikkyleaks notes.

Is Polack just a super-humanly efficient trial investigator, or could this be evidence of fraud? As noted by Steve Kirsch in the featured video and an accompanying Substack article,15 Polack is the coordinator for a network of 26 hospitals in Argentina, so perhaps it’s possible he could have recruited 57 patients per week per hospital, but it seems highly unlikely.

Questions Surround Site 4444 Data

Now, “site 4444” does not exist. It’s actually the same as site 1231. It appears site 1231 held a second enrollment session, and these were for some reason given the designation of 4444. The 4444 trial site data raise another red flag.

Site 4444 (the second enrollment session for site 1231) supposedly enrolled 1,275 patients in a single week, from September 22 through 27, 2020, and the suspicious thing about that — aside from the speed — is the fact that this was the last week that recruitment could take place to meet the data cutoff for the FDA meeting in December 2020. Jikkyleads writes:16

“My guess: they needed enough numbers of ‘positive PCR tests’ in the placebo group to show a difference between groups for that VRBPAC meeting on the 10th Dec, and they didn’t have them. So, site 4444 appeared and gave them their ‘perfect’ result. Bravo.”

 

Kirsch notes:17

“Was there fraud in the Pfizer trial? Without a doubt. The story of Maddie de Garay is a clear case of that. Brook Jackson has evidence of fraud; she has 17 lawyers working for her. If there wasn’t fraud, these lawyers wouldn’t be wasting their time.

This new data on Site 1231/4444 looks suspicious to me. It looks too good to be true. But we can’t make the call without more information. Undoubtedly, the mainstream media will not look into this, Pfizer will remain silent, and Polack will be unreachable for comment. The lack of transparency should be troubling to everyone. That is the one thing we can say for sure.”

Pfizer Documents Reveal COVID Jab Dangers

Among the tens of thousands of Pfizer documents released by the FDA so far, we now also have clear evidence of harm. For nurse educator John Campbell, featured in the video above, these documents appear to have served as a “red pill,”18 waking him up to the possibility that the jabs may indeed be far more dangerous than anyone expected, including himself.

In the video, Campbell reviews the documents listed as “5.3.6. Postmarketing Experience,” which were originally marked “confidential.” They reveal that, cumulatively, through February 28, 2021, Pfizer received 42,086 adverse event reports, including 1,223 deaths.

To have 1,223 fatalities and 42,086 reports of injury in the first three months is a significant safety signal, especially when you consider that the 1976 swine flu vaccine was pulled after only 25 deaths.

As noted by Campbell, “It would have been good to know about this at the time, wouldn’t it?” referring to the rollout of the jabs. Campbell has been fairly consistent in his support of the “safe and effective” vaccine narrative, but “This has just destroyed trust in authority,” he said.

158,000 Recorded Side Effects — A World Record?

The first really large tranche of more than 10,000 Pfizer documents was released March 1, 2022. (You can find them all on PHMPT.org.19) In this batch were no less than nine single-space pages of “adverse events of special interest,” listed in alphabetical order20 — 158,000 in all!

 

The first side effect on this shockingly exhaustive list is a rare condition known as 1p36 deletion syndrome, which results in severe intellectual disability, seizures, vision problems, hearing loss, breathing problems, brain anomalies, congenital heart defects, cardiomyopathy, renal anomalies, genital malformation, metabolic problems and more.

To see the first page, click the link below. The first side effect on this shockingly exhaustive list is a rare condition known as 1p36 deletion syndrome. This condition, caused by the deletion of DNA in chromosome 1p36, results in developmental delays, severe intellectual disability, seizures, vision problems, hearing loss, breathing problems, brain anomalies, congenital heart defects, cardiomyopathy, renal anomalies, genital malformation, metabolic problems and more.21,22

Life expectancy depends on the amount of DNA that has been deleted. This, at bare minimum, sounds like something a pregnant woman might want to know before she gets the shot.

 

CRF Anomalies Raise Questions of Fraud

After reviewing some of the released CRFs in the March 1 tranche, investigative journalist Sonia Elijah also discovered several problems, including the following:23

  • Patients entered into the “healthy population” group who were far from healthy — For example, one such “healthy” participant was a Type 2 diabetic with angina, a cardiac stent and a history of heart attack.

  • Serious adverse event (SAE) numbers were left blank — Ventavia site No. 1085 has a particularly large number of missing SAE numbers.

  • Missing barcodes for samples collected — Without those barcodes, you can’t match the sample to the participant.

  • Suspicious-looking SAE start and end dates — For example, the so-called “healthy” diabetic suffered a “serious” heart attack October 27, 2020. The “end” date is listed as October 28, the next day, which is odd because it was recorded as serious enough to require hospitalization.

Also, on that same day, October 28, the patient was diagnosed with pneumonia, so likely remained hospitalized. “This anomaly raises doubt as to the accuracy of these recorded dates, potentially violating ALOCA-C clinical site documentation guidelines for clinical trials,” Elijah writes.

  • Unblinded teams were responsible for reviewing adverse event reports for signs of COVID cases, and to review severe COVID cases — Yet in some cases they appear to have dismissed the possibility of an event being COVID-related, such as pneumonia. This despite the fact that Pfizer’s protocol (section 8.2.4) lists “enhanced COVID-19” (i.e., antibody dependent enhancement) as a potential side effect to be on the lookout for. As noted by Elijah:

“Inadvertently, this could have led to bias, as the unblinded teams would have been aware which participants were assigned the placebo and those who received the vaccine. They might have been under pressure by the sponsor for the trial to go a certain way and for events like ‘COVID Pneumonia’ to be classified simply as pneumonia.”

  • Impossible dating — The diabetic who suffered a heart attack followed by pneumonia (which may have been unacknowledged COVID pneumonia) died, and the date of death is listed as the day before the patient supposedly went for a “COVID ill” visit.

Clearly, it’s impossible for a dead person to attend a medical visit, so something is wrong here. The clinical investigator note states: “There cannot be a date later than date of death. Please remove data from the COVID illness visit and add cough and shortness of breath as AEs (adverse events).” “What kind of pressure was being exerted here?” Elijah asks.

  • Second dose administered outside the three-week protocol window.

  • Observation period appears to have been an automatic entry — According to the protocol, each participant was to be observed by staff for a minimum of 30 minutes.

A majority of the CRFs state 30 minutes, which raises the question: Were participants observed for adequate amounts of time, or did they simply put down “30 minutes” as an automatic entry? Why is there so little variety in the observation times? If participants were not adequately observed, their safety was put at risk, which was one of Jackson’s concerns.

  • Adverse events listed as “not serious” despite extended hospital stay — In one case, the participant fell and suffered facial lacerations the day after the second dose and was hospitalized for 26 days, yet the fall was not reported as serious.

Other anomalies in this particular case include listing the fall as being caused by a “fall” unrelated to the study treatment, and the facial laceration being the result of “hypotension” (low blood pressure). The SAE number is also missing for the facial lacerations.

Elijah writes, “Doubts can be raised over the credibility of this information given the fall and facial lacerations were intrinsically related. So, if facial lacerations were due to ‘hypotension’ then the fall should be due to that too.” Might low blood pressure be an effect of the experimental shot? Possibly. Especially when you consider the patient fell the day after being given the second dose.

Even more suspicious: the causality for the fall was recorded as “related” (to the treatment) on the serious adverse event form, but listed as “not related” on the adverse event CRF. A note states, “Please confirm correct causality.”

  • Dismissing brand new health problems as unrelated to the treatment — For example, in one case, a female participant with no medical history of impaired kidney function was diagnosed with kidney stones and severe hypokalemia, requiring hospitalization, one month after her second dose. Yet despite her having no history of kidney problems, both events were dismissed as “not related” to the study treatment and no further investigation was done.

In closing, Elijah wrote:24

“All the evidence gleaned over a limited time appears to back up whistleblower Jackson’s claims of poor trial site data management and raises questions as to how Ventavia conducted the Pfizer clinical trials.

The errors and anomalies in the CRFs also allude to her claims that the clinical research associates were not trained adequately, with many having had no prior clinical experience history. If such egregious findings are true at these sites, could they manifest at other trial sites around North America and beyond?”

Can You Trust Pfizer?

Pfizer, which was quickly given emergency use authorization (EUA) for its COVID-19 mRNA gene therapy shot, has a long list of criminal verdicts against it:

 

Despite its tarnished history, we’re now expected to trust that everything Pfizer does is above-board. I don’t think so. A company that continues getting caught committing the same crimes over and over again clearly has a deeply established ethical rot within its corporate structure that fines simply have no effect over.Has Pfizer committed fraud in its COVID jab trials as well? It sure looks that way. Time will tell whether attorneys will have enough for a conviction in the future. If fraud did take place, Pfizer can (and likely will) be held liable for the more than one million injuries its injection has caused in the U.S. alone, and we all look forward to that reckoning.

Originally published May 17, 2022 on Mercola.com

 

Sources and References

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

 

 

Top Airline Pilot Suffers Cardiac Arrest Between Flights Post Mandatory COVID Vaccination

By Enrico Trigoso

 

May 23, 2022 Updated: May 23, 2022

biggersmaller 

Print

0:009:44

Robert Snow, a pilot for American Airlines, one of the top 3 largest airlines in the country, has 31 years of commercial airline experience and additionally seven years of experience as a U.S. Air Force pilot.

Snow says that he might not be able to fly again after he suffered a cardiac arrest only 6 or 7 minutes after landing a plane he piloted from Denver to Dallas Fort Worth (DFW).

He still had two more flights scheduled on April 9.

He believes that his cardiac arrest is connected to the Johnson and Johnson COVID vaccine he was forced to take in order to keep his job on Nov. 4, 2021, even though he already had natural immunity from previously contracting the virus.

Dr. Peter McCullough, a world-renowned cardiologist, told Newsmax that Snow’s case fits a “pattern.”

“There is no other explanation,” McCullough said about Snow’s case since Snow has no coronary disease.

“The MRI pattern is consistent,” the doctor said. “Indeed, it may have been vaccine-induced myocarditis with a late manifestation of cardiac death.”

In addition, he told The Epoch Times that he has received “several phone calls and communications from friends in the industry that do think that they might have had issues with a vaccine.”

Most alarming is that some pilots are “afraid to raise the flag and say, ‘Hey, I think I might have an issue because they’re afraid they’ll either lose their medical certification to fly, which if we lose our medical, we can no longer operate. We can’t be a commercial pilot anymore. And in worst-case scenario, which is what right now probably what I’m experiencing is you can’t fly at all. Period,” Snow said.

“I would just tell you that there are other pilots out there that have had concerns, not just pilots, also because it was an employee mandate. So we have flight attendants, we have mechanics, we have dispatchers, we have gate agents, you name it. Of course, for pilots, we consider that a safety-sensitive job so we’re a little bit more concerned from the standpoint of aviation safety; but yes, I have received calls from other pilots and other communications stating that they have concerns but because of the nature of this, they’re afraid to come forward.”

The veteran pilot had serious questions about the novel COVID vaccines that are supposed to prevent infection from the Chinese Communist Party virus, but are now known to provide little protection against infection after the Omicron virus variant became dominant.

Vaccine booster efficacy also wanes over time.

What’s more, cases of myocarditis—inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis—inflammation of the lining outside the heart have spiked dramatically since the COVID vaccines started being administered worldwide.

He did not want to get the shot, but being the sole provider for his family, decided to take the risk.

Amid short sighs, Snow told The Epoch Times: “Initially, my employer was not going to force the vaccine on its employees. They subsequently changed their mind on approximately October 1, in conjunction with the executive office here in the United States mandate on federal contractors. They decided that now that they would enforce the vaccine mandate on all employees of the airline. And in regard to that, we were told that if we did not receive the vaccination we would be terminated. There was no question as to the sincerity at that time of their statement.”

Airlines, which are government contractors, were affected by President Joe Biden’s executive order from September that states all employees of those companies have to be vaccinated against the CCP virus.

The Epoch Times reported on December last year that the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) was breaking its own rule that states pilots should not fly after having taken medications that have been approved for less than a year, according to a group of attorneys, doctors, and other experts; including another pilot who says his career ended due to adverse reactions from a vaccine.

“So I elected, after some serious consideration given that I was the sole source of income for my family, that I would go ahead and receive the vaccine. I didn’t want to,” Snow said.

“I had serious questions as to the safety and the efficiency and the effectiveness of the vaccine. I’d already had COVID. I’d already tested positive for antibodies, and really didn’t see the rationale for it. But, the only solution that might have been available to me to not receive the vaccine was to request a religious or medical exemption. Neither of which did I really feel like I should request. Medical exemption, I didn’t have any reason to not to, scientifically speaking, not receive it, other than the fact that it was issued under an EUA and not fully tested. And as far as a religious exemption, I didn’t see any reason to request that because I don’t really have a religious belief that would prevent me from receiving this particular vaccination. So for moral and ethical reasons, absolutely. But that wasn’t considered a valid reason not to get the vaccine.”

The veteran pilot had a sore arm for 10 days after getting the jab, and later experienced a strange pain that spread through his upper body.

Snow said that his arm became “pretty sore,” for 10 days, something which he didn’t experience with any previous vaccinations. For other vaccines for travel or in the military, he would usually have soreness for two or three days maximum.

Things returned to normal until January, then he recalled:

“I was on that course of a flight and noticed a strange pain while I was working on the overhead panel. …  I got a strange pain in my right shoulder, seemed to spread down to my lower right quadrant and then up into my chest and through my shoulder blades, which I thought was very strange, but I just kind of chalked it up to manipulating myself oddly on the overhead panel, maybe tweaked a nerve or something like that, because I really had no history of that whatsoever that I’d ever experienced. And so [the] pain went away after one or two minutes and then back to normal.

“When we finished that flight, I actually tested positive again for COVID for the second time, [the] first time I had it was in March of 2021. Second time then would have been in January of 2022—this is postvaccination mind you— and that was what I presumed to be the Omicron variant because it presented itself basically as just allergies, I kept sneezing a lot, runny nose and that was it, no fever, no chills, no nothing, no loss of taste and smell like I had the first time. So I went back to work, after the mandatory amount of time, and I started getting the pain again, only a little bit more frequently this time. So actually, with a history of gastrointestinal issues, I went to see a gastroenterologist he elected to do an endoscopy to take a look to see if I had maybe a hiatal hernia or something that was aggravating the vagus nerve. We also did an abdominal CAT scan.

“During the course of awaiting the results of the abdominal CAT scan, that’s when I had my sudden cardiac arrest and that was after the course of a flight from Denver to DFW. We had been on the gate just a few minutes after shutting the aircraft down, probably about six minutes, six, seven minutes after touchdown. And I stood up to collect my bags to proceed to the next aircraft. We were to finish up with another turn to a different city to come back and then finish the trip on day four. And that’s the last I remember, standing up collecting my luggage. And at that point, witnesses say I collapsed in the flight deck. And that’s all I know at this point. When I woke up, I was in the ICU at Baylor Scott and White in Grapevine Texas, having suffered a sudden cardiac arrest.”

He now has to wear an automatic external defibrillator or “life vest” that monitors his heartbeats, except when he showers when he is supposed to be monitored by a family member. The life vest is designed so that if the heart rhythm becomes abnormal, it will send a small shock to get it back to sinus rhythm, and if it detects full atrial fibrillation, ventricular fibrillation, or any sort of fibrillation, it would send a much stronger shock to try to get it back to the right rhythm.

Albeit all this trauma, Snow feels very fortunate because he was able to get professional care immediately, which is not the case for many other people.

According to heart.org: “Cardiac arrest is when the heart stops beating. Some 350,000 cases occur each year outside of a hospital, and the survival rate is less than 12 percent. CPR can double or triple the chances of survival.”

“If you look at the numbers … I try not to look too closely at them because it’s rather intimidating.” Snow said, referring to the survival rate of cardiac arrests.

“The thing that concerns me, is [that] this happened in the right place at the right time. Because if it had happened … any other time where I was either alone or beyond reasonable response time for a medical response, I wouldn’t be here having this conversation.”

John Pierce Law, who previously represented many prominent conservatives, is going to sue 18 major airlines, including American Airlines, focusing on the alleged unconstitutionality of the vaccine mandates that were imposed on the airline employees.

The Epoch

Bret Delaire paid for this website. He is committed to his message, and is willing to boldly speak out in contradiction to the narrative of the mainstream media.