Just the essential [controversial] links about COVID vaccination, compiled from the past 2+ months of weekly links, plus a few extras:
first posted a compilation on June 20; see here
this update as of Aug 30
first, one of my new favourite sources, Mathew Crawford (and, from the 2nd paragraph of the first link below, you will get an inkling of why he has become one of my favourites):
Mathew's Favorite Pandemic ResourcesThe Chloroquine Wars Part L
While calculations are being performed on my other computer (may have to invest in a personal computational cluster soon), I thought I'd finish a list I started a few days ago. I'm going to assume nobody is going to sue me for advertising their logo here, but I'm happy to take any images down upon request.
Writing that title feels pretty icky, but if there is a silver lining to the pandemic, it's that it forces a person interested in the machinery of the world to look around and ask, "Where are the sane people?"....
Remember: It is okay not to agree with everything in all places.
The Anonymous Resources
This is an edit to the original list because I have become so reliant on checking these sites that they become intuitive to the point of invisibility. The creators of these sites are among the greatest pandemic heroes in the world. The websites split into numerous resources as a kind of hierarchy of information that is vast. Go check them out so that I don't have to describe them.
C19study.com
C19early.com
[X]meta.com, where X includes many medical agents with varying efficacy in COVID-19 treatment.
COVEXIT, [which] is not a place to find several articles a day, but a place to find a high signal-to-noise ratio.
...
references lots more sources, with links, including Last American Vagabond, Darkhorse Podcast, Peak Prosperity, plus others I hadn't heard of nor followed yet, but will start
My worry about vaccine-induced deaths grew somewhat when I became more aware of the intersection of causality of damage between SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. Finding out the pioneer of the experimental gene therapy technology behind two of the vaccines regretting getting vaccinated moved me beyond "we should be more cautious, and focus on early treatment therapies," to "Wow, this really isn't going well." Finding out that there are moratoriums on autopsies in many medical systems that prevent us from seeing this and this worried me more.The Chloroquine Wars Part LI
The loose network of doctors and researchers I work with has consistently reached out to anyone who would listen to about the tremendous numbers of reports in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database.
The VAERS database is understood to be historically underreported, so researchers generally use the data there more for vaccine-to-vaccine comparison rather than a source for overall numbers. However, it seems to escape those at the CDC whose job is to pay attention to potential threats to health that the numbers---particularly serious adverse events (SAEs) and deaths are historically unprecedented. ...
MC's use in this link of the the initial quotations is another prime example of why he has become a favourite of mine to follow:
The Pharmaceutical Bubble
Nobody will argue that none of the medicines produced by the pharmaceutical industry are worthwhile. However, many of those medicines have been around long enough that they are off-patent, so profitable only to the extent that competition is limited and companies can find ways to outsource production to nations with cheaper labor, leaving the West in a state of medical dependence that should have raised eyebrows long before now. ...
Blinded by Profit
Progress in cutting edge fields no longer keeps up with desired technological growth curves sought by investors. Since the Human Genome Project, government funding of science, and particularly medical science, has seen a negative return on investment (ROI), mirrored closely by ROI for research and development within the pharmaceutical industry itself.
Along came a conveniently timed pandemic, that just so happens to have also coincided with the end of the pharmaceutical profit era.
...
Yesterday a friend sent me this article in Naked Capitalism about the ways in which Pfizer has engineered the process of running trials---in particular the way consent works for their booster clinical trial. Stop here and read the whole thing, please. Please. The clinical trial process has been gradually hijacked to reduce [ethical] review, reduce oversight, and bait in participants whose responses can be most easily manipulated. Just the fact that the participants are told not to contact the study doctor about non-COVID symptoms that have been attributed to the vaccines should call this and all the other vaccine studies into question.
No wonder none of the vaccine manufacturers will release their raw data. The experiments are a success, so long as all participants remain blinded?
The vaccine campaign is no longer a regulated process. We should call it what it is: extralegal, with law makers turning blinded eyes, and a dysfunctional media running a full frontal assault on anyone who stands in the way while running the most sophisticated propaganda campaign in history against simple and effective alternatives. And what all else fails, the mob gets roused.
Over the past few months, my concerns over vaccine safety have grown steadily. At first I took the personal approach of "I'll wait and see what the aggregate results of these experimental vaccines look like," but was mostly focused on the bizarre sabotage of early treatment medication. I did write up thoughts regarding vaccine risks (here and here) because I felt that the risk assessment was irresponsibly ignored, and I wrote up assessments of the UK's PHE data (here and here) because it seemed to me that the benefits of the vaccines were overstated, based on the data. When I discussed vaccine safety data with Steve Kirsch, I pushed back multiple times at his theory that there were perhaps 50,000 vaccine-induced deaths in the U.S., proffering a more modest number, and having a hard time squaring the complete disinterest in the topic by the medical community. I thought then and still think now that vaccine-induced deaths could be greater than most people in medicine would realize due to standard human lack of intuition regarding the interplay of very large and very small numbers.The vaccine campaign is no longer a regulated process. We should call it what it is: extralegal, with law makers turning blinded eyes, and a dysfunctional media running a full frontal assault on anyone who stands in the way while running the most sophisticated propaganda campaign in history against simple and effective alternatives. And what all else fails, the mob gets roused.
The Chloroquine Wars Part LII
Sadly, this picture suggests that there were an estimated more than 17,000 vaccine-induced deaths during the first month of COVID-19 vaccinations throughout Europe, out of just over 17 million vaccine doses delivered. This is going to take some time to explain.But when I read through the McLachlan paper completely, and saw that vaccine deaths were seemingly classified as COVID-19 deaths, my estimation of the death toll quickly grew. Now I personally suspect that over 100,000 Americans have been killed by the experimental vaccines. Others I know think the number may be as large as a quarter of a million.
...
This means that the experimental COVID-19 vaccination programs may be killing somewhere between 200 people per million doses and 500 people per million doses---perhaps even more since the U.S. has a more substantial population living with substantial comorbidities, and the world's best cardiac trauma care. At 360 million doses delivered, these estimates suggest between 72,000 and 180,000 (or maybe even a little more) vaccine-induced deaths in the U.S. during the experimental COVID-19 vaccination program. As we will see in future articles, this estimate range matches numerous other mortality signals.The Chloroquine Wars Part LIII
...
...
Meanwhile, health authorities still seem to have no issue with the lack of risk report or risk-benefit analysis performed by any of the vaccine manufacturers or anyone else. This strikes me as one of the worst signs in my lifetime that corporations have taken over government on an essentially complete level.
The Chloroquine Wars Part LIV
.... if the alternative is to let that psychopath go and maybe trick more parents into poisoning their kids, I think shooting that psychopath in the face is a clearly superior alternative to doing nothing---a Pareto improvement, so to speak
The Chloroquine Wars Part LV
.... Even if I am overestimating vaccine-associated mortality by a factor of 5 or 10, the risk-benefit on mortality still looks negative to me. That's before we start discussing risks like antibody dependent enhancement, original antigenic sin, unknown long-term fertility risks, prion disease (which I know only the tiniest bit about), and whatever known unknowns you want to toss in the basket with the unknown unknowns.
...
Safe and Effective?
Anyone using those words should be considered incompetent, irresponsible, and uncaring without each of the following:
- A standard for what "safe" and "effective" each mean.
- A risk-benefit analysis they can point to that demonstrates more good than harm
Multiple recent papers have emerged that relate to the debate over whether vaccinated or unvaccinated people drive the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants since I wrote my first article on the topic. Let's take a look at what they tell us, and how vaccine partisans are misinterpreting them as publicly as possible.
...
It has grown extremely hard for me to respect Eric Topol on an even basic level. At some point, somebody must have convinced him that if he writes books about futuristic medicine (speculative topics for which nobody has to answer an actual argument beyond, "This will happen in the future,") he'll become fabulously rich and famous, and influence people. Perhaps that experience led him to fool himself into believing that he understands things he does not---like basic math.
...It has grown extremely hard for me to respect Eric Topol on an even basic level. At some point, somebody must have convinced him that if he writes books about futuristic medicine (speculative topics for which nobody has to answer an actual argument beyond, "This will happen in the future,") he'll become fabulously rich and famous, and influence people. Perhaps that experience led him to fool himself into believing that he understands things he does not---like basic math.
Predictably, Edward Nirenberg seems to have jumped on the incorrect interpretation as well. Since he is young, with ample opportunity to shed the notion that he understands more than he does (trained to that point no doubt by the educational institutions that fail us all), his influential pandemic-era writing reads like a peacock-display of understanding much more than he does while cross-troping Reality Show political phrases like "deplatform [disease]" and "[vaccine] nationalism". Sigh.
... Sadly, this is how the public winds up being misinformed at about every turn during the pandemic. Can you imagine how Topol's going to look if the public comes to the conclusion that hydroxychloroquine works and vaccines kill more than help?
Since my articles (here and here) on vaccine-induced mortality made the rounds, and a bounty was placed on my head, some interesting things have occurred and not occurred. What has occurred is that I was put in touch with a number of academics, including some at top-five ranked research universities, making similar observations. In some cases, they are working toward publication, which is great, though the experimental vaccines face potential approval at the end of this month while our regulatory agencies seem content to pretend there are no safety signals and dodge all questions about why they're suppressing autopsies.
In some cases, research indicating vaccine-induced mortality and low-to-negative risk-benefit has been suppressed (here and here). Some very famous researchers feel under threat of physical harm for themselves and their families, with mentions of specific threats made. Such threats were made against Professor Didier Raoult last year, though U.S. researchers may have reason to take such threats even more seriously.
What hasn't happened is any serious kind of challenge to the data arguments themselves.
…
We have suffered through 18 months of Pandemonium during which all manner of absurdities have been thrust upon us. Two of those that stand out include, (1) the use of PCR testing at such high cycles that exponentially scale up tiny mistakes in sequence-matching to detect other genetic sequences, and (2) almost no autopsies have been performed. Thinking about (2) is actually quite chilling. It makes no sense, whatsoever.
…
It is time that the U.S. regulatory agencies (CDC and FDA) come to the table for real discussion, or that we write them off as corrupt, extralegal organizations. What other choice do we have?
Meanwhile, your moment of Zen: There is no [significant] correlation between rates of COVID cases in U.S. counties and vaccination rates
The CDC and associated regulatory agencies seem to be intentionally hiding signals of dramatic vaccine risk, then reporting numbers on two sides of risk-benefit analyses that are tallied by extremely different criteria to engineer an impression that the COVID-19 vaccines are "safe and effective". This alone should be reason enough to halt and re-evaluate the mass vaccination program using experimental vaccine technologies.
…
The safety signal analysis employed by the CDC, VSD, and associated regulatory agencies uses methods that are not simply ill-suited to the task, but mask substantial indications that large numbers of people are being injured, often seriously, or even killed by the COVID-19 vaccines currently in use. The inequivalent definitions used in mortality calculations results in inexcusably rigged risk-benefit analyses, and the lack of investigation into causes of mortality (both for the COVID-19 disease and also for the COVID-19 vaccines) stands out as historically monumental malpractice and dereliction of duty. The mass vaccination program should be halted while true risk-benefits of the vaccines are assessed, and regulatory agencies fully investigated for conflicts of interest and intention to defraud the public of its opportunity for informed consent.
Mask Research and It's Portrayal (Absurdity Score: 9.8/10)
Despite surgeons routinely pointing out that they don't wear masks to stop the spread of viruses, masks were not simply encouraged, but often mandated by laws and institutions during the pandemic. Amazingly, all this happened during a time when health authorities weren't certain (so far as we know) how aerosolized the SARS-CoV-2 virus is---and didn't seem particularly interested in finding out.
On to other sources:
Josh Mittledorf also is good at crunching numbers and puts truth to the corporatocracy's lies:
There are several systems for reporting vaccine reactions, including deaths, but the only one available to the public is VAERS. It is incomplete, because it relies on voluntary reporting, there is no incentive to report to VAERS, and it is a cumbersome process. We may compare reports of the COVID vaccines to past years, when there were also hundreds of millions of vaccinations, including annual flu shots and childhood vaccine schedules. The comparison is dramatic. There were more than twice as many deaths related to the COVID vaccines this year as the sum total of all vaccine deaths in the 30-year history of VAERS. Given this safety record, how is there any possibility of approval? Here is where the statistical fraud comes in. [I am grateful to have been alerted to this situation by Matthew Crawford]
…
The real scandal is that PRR is blind to the absolute risk numbers. PRR is defined in such a way as to look for unusual PATTERNS of adverse events, but it is completely insensitive to unusual RATES of adverse events. Of course, it is the rates and not the patterns that are of primary concern, and the PRR is designed NOT to reflect that.
For example, suppose we have 2 vaccines:
Vaccine A has 1 reported death per million vaccinations, 3 reported heart attacks per million, and 20 reported headaches per million.
Vaccine B has 1 reported death per hundred vaccinations, 3 reported heart attacks per hundred, and 20 reported headaches per hundred.
Vaccine A is quite safe, and vaccine B is extremely dangerous. And yet the formula for PRR will produce the same result for vaccine A and B!
Clearly, PRR is not an appropriate criterion for evaluating safety of any particular vaccine. Someone has arranged to cook the books.
more number-crunching, this in The Lancet:
Vaccine efficacy is generally reported as a relative risk reduction (RRR). It uses the relative risk (RR)—ie, the ratio of attack rates with and without a vaccine—which is expressed as 1–RR. Ranking by reported efficacy gives relative risk reductions of 95% for the Pfizer–BioNTech, 94% for the Moderna–NIH, 91% for the Gamaleya, 67% for the J&J, and 67% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford vaccines. However, RRR should be seen against the background risk of being infected and becoming ill with COVID-19, which varies between populations and over time. Although the RRR considers only participants who could benefit from the vaccine, the absolute risk reduction (ARR), which is the difference between attack rates with and without a vaccine, considers the whole population. ARRs tend to be ignored because they give a much less impressive effect size than RRRs: 1·3% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford, 1·2% for the Moderna–NIH, 1·2% for the J&J, 0·93% for the Gamaleya, and 0·84% for the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccines.
Here is someone else I stumbled upon more recently who, like Crawford, is averse to blindly accepting propagandistic B.S., knows her stuff, and tells it like she sees it, Karen Kingston:
Karen Kingston is a former Pfizer employee, a pharmaceutical marketing expert and biotech analyst. Kingston joins Stew Peters, and brings the receipts! Kingston reveals how the FDA “approval” is sure to be the “checkmate” move to end the shots that have caused unprecedented injury and death, worldwide. Kingston shared slides and brought the receipts, which are available at StewPeters.tv, and document everything she states in her BOMBSHELL claims during her exclusive and revealing deliver of damnation to big pharma, and those responsible for pushing these injections onto a global population.
There there is Peter Doshi, of the BMJ:
Does the FDA think these data justify the first full approval of a covid-19 vaccine? Peter Doshi, senior editor, The BMJ.
Then there are of course sources I've been following for awhile, including Ishi Nobu, and lots by Denninger:
Ishi Nobu: Covid-19 Pandemic: Daily World Report
The endless covid pandemic remains vibrant, though, globally, the current wave has peaked.
Rather than improve their health care systems, many governments impose harsh restrictions which are known to be ineffectual – purely a political ploy to promote the lie to a gullible populace that the domestic epidemic is being “controlled.”
...
Most masks worn as an anti-covid measure may instead heighten the hazard of V2 infection. Such masks reduce airflow and may trap viral particles, giving the virus more time to be inhaled.
The anti-covid barriers that have become so common instead foster infection by limiting air flow, thereby allowing higher viral concentration
... V2 vaccines have universally proven less efficacious than stated by their makers. Governments are approving V2 jabs without adequate reliable data.
... Jabbing has not made a notable difference in pandemic infection numbers.
... Viral escape – evolving to elude vaccination – is a certainty.
... Side effects to V2 vaccines are a serious problem.
... The covid pandemic has worsened the US‘s sorry educational system.
... Canada in instilling mandatory V2 jabs upon anyone it can. The fascist government, which calls itself the Liberal party, is big on vaccine passports.
Denninger: Israel Cracks The Code: Jabs Don’t Work
If you recall early on before the jabs were “released” under EUA I pointed out that some of the early study work had odd results that I could not reasonably explain a purpose to, and they bothered me a lot. One of the most-glaring was the wildly higher antibody titers produced by them as opposed to natural infection. I mused at the time that this could easily be explained by the truncation (or simply ignorance of) the usual dose-ranging studies that are done on all drugs; those require time, of course, and when you’re after Warp Speed time is something you don’t have. But now it appears that Pfizer may have known there was a problem — they may not have known how serious it was, but they may well have known it existed and may have deliberately set the dosing to try to hide it. And, as it turns out, that wasn’t the only problem.
“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 seropositivity 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.” In other words the dosing they used, and the original titers, concealed the decay below effective levels which was not being tested for but would have shown up in infections among vaccinated people had the original level been lower. That’s bad; the question now becomes did Pfizer know this and do it deliberately, and if not, what is the logical explanation for the dosing used? Why not set dosing roughly identical to natural infection? Simple: If they did that before the four months of the study ran a crap-ton of people would have gotten infected since the antibody titer would have worn off.
It gets worse: “In our study, we show that following vaccination, the levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies decrease rapidly, indicating that BMPCs may not be created adequately and therefore anti-SARS-CoV-2 humoral immunity might be transient (Ibarrondo et al., 2020; Seow et al., 2020).” If there is little or no B-cell recall then the vaccine is a failure as it cannot stimulate durable immunity at all. That is, the jabs are basically the same (via a different mechanism) to receiving monoclonal antibodies if you get infected; yes, you have an antibody titer but the jabs fail to train your immune system to recognize the infection in the future. As that titer wanes the protection becomes increasingly worthless and, since we know mutational binding changes are occurring the potential for vaccine-caused harm by potentiating infections remains a distinct possibility as that occurs.
What we did was fight a war that cannot be won by the means employed and any honest person knows it. The entire ****ing government and medical apparatus knew this, lied about it and continues to lie today. All of them.
They KNOW they're full of ****.
and: Well, ****….
You stupid, stupid bastards….. Coronaviruses have a long history of doing this sort of thing and its one of the reasons we’ve never managed to have a vaccine developed for them before; it simply doesn’t work. But we were sure it wouldn’t happen this time. It had happened all the other times, but not this time. We were so sure we didn’t need to take the several years required to prove it. We’re smart! We have the new technology, never before deployed in man or beast, which we were absolutely certain would evade the risk that had always, in previous trials, derailed attempted vaccines. Oh, and there were also billions of dollars involved for the companies involved and many newly minted billionaires to be, including the NIH itself who holds some of the patents involved.
So here’s what happened. In mid-December, before the first person had full vaccinated immunity, cases were falling dramatically in the United States. Herd Immunity. For real. It was over. We had suffered, but, had we not been stupid, Covid was more-or-less finished with us. Yes, there were and would remain some of us who hadn’t gotten it, and the extremely rare person who could get it a second time, that would continue to get the virus. It was, however, over. But we were stupid. We jabbed a huge percentage of our population. And as has occurred every other time with coronavirus vaccine attempts the virus mutated around the protection and in fact used the vaccine antibodies to enhance infection. Delta is in fact promoted by those who were vaccinated. As with all other Covid variants most people get a mild or no real illness, but some people get hammered.
However, prior infection doesn’t help if you got jabbed since you took a drug that helps the virus attack you. We created a third wave by our own stupidity: Stupidity seen in nation after nation, but only in nations with high vaccine prevalence; Israel, the UK, Iceland and here in the United States. Don’t run the bull**** on me that this isn’t happening: Not only is the science now in on how its happening but Israel and Palestine, two nations literally next door to each with one having near 100% vaccination and the other about 10% could not be more-stark. Palestine is seeing a small uptick in infections while Israel is getting hammered. The “smartest men in the room” screwed not just a nation — bad enough — but an enormously-large part of the world. Including, quite possibly, you. There’s a reason we’ve never attempted to vaccinate against coronaviruses before. THIS IS THE REASON!
or Dr. Malone and Dr McCullough, as well as Micheal Yeadon and Vanden Bossche, plus Doctors for COVID Ethics:
Dr. Robert Malone and Peter Navarro: Biden Team’s Misguided And Deadly Covid-19 Vaccine Strategy
The Biden administration’s strategy to universally vaccinate in the middle of the pandemic is bad science and badly needs a reboot. This strategy will likely prolong the most dangerous phase of the worst pandemic since 1918 and almost assuredly cause more harm than good – even as it undermines faith in the entire public health system. Four flawed assumptions drive the Biden strategy.
The first is that universal vaccination can eradicate the virus and secure economic recovery by achieving herd immunity throughout the country (and the world). However, the virus is now so deeply embedded in the world population that, unlike polio and smallpox, eradication is unachievable. SARS-CoV-2 and its myriad mutations will likely continually circulate, much like the common cold and influenza.
The second assumption is that the vaccines are (near) perfectly effective. However, our currently available vaccines are quite “leaky.” While good at preventing severe disease and death, they only reduce, not eliminate, the risk of infection, replication, and transmission. As a slide deck from the Centers for Disease Control has revealed, even 100% acceptance of the current leaky vaccines combined with strict mask compliance will not stop the highly contagious Delta variant from spreading.
The third assumption is that the vaccines are safe. Yet scientists, physicians, and public health officials now recognize risks that are rare but by no means trivial. Known side effects include serious cardiac and thrombotic conditions, menstrual cycle disruptions, Bell’s Palsy, Guillain Barre syndrome, and anaphylaxis.
Unknown side effects which virologists fear may emerge include existential reproductive risks, additional autoimmune conditions, and various forms of disease enhancement, i.e., the vaccines can make people more vulnerable to reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 or reactivation of latent viral infections and associated diseases such as shingles. With good reason, the FDA has yet to approve the vaccines now administered under Emergency Use Authorization.
The failure of the fourth “durability” assumption is the most alarming and perplexing. It now appears our current vaccines are likely to offer a mere 180-day window of protection – a decided lack of durability underscored by scientific evidence from Israel and confirmed by Pfizer, the Department of Health and Human Services, and other countries.
A groundbreaking preprint paper by the prestigious Oxford University Clinical Research Group, published Aug. 10 in The Lancet, includes alarming findings devastating to the COVID vaccine rollout. The study found vaccinated individuals carry 251 times the load of COVID-19 viruses in their nostrils compared to the unvaccinated. While moderating the symptoms of infection, the jab allows vaccinated individuals to carry unusually high viral loads without becoming ill at first, potentially transforming them into presymptomatic superspreaders. This phenomenon may be the source of the shocking post-vaccination surges in heavily vaccinated populations globally.
… The conclusions of the Chau paper support the warnings by leading medical experts that the partial, non-sterilizing immunity from the three notoriously “leaky” COVID-19 vaccines allow carriage of 251 times the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 as compared to samples from the pre-vaccination era in 2020. Thus, we have a key piece to the puzzle explaining why the Delta outbreak is so formidable — fully vaccinated are participating as COVID-19 patients and acting as powerful Typhoid Mary-style super-spreaders of the infection.
Michael Yeadon: Covid-19 Injections Dangerous For Mothers and Babies
The covid-19 vaccines currently subject to emergency use authorisations all share a common and novel feature: they are gene-based products. Instead of containing a small amount of killed or live-attenuated pathogen, they instead comprise genetic code, instructions as it were to manufacture in our own cells a part of the pathogen. In some products, the genetic code is of DNA & use a weakened respiratory virus to ensure delivery to our cells, or of messenger RNA (the intermediate between the DNA of our genes and the protein product thereby manufactured). There is a further commonality: they cause the recipients cells to manufacture a portion of the SARS-CoV-2 virus called the spike protein. This is literally the spike projecting outwards from the spherical object that contains the virus itself.
As detailed elsewhere in this packet of information, coronavirus spike proteins are biologically active and they initiate the blood coagulation cascade among other properties. It is alleged that it is the induction of blood coagulation in various locations in the body which is responsible for a high proportion of the serious adverse events including deaths which are being reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in the USA and in analogous databases elsewhere. The rate of fatal outcomes following covid-19 vaccination, usually from clotting or bleeding disorders, is extraordinary and exceeds that from any previous vaccine by a very large amount, which this reviewer estimates is of the order of 60-fold.
That this astonishingly high rate of adverse events after vaccination is a consequence of two factors: 1. The manufacturers were simply not required to study the way the product moves around the body after injection and 2. They were not required to study the functional effects of the genetic code within the product after administration. There are no products on the mass market which operate in this way. It is my expert opinion that this is the greatest failure of medicinal product regulation in relation to reproductive health since thalidomide and is very much greater in terms of societal impact. It is imperative that all these products be suspended until improved safety testing can determine whether there are any groups in whom the benefits outweigh the risks.
The WHO’s mass vaccination program has been installed in response to a public health emergency of international concern. As of the early days of the mass vaccination campaigns, at least a few experts have been warning against the catastrophic impact such a program could have on global and individual health. Mass vaccination in the middle of a pandemic is prone to promoting selection and adaptation of immune escape variants that are featured by increasing infectiousness and resistance to spike protein (S)-directed antibodies (Abs), thereby diminishing protection in vaccinees and threatening the unvaccinated. This already explains why the WHO’s mass vaccination program is not only unable to generate herd immunity (HI) but even leads to substantial erosion of the population’s immune protective capacity.
As the ongoing universal mass vaccination program will soon promote dominant propagation of highly infectious, neutralization escape mutants (i.e., so-called ‘S Ab-resistant variants’), naturally acquired, or vaccinal neutralizing Abs, will, indeed, no longer offer any protection to immunized individuals whereas high infectious pressure will continue to suppress the innate immune defense system of the nonvaccinated. This is to say that every further increase in vaccine coverage rates will further contribute to forcing the virus into resistance to neutralizing, S-specific Abs. Increased viral infectivity, combined with evasion from antiviral immunity, will inevitably result in an additional toll taken on human health and human lives.
Immediate action needs, therefore, to be taken in order to dramatically reduce viral infectivity rates and to prevent selected immune escape variants from rapidly spreading through the entire population, whether vaccinated or not. This first critical step can only be achieved by calling an immediate halt to the mass vaccination program and replacing it by widespread use of antiviral chemoprophylactics while dedicating massive public health resources to scaling early multidrug treaments of Covid-19 disease.
Fauci and the NIH Knew Covid-19 “Vaccines” Could Lead to Antibody-Dependent Enhancement
Three days ago, I published an article about Dr. Robert Malone’s warning that we might very well be witnessing the emergence of a deadly condition called Antibody-Dependent Enhancement within the population of people who were injected with Covid-19 “vaccines”.
… Late last night, an anonymous source forwarded a screenshot of a report attributed to John Wiley and Sons that is found at the bottom of NIH’s website. The report specifically warned of the distinct possibility that people who are injected with Covid-19 “vaccines” could develop the very Antibody-Dependent Enhancement that Dr. Malone keeps ringing the alarm about. Not only was this information suppressed from the public, the government-media-corporate complex went out of their way to censor—in the case of Dr. Malone destroy—anyone who questions the safety and efficacy of these boosters that are still undergoing clinical trials.
Even though I knew all along that the US government, and governments around the world, were lying through their teeth about the origins of Covid-19 and were likewise peddling medical misinformation about the scientific integrity of the “vaccines”, it was still shocking to read the following paragraph right on NIH’s website:
“The specific and significant COVID-19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.” [source NIH]Despite the fact advisors from John Wiley & Sons explicitly advised the NIH to disclose to research subjects in the three-month trials that were conducted last year as well as to all recipients once the “vaccines” garnered approval for general use, over 160 million Americans and more than 2 billion people around the world were never told about the distinct possibility that they could end up developing a disease called Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) which leads to our body’s natural immune system getting compromised and starts attacking vital organs.
… This is not some fluke occurrence that could not have been foreseen, “vaccines” that produce spiked proteins by way of mRNA or adenovirus were studied on lab animals—specifically ferrets and cats because they are more susceptible to Coronavirus—for over twenty years. Though the test subjects initially acquired synthetic antibodies, once their immunization window expired and they were challenged with SARS-CoV-1, the lab animals that were injected with the “vaccines” were wiped out. The warning on NIH’s website was alluding to this very real possibility but the very authorities we entrust to protect us instead concealed this information and conditioned billions of people to get jabbed without informed consent.
In this letter to physicians, Doctors for Covid Ethics explains why recent findings regarding vaccine-immune interactions suggest that “vascular damage and leakage” is likely to occur following COVID-19 vaccination. The findings add to work published last year showing that spike protein in the bloodstream directs an immune factor known as complement to attack the inner vessel lining, resulting in damage and leakiness of the vessels.
The severity of this effect can be expected to intensify with each injection, rendering booster shots “uniquely dangerous”.
The letter explains why booster shots can be expected to cause increasingly severe “vascular injury occurring at multiple sites throughout the body” with “potentially devastating effects.” Given that no clinical trials have examined booster shots and their impact upon this foreseeable vaccine-immune pathway, we ask the question: “Are we about to witness the birth of an entirely new world of autoimmune disease?”
And there were a number of links recently specifically about mask policies:
and
Distancing, hybrid models, classroom barriers, HEPA filters, and, most notably, requiring student masking were each found to not have a statistically significant benefit. In other words, these measures could not be said to be effective.
… But it’s not just this CDC study. There are no studies that Zwieg — or anyone — can find that “show conclusively that kids wearing masks in schools has any effect on their own morbidity or mortality or on hospitalization or death rate in the community around them”
… Meanwhile, as we've noted a few times in the past week, there are plenty of studies which conclude that masks provide minimal to no protection. .......
Then there is this truly entertaining read, followed by a bit of a spoof, which just sums it all up:
I’ve neglected to talk about the Wuhan death virus until now, mostly because I’ve been enjoying the spectacular fuckery on display, the gaping credulity, the mass hysteria and the moronic panic. Also because the last thing anybody needed over the last year and a half is yet another dipshit adding to the noise. My employers asked me to evaluate the situation using the best public knowledge back in March and April 2020, and I did so; I did pretty well with my estimates. I haven’t thought about it much since then, other than on the occasions in which the situation inconveniences me: and then only to the extent that I get the job done. It’s simply not that interesting, and knowing something of history I’m not particularly worried about the disease; more worried about governments using it as an excuse for totalitarian shenanigans. As such, it’s worth remembering how badly “the authorities” have handled the situation from the earliest days, in the same spirit as Matt Taibbi’s excellent discombobulation of the similarly insane Russiagate conspiracy theories. None of my statements below are scientifically or historically controversial, though I’m sure someone will attempt to argue otherwise. Here’s my list of establishment fuckups:
1 It’s just the flu.
Yeah, they actually said that. For a long time. I assume because Orange Man was taking it seriously.
..
...
....
ME: CDC, should I get poke if I already had Covid?
CDC: “Yes, you should be poked regardless of whether you already had COVID-19. That’s because experts do not yet know how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19.”
ME: Oh, so we don’t know how long natural immunity lasts. So, how long does poke-induced immunity last?
CDC: “There is still a lot we’re learning about pokes and CDC is constantly reviewing evidence and updating guidance. We don’t know how long protection lasts for those poked.”
ME: Okay, but wait a second. I thought you said the reason I need the poke was because we don’t know how long my natural immunity lasts, but you’re saying we ALSO don’t know how long poke immunity lasts either. So, how exactly is the poke immunity better than my natural immunity?
CDC: …
ME: Uh … alright. But, haven’t there been a bunch of studies suggesting that natural immunity could last for years or decades?
CDC: Yes.
NEWYORKTIMES: “Years, maybe decades, according to a new study.”
ME: Ah. So natural immunity might last longer than poke immunity?
CDC: Possibly.
ME: Okay. If I get the poke, does that mean I won’t get sick?
BRITAIN: Nope. We are entering a seasonal spike and half of our infections and hospital admissions are poked people.
ME: CDC, is this true? Are there people in the U.S. catching it after getting poked?
CDC: We stopped tracking breakthrough cases. We accept voluntary reports but aren’t out there looking for them.
ME: Does that mean that if someone comes in the hospital with Covid, you don’t track them because they’ve been poked? You only track the UN-poked Covid cases?
CDC: That’s right.
ME: Hmm. Well, if I can still get sick after I get the poke, how is it helping me?
CDC: We never said you wouldn’t get sick. We said it would reduce your chances of serious illness or death.
ME: Oh, sorry. Alright, exactly how much does it reduce my chances?
CDC: We don’t know “exactly.”
ME: Oh. Then what’s your best estimate for how much risk reduction there is?
CDC: We don’t know, okay? Next question.
ME: Um, if I’m healthy and don’t want the poke, is there any reason I should get it?
CDC: Yes, for the collective.
ME: How does the collective benefit from me getting poked?
CDC: Because you could spread the virus to someone else who might get sick and die.
ME: Can a poked person spread the virus to someone else?
CDC: Yes.
ME: So if I get poked, I could still spread the virus to someone else?
CDC: Yes.
ME: But I thought you just said, the REASON I should get poked was to prevent me spreading the virus? How does that make sense if I can still catch Covid and spread it after getting the poke?
CDC: Never mind that. Also, if you stay unpoked, there’s a chance the virus could possibly mutate into a strain that escapes the pokes protection, putting all poked people at risk.
ME: So the poke stops the virus from mutating?
CDC: No.
ME: So it can still mutate with the poke?
CDC: Yes.
ME: This seems confusing. If the poke doesn’t stop mutations, and it doesn’t stop infections, then how does me getting poked help prevent a more deadly strain from evolving to escape the poke?
CDC:
CDC: You aren’t listening, okay? The bottom line is: as long as you are unpoked, you pose a threat to poked people.
ME: But what KIND of threat??
CDC: The threat that they could get a serious case of Covid and possibly die.
ME: My brain hurts. Didn’t you JUST say that the poke doesn’t stop people from catching Covid, but prevents a serious case or dying? Now it seems like you’re saying poked people can still easily die from Covid even after they got the poke from an unpoked person! Which is it??
CDC: That’s it, we’re hanging up now.
ME: Wait! I just want to make sure I understand all this. So, even if I ALREADY had Covid, I should STILL get poked, because we don’t know how long natural immunity lasts, and we also don’t know how long poke immunity lasts….
…And I should get the poke to keep a poked person from catching Covid from me, but even if I get the poke, I can give it to the poked person anyways. And, the other poked person can still easily catch a serious case of Covid from me and die. Do I have all that right?
……
ME: Um, hello? Is anyone there?
Finally, as if the academic, scientific and/or statistical analysts aren't telling, how about the everyday stories:
Are you thinking of getting a COVID shot?
Is your teenager being forced to take a shot in order to return to college?
Do you have friends on the fence about vaccines?
Are you concerned about their possible side effects?
if you go online and do simple research on the term “COVID Vaccine Side Effects” you are presented with a gaggle of links that are strangely similar. “Side effects are minor and common.” “Side effects are a sign that your vaccine is working properly.” When you visit YouTube and do the same search, again, the videos have a consistent theme. “The risk from the vaccines are less than the risks from COVID” and “vaccine side effects are actually a good thing.” If you post a comment or video on Facebook about vaccine side effects your post is deleted and your account may be closed.
But when you go to an uncensored website like Bitchute.com or Rumble.com and do the same search, you see hundreds of videos from real people who have had horrific side effects from their injections.
This website is dedicated to sharing the truth about these people and their testimonials. Watch for yourself and make up your own mind. Is it worth it to risk life-changing and even fatal side effects from a vaccine for a disease that is survived by 99.98% of people under 70?
Below, you will find countless stories of side effects directly from those involved, or sadly, if they died, from their relatives….
No comments:
Post a Comment