This is the most important article I ever wrote, because it cracks open the plandemic nut. Perhaps more appropriate, it lances the pandemic boil so all can see/smell the putridness inside.
Pharmaceutical Hegemony Vs Scientific Integrity and Public Health
“I have slowly and reluctantly concluded that contrary to my own initial dogmatic beliefs, Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine is far from being as safe and effective as we first thought.”
So writes Dr. Aseem Malhotra, in the first of his two important papers out this week. Aiming, in this first paper1, to “gain a better understanding of the true benefits and potential harms of the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) coronavirus disease (COVID) vaccines,” he walks the reader through a careful and concise analysis, providing the evidence which contributed to his changing his mind
Changing one’s conclusions based on new evidence or analysis is one of the most critical things that scientists do. But it is not what most people calling themselves scientists are now doing. In a short video interview that was released just as the papers were published, Dr. Malhotra was asked if he worries about the blowback that will come from being an mRNA vaccine whistleblower. He answers without hesitation. “For me, what’s most important is my duty to patients, and to scientific integrity, and to the truth.”
Would that everyone wearing the mantle of science or medicine acted this way. If they did, we would be living in a very different world.
Vaccines are simultaneously one of the great advances that Western medicine has ever made, and are not the solution to every problem. Even the best tool isn’t the right one for all situations. Some situations call for a different approach.
Furthermore: labelling something as a particular kind of tool doesn’t make it one. The Pfizer product that is labeled a Covid vaccine does not deserve to be called a vaccine. It doesn’t behave like any vaccine that has come before, and it’s not effective at doing what other vaccines do. It doesn’t, in short, belong in the category. Therefore, those who would call mRNA-vaccine skeptics anti-vaxxers are wrong.
As I have said elsewhere2, I’m not an anti-vaxxer. I’m a trad-vaxxer. I like my vaccines to substantially reduce my risk of infection with the target disease, and also to reduce the risk that I will transmit the disease to others. And I strongly prefer that they’re free of adjuvants. The mRNA Covid “vaccines” fail on all counts.
In his first article, Malhotra analyses the highly questionable benefits of these vaccines (obscured from public view in part by Pfizer’s monkeying with their own clinical trials); and also assesses their risks, in which he includes both an overview of known adverse events following vaccination of individuals, and excess deaths at the population level after the vaccines were rolled out. Malhotra also points out some of the falsities we were fed (even while those of us questioning the party line were the ones being accused of mis-, dis- and mal- information). The falsities include, for instance, ....
A look at the true benefits and harms of mRNA
A British doctor, Aseem Malhotra, has just had a two part, peer-reviewed paper published in the Journal of Insulin Resistance. The aim of the paper was to gain a better understanding of the true benefits and potential harms of the mRNA Covid vaccines. You can read Part 1 and Part 2 in full by clicking on the links.
Dr Malhotra. a cardiologist by trade, was originally a strong Covid vaccine advocate. He volunteered in a vaccine centre, was one of the first people to be double dosed and appeared on morning television to encourage everyone to get vaccinated. He was surprised and concerned at vaccine-hesitant patients when they asked about ‘anti-vax’ propaganda.
That was until, sadly, in July 2021, his father suffered a cardiac arrest and died. His father had been the former deputy chair of the British Medical Association (BMA) and honorary vice president. The 73 year old gentleman was extremely fit and active and heart scans from a few years earlier had revealed no significant problems. Dr Malhotra was shocked to read his father’s post mortem which found that two out of three of his major arteries had severe blockages.
Aseem couldn’t explain the post mortem findings and became more concerned in November 2021 after reading a peer-reviewed abstract in Circulation Journal. In the study, the mRNA vaccine was associated with significantly increasing the risk of a coronary event within five years from 11% pre-mRNA vaccine to 25% 2-10 weeks post vaccine.
He began to question his father’s death and wondered whether the Pfizer vaccination he had received six months earlier could have contributed in some way. After six months of critically appraising the data and speaking to eminent scientists, he reluctantly concluded that, contrary to his own dogmatic beliefs, Pfizer’s vaccine was far from being as safe and effective as first thought.
During his reassessment of the Covid vaccine he recalled a conversation with a cardiologist colleague who decided against vaccination due to his low personal risk and concerns about short and long term harms. His colleague was particularly alarmed that, during the trials, there had been four cardiac arrests in the vaccine group but only one in the placebo group.
Next, Dr Malhotra assessed the 95% efficacy claims. ....
.......................... The paper continues to look at institutional corruption and erosion of public trust, the failure of regulation, biased reporting in the media and censorship of legitimate scientific debate.
A hard hitting, yet sensible paper which should be read by everyone, especially doctors who lost their critical thinking skills over the last few years.
And – details on these test results being withheld from the public
A small but groundbreaking study (available here) has been released at the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Pediatrics, demonstrating that trace amounts of COVID-19 vaccine mRNA were found in the breastmilk of lactating women as soon as one hour after vaccination.
A new preprint from NIH and NIAID authors released on the 27th September confirms that spike protein translocates to the nucleus. This was denied by every single COVID vaccine (gene therapy) advocate to date.
More importantly this paper totally vindicates Jiang and Mei who were forced to retract their completely correct paper under political pressure from Eric Freed of the very same NIH, the funders of Moderna Inc.
One of the most important skills for intelligent people to develop, one that I sadly never managed to master myself, is to never show the back of your tongue. It’s a skill that academics and people working within government bureaucracies tend to be good at. Testosterone causes honesty in men. A honest man will show you the back of his tongue, he’ll tell you what he truly thinks is going on.
One of the tendencies you’ll find on the left is that the smarter people don’t speak out against their own side’s pet projects, they just silently don’t go along with them: They don’t neuter their children, they don’t live in “vibrant” neighborhoods, etc. There’s a general absence of hypermasculinity among the modern left, so doing one thing and saying another is the norm.
And if you wonder how the vaccination project comes to an end, it happens in the same manner. There’s no honest admission that this was a mistake. There’s not enough testosterone circulating in decision making circles for that. The people in academia and government bureaucracies tend to have the digit ratios indicative of low testosterone exposure in the womb. The classical male pattern of high prenatal testosterone exposure doesn’t get you very far in modern Western society outside sportsball, the military and the drug trade.
Consider Monica Gandhi, as the typical example of an academic who just won’t show the back of her tongue. She knows more than she is telling you. A few months ago, she called for extending the delay between the first shot of the COVID vaccine. It goes without saying, this is kind of pointless: You won’t find anyone who is still unvaccinated and dumb enough to sign up for these shots.
It’s indicative however of what she comprehends: If you got these first two shots and the period between them is relatively short, your body ends up stuck with decreased breadth of the immune response, meaning it sucks at dealing with the Omicron variants. How long are you going to be stuck with this poor immune response? Heaven knows. What’s clear is that she is worried. She is worried that a mistake was made.
And now Monica Gandhi is back, with a new recommendation. If you remember that smart successful academics don’t show the back of their tongue, then what she is saying is pretty easy to translate: Stop vaccinating. She doesn’t explicitly say “stop vaccinating”, she has to say it in a manner that doesn’t contradict the narrative. So what she says is: “Wait six months after the most recent booster or infection.”
It doesn’t take a genius to understand what this means: It means you stop vaccinating. It’s a way of no longer vaccinating, without saying that you’re no longer vaccinating. With the exception of some total shut ins perhaps, there’s nobody out there who has had three or four shots of these vaccines, who manages to go six months without getting infected. If you stop vaccinating within six months of infection, you stop vaccinating. It’s as simple as that.
The six months rule would give every Twitter blue check the perfect valid reason not to get another dose of science-juice, without suffering cognitive dissonance. “No, the reason I’m not getting my next shot is not because of those side-effects that knocked me out last time, it’s because I’m following CDC guidelines!“ ......
In Denmark they’re less subtly backpedaling: You’re not getting this shot if you’re under fifty and they even admit that vaccinating children was a mistake. If they thought they could get away with it, I think they would stop science-juicing altogether, but that would cause a meltdown among the elderly.
It’s right now dawning on a lot of people simultaneously that they have made a mistake. ......
..... Fundamentally, the vaccination campaign represented a bet on SARS-COV-2 getting stuck in an evolutionary dead end. You can see a Moderna employee who blocked me on Twitter reveal that thought process here in the screenshot. The whole fitness landscape available to this virus can be thought of as a giant maze. If you trapped it in a particular corner, then it stands no chance to explore the rest of the maze. But that clearly failed, so now all bets are off. They forced vaccine evasive variants to come into existence, those variants had through pleiotropy the ability to jump into other species, how it behaves in those other species is something hardly anyone studies.
There is one thing that characterizes coronaviruses: They’re versatile. ........
Some coronaviruses jump into our species and cause a few nasty flu seasons for the elderly. Others seem to have decimated our primate ancestors over multiple generations. SARS-COV-2 looks like it plans on behaving more like the latter than the prior. It has something no coronavirus has ever had before: Millions of immunocompromised people, who function as human incubators where very rare strains can come into existence, strains that can then be spread around the globe within days.
I honestly believe this is probably the worst mistake in human history: The conviction of the vaccine manufacturers that they could trap SARS-COV-2 in a corner in the maze, by summoning a narrow range of high affinity IgG antibodies against a handful of epitopes of the Wuhan spike protein. You accomplish the exact opposite: You create new routes on the fitness landscape, from one destination to another. That’s what narrow immunity does: It makes variants viable that would otherwise be selected against because they can’t compete with the other variants. .......
Look at the data and you’ll notice the first major variants tended to emerge within a few weeks after the vaccines trials were held, in the places where these trials were held. You first have a window of negative efficacy for the first few weeks, then you have the surge in IgG antibodies against a handful of Spike epitopes that will then select for strange novel variants in some people.
The more of its awful repertoire it gets to perform, the bigger the chances it ends up stumbling on one terrible song or another that makes the blood drip from our eardrums. And perhaps you’ll wonder why this is a concern for SARS-COV-2, but not for other viruses. The simplest answer would be to point out that there’s a LOT of SARS-COV-2 RNA circulating around the world right now, but not a lot of other viruses. In other words, SARS-COV-2 gets to roll the dice a lot more often than other viruses do. ......
And I have to emphasize again, that this is all your own damn fault. Once you started vaccinating, herd immunity became out of the question. The genetic evidence is pretty clear: Our immune systems are fine-tuned by evolution, to be good at dealing with coronavirus outbreaks. The immune response the population now produces is inadequate compared to what we would have been capable of. On the other hand, the virus suffers no such limitations, it has a massive sandbox in which it can discover its most potent forms. ...
What are the ethics for investigators and researchers under investigation?
No comments:
Post a Comment