MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘mRNA’

In a Dark Wood | Kunstler

Posted by M. C. on October 2, 2021

Everything else under “Joe Biden’s” watch looks like a pyromaniac seeking to burn down the country. Over 10,000 Haitian interlopers have been surreptitiously dispersed from Del Rio, Texas, to nether regions of the USA. The government made no effort to vaccinate them — what does that tell you?

https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/in-a-dark-wood/

James Howard Kunstler

Behold the photo (above) showing President “Joe Biden” getting his booster shot of the Covid-19 “vaccine,” with the news media clustered to the left of what is apparently a stage-set built in a larger chamber. Do you possibly ask yourself: why bother to build a set for this event in or under the White House somewhere — including even fake daylit windows — when there are any number of actual rooms in the White House perfectly suited to holding this grand event in real daylight? What is going on here?

And, by the way, how do we know that “JB” is getting an actual mRNA booster?  Or is it just 3 CCs of saline solution? Is not the syringe, after all, just another prop in the show? The video of this event was broadcast on cable TV channels and corporate media websites everywhere. None of them commented on the strange artificiality of the staging. And so, the mystery abides….

It only reinforces the creeping suspicion that absolutely everything about the “Joe Biden” regime is fake. And malevolently so. How else could it be that so many bad things are happening at the same time in this country if there was not some faction seeking to destroy it?

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Scandal Behind the FDA Fake Approval of Pfizer Jab

Posted by M. C. on September 10, 2021

There is no control group after Pfizer offered the product to placebo participants before the trials were completed.” Read that again, slowly. Pfizer tests destroyed their own control group mid-stream! And its six month rollout of the mRNA jab worldwide has resulted in catastrophic side effects which have been totally officially ignored. Is this “science” Dr Fauci?

US vaccinologist and a developer of the mRNA technique, Dr Robert Malone, has accused the FDA of playing a “bureaucratic shell game” with their supposed early approval of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine. He cites the two separate FDA letters, “There is a letter for Pfizer and a letter for BioNTech. The New York Times and the Washington Post got it wrong. The authorization is not for Pfizer. The authorization is for BioNTech, and it will only be initiated at the time BioNTech product becomes available…”

http://www.williamengdahl.com/englishNEO30August2021.php

By F. William Engdahl

Scandal Behind the FDA Fake Approval of Pfizer Jab

Image: Janet Woodcock M.D. ACTING COMMISSIONER OF FOOD AND DRUGS – FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATIONAttribution: Credit: US FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION. Unless otherwise noted, the contents of the FDA website (www.fda.gov) — both text and graphics — are not copyrighted. They are in the public domain and may be republished, reprinted and otherwise used freely by anyone without the need to obtain permission from FDA. Credit to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as the source is appreciated but not required. https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/fda-organization/janet-woodcock

The US Government regulator for drugs, the Food and Drug Administration, has just announced that it has voted full approval for the mRNA genetic vaccine of Pfizer and BioNTech, or did they? This supposed new status is being used by the Biden Administration and many states and companies to impose mandatory vaccinations. The notoriously conflicted Biden covid adviser, Tony Fauci of the NIAID, using that ruling, is calling for national mandatory vaccination for the country. What is not being revealed is the cesspool of corruption and conflicts of interest between the FDA and the major drug companies, including Pfizer, that stand behind the rushed approval. And it’s not full approval for Pfizer’s jab, only for BioNTech’s legally different vaccine. .

“…final stamp of approval”?

On August 23 as the FDA announced full approval for the Pfizer mRNA gene-edited substance. Or not quite, when the full papers of FDA are studied. Fauci, whose NIAID has financial interest in the vaccine, referred to the FDA decision as the “final stamp of approval.” It is however anything but final or an impartial, scientific rigorous medical evaluation. Rather it is a politically-motivated decision by an FDA that is corrupt beyond the imagination of most people.

Backtracking on its statement in 2020 that it would hold normal FDA advisory committee hearings with independent experts to discuss the Pfizer application for full approval, now the FDA told the British Medical Journal that they did not believe a meeting was necessary ahead of granting full approval of what is the most controversial vaccine in modern history. The BMJ quotes Kim Witczak, a drug safety advocate who serves as a consumer representative on the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee, “These [FDA] public meetings are imperative in building trust and confidence especially when the vaccines came to market at lightning speed under emergency use authorization.”

Witczak continued with the alarming note, “It is already concerning that full approval is being based on 6 months’ worth of data despite the clinical trials designed for two years. There is no control group after Pfizer offered the product to placebo participants before the trials were completed.” Read that again, slowly. Pfizer tests destroyed their own control group mid-stream! And its six month rollout of the mRNA jab worldwide has resulted in catastrophic side effects which have been totally officially ignored. Is this “science” Dr Fauci?

The refusal of the FDA and its Acting Director, Janet Woodcock, to convene its Drugs Advisory Committee for discussion of the Pfizer and BioNTech decisions is even more shocking as in June three members of that same panel resigned in protest for being disregarded in another drug approval. NPR network reported, “Three experts have now resigned from a Food and Drug Administration advisory committee after the agency approved an Alzheimer’s drug called Aduhelm against the wishes of nearly every member on the panel.” One of the three, Dr. Aaron Kesselheim, in his resignation letter from the FDA Advisory Committee (June 10, 2021), wrote: “For both eteplirsen and aducanumab, the decisions by FDA administrators to ignore the Advisory Committee’s clear recommendations led to their approval of two highly problematic drugs that offered little evidence that they would meaningfully benefit patients…With eteplirsen, the AdComm (Advisory Committee) and FDA’s own scientific staff reported that there was no convincing evidence that the drug worked; both groups were overruled by FDA leadership… “

Now the FDA refusal to convene their advisory committee for the Pfizer decision is all the more astonishing in light of the fact that the Government Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in its official VAERS data bank for recording vaccine negative effects has recorded 8,508 reports of fatalities following the Pfizer mRNA shot in the past seven months, a number more than for all vaccines combined in the past 30 years. By denying a public hearing the FDA avoided any discussion of these alarming fatality numbers, let alone the tens of thousands of serious side-effects including heart attacks, blood clots, miscarriages, permanent paralysis following the Pfizer-BioNTech jabs. The public declaration by Fauci before approval that he expected it, is also unethical influencing, but that is the least of the crimes.

Faked Approval

It seems the FDA executed a clever ruse in which it issued separate rulings for a Pfizer Inc.-BioNTech vaccine which is widely used in the USA, and another ruling for the similar vaccine of Pfizer’s German-based partner and developer of the mRNA platform, BioNTech of Mainz. It is only BioNTech that got FDA approval, but conditioned on completion of a series of further tests on select groups including infants, pregnant women and youth, by 2027. The US vaccine, Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine, only got extension of its Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), not full approval!

In their separate letter to Pfizer, the FDA stated, “…On August 23, 2021, having concluded that revising this EUA is appropriate to protect the public health or safety under section 564(g)(2) of the Act, FDA is reissuing the August 12, 2021 letter of (Emergency Use) authorization in its entirety with revisions incorporated to clarify that the EUA will remain in place for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for the previously-authorized indication and uses…”(emphasis added).

Buried in a footnote in the letter the FDA admits there are two legally separate entities and vaccines—Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccine and BioNTech GmbH of Mainz with its own vaccine trade-named Comrinaty. The FDA writes that “The products are legally distinct with certain differences…” Legally distinct means two separate vaccines. If you find this confusing it is meant to be. Only under an EUA ruling is Pfizer presently exempt from vaccine liability. Some lawyers are calling the FDA ruse a classic “bait and switch” tactic, a form of fraud based on deception.

US vaccinologist and a developer of the mRNA technique, Dr Robert Malone, has accused the FDA of playing a “bureaucratic shell game” with their supposed early approval of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine. He cites the two separate FDA letters, “There is a letter for Pfizer and a letter for BioNTech. The New York Times and the Washington Post got it wrong. The authorization is not for Pfizer. The authorization is for BioNTech, and it will only be initiated at the time BioNTech product becomes available…”

Adding to the bizarre irregularities, in their two separate letters, one to BioNTech and another to Pfizer, the FDA repeatedly deletes the location of the vaccine manufacturing they approve. Why that? Is it in China where BioNTech has a joint agreement with Fosun Pharma of Shanghai to jointly produce and market Comirnaty vaccine for COVID-19? Why do they need to hide that location data from the public? Would it expose the entire fraud?

FDA-Pfizer Conflicts of Interest

In 2019 Pfizer made a very conflicted appointment to its board of directors. It took Scott Gottlieb, who had just resigned as head of the FDA three months earlier. If this gives an appearance of a huge conflict of interest, it is. Alongside Gottlieb at Pfizer’s Board of Directors sits Dr Susan Desmond-Hellmann, who headed the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation until 2020. The Gates Foundation is behind every single key part of the covid vaccine rush and owns stock in Pfizer to boot.

Another person who links Pfizer and Gates is Prof. Holly Janes, a bio-statistical expert in Gates’ hometown Seattle, at the Fred Huff cancer research center. Janes is also a member of the FDA Vaccine Committee until 2023. Notably, she co-designed the controversial trials for both Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines for Fauci’s NIAID from her Seattle center, which is also funded by the Gates Foundation.

Janes is Professor at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, known as Fred Hutch. Earlier she received Gates Foundation research money for a six year period when she worked for the Gates Foundation from 2006 to 2012 to develop “statistical and study design support for pre-clinical vaccine performance trials.” Prof. Janes also helped develop the program that tracks vaccine data at John Hopkins University.

The person who runs FDA as “Acting Director” is Janet Woodcock. To call her tainted is mild. She has been at FDA since 1986, almost as long as Fauci at NIAID. Woodcock was Biden’s choice to head FDA, but a massive opposition from 28 groups including state attorneys general and citizen groups forced him to name her “acting,” which does not need Congressional scrutiny.

Woodcock was directly responsible for the FDA approval of deadly opioids over the objections of her own scientists and other advisors. Two decades ago as head of the FDA unit responsible, Woodcock was instrumental in the approval of a powerful opioid, Zohydro, even though the FDA’s own scientific advisory committee voted 11-2 to keep the drug off the market because it was unsafe. The online Drugs.com writes, “Hydrocodone (Zohydro) can slow or stop your breathing. Never use Zohydro ER in larger amounts, or for longer than prescribed. .. Swallow it whole to avoid exposure to a potentially fatal dose. Hydrocodone may be habit-forming, even at regular doses.” Woodcock later approved the sale of a high-strength narcotic pill, OxyContin, as “safer and more effective than other painkillers” based on the false claims of the now bankrupt manufacturer, Purdue Pharma. Some 500,000 Americans have since died as a result of opioid addiction.

Woodcock clearly is the key FDA person behind the duplicitous August 23 Pfizer decision, seeing to it that there were no public advisory hearings to review relevant data. It would be relevant to know what discussions or communications went on with her former boss, now Pfizer director, Scott Gottlieb.

Why?

There are many unanswered questions in this twisted tale of corruption at FDA and Pfizer. Was this theater rushed through by the Biden Administration to accelerate the forced vaccination of millions of Americans uncertain or skeptical of taking an emergency or experimental jab? Why is there such an incredible pressure from mainstream media and politicians to vaccinate every man, woman and now child in the US? Are the vaccines really safe if there are so many dire cases of adverse events after the Pfizer jab? Why did the FD refuse to allow its independent vaccine committee to weigh in?

It is worth noting that as of August 14 Pfizer does not mandate vaccines for its own employees. Also the Biden White House does not mandate vaccines for its staff. These are all serious issues that demand serious and honest answers.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Erie Times E-Edition Article-Antibodies waning? The immune system has a backup plan for that

Posted by M. C. on August 30, 2021

Conveniently discovered when vaccinate are being rejected by the unwashed, your natural immune system does not work against covid until after you take the vaccine!

“The research was released Aug.23 ahead of peer-review and publication.”

https://erietimes-pa-app.newsmemory.com/?publink=235a568fd_1345eb2

Jason Gale Bloomberg News TRIBUNE NEWS SERVICE Antibodies against the coronavirus wane over time, but the immune system has a backup plan that doesn’t rely on boosters, according to a study by scientists at the University of Pennsylvania, where technology for mRNA vaccines was developed.

Researchers at the university’s Perelman School of Medicine tracked 61 people for six months after immunization with mRNA vaccines. The team noted that antibodies gradually ebbed, but that the shots generated durable immune memory to COVID-19 in the form of B and T cells that increased over time to help ward off serious illness.

‘That was maybe a little bit surprising,’ said John Wherry, director of the institute for immunology, who works in the same faculty as mRNA pioneer Drew Weissman. The research was released Aug.23 ahead of peer-review and publication.

Concern that COVID-19 vaccines are providing a weaker shield against the more-transmissible delta strain in countries that began immunizations early has prompted health authorities to consider offering third doses to boost antibody levels. President Joe Biden said recently his administration is considering whether to start offering extra jabs as soon as five months after receiving a second dose.

Although third doses promise to bolster antibodies and make them better at blocking COVID-19 for longer, the body has its own natural support to defend against COVID-19 even when circulating antibody levels decline, Wherry said.

‘Should antibodies wane and you get a little bit of local infection, you have memory B cells there to sort of renew or respond very rapidly to make new neutralizing antibodies,’ he said.

Antibodies on mucosal surfaces lining the nose and throat block the coronavirus at its portal of entry, preventing it from causing an infection. But, as protective antibodies there fade, an infection is more likely to take hold – at least until new antibodies are triggered in response. Wherry’s group found that memory B cells generated by the mRNA vaccines made by Moderna Inc. and Pfizer Inc. and its partner BioNTech SE appeared better at blocking virus variants including alpha, beta and delta, than those produced in response to a mild case of COVID-19.

Additionally, high levels of vaccine-induced T cells, a type of white blood cell capable of finding and killing virus-infected cells, were detected after six months, ‘maintaining an additional armor to protect us,’ Wherry said.

The findings help to explain why immunization remains effective at protecting against severe COVID-19, hospitalization and death even as more breakthrough infections occur.

‘Vaccinated people are really not fueling this fire; it’s really unvaccinated people that are,’ Wherry said. ‘So that’s more reason to get vaccinated.’

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

US Investigates Moderna Jab After Data Show 2.5x Higher Risk Of Heart Inflammation | ZeroHedge

Posted by M. C. on August 21, 2021

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/us-investigates-moderna-jab-after-data-show-25x-higher-risk-heart-inflammation

Tyler Durden's Photoby Tyler Durden

The Internet’s social-media censors have been extremely vigilant at suppressing every tidbit of COVID vaccine “misinformation” that comes their way. So, as readers might imagine, drawing attention to publicly released data about the rare (but sometimes deadly) side effects associated with both mRNA and adenovirus-vector jabs has been…a challenge.

Hey @jack what happens to all those who were banned for warning about this?https://t.co/E9mFoFLqGS — zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 20, 2021

But let’s back up: over the past couple of months, health authorities in the US and Israel connected rare instances of myocarditis – that is, inflammation of the heart – to the mRNA jabs produced by Pfizer and Moderna. After a hurried secret meeting with its advisors in late June, the FDA reluctantly released a warning about a “likely association” between incidences of myocarditis and the new side effects.

And now, a new twist: On Thursday evening, the Washington Post published a report claiming that the Moderna coronavirus vaccine may be associated with a higher risk of myocarditis in younger adults than previously believed. The report relies on new data from a Canadian study that has yet to be released.

How much more dangerous is the Moderna jab than the Pfizer? Well, the preliminary data leaked to WaPo show the risk of myocarditis might be as much as 2.5x higher for the Moderna jab.

The news represents the latest bump in the road for Moderna’s high-flying stock, as patients (especially younger men in their 20s and 30s deemed at highest risk to suffer the side effect) now have an incentive to prefer Pfizer’s jab over Moderna’s (if they still have any confidence in the mRNA jabs at all, that is).

WaPo’s sources stressed that the new research hasn’t yet been concluded, and that there’s still plenty of work to be done before the FDA decides whether to attach another warning label to the Moderna jabs. The sources also claimed that the new data “are not slam bang”.

The investigation, which involves the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is focusing on Canadian data that suggests the Moderna vaccine may carry a higher risk for young people than the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, especially for males below the age of 30 or so. The authorities also are scrutinizing data from the United States to try to determine whether there is evidence of an increased risk from Moderna in the U.S. population.

The two people who described the investigation spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing review because they were not authorized to discuss it.

One of the people familiar with the review emphasized it is too early to reach a conclusion. The person said the agencies must do additional work before deciding whether to issue any kind of new or revised warning or recommendation about the situation. In June, the FDA added a warning label for the Pfizer and Moderna shots — both known as mRNA vaccines — about increased risk of myocarditis.

“We have not come to a conclusion on this,” one of the people familiar with the investigation said. “The data are not slam bang.”

The FDA and CDC both said they’re looking into the data. To be sure, WaPo notes that the side effects remain “extremely rare” – or at least “very uncommon.” Probably…

The myocarditis side effect is extremely rare and even if it is more likely in people receiving the Moderna vaccine, it probably is still very uncommon. Officials want to be careful not to cause alarm among the public, especially when officials are trying to persuade more people to be vaccinated amid a surge of cases fueled by the fast-moving delta variant.

So far, the FDA and CDC’s official position is that the threat posed by COVID is far worse than any threat posed by vaccine side effects, and that all Americans over the age of 12 should get the jab. But as with any recent scientific judgment, there are others in the community who disagree – some who believe that the risk of side effects for young people might just outweigh the risk of harm from contracting COVID, which – as we have reviewed before – is virtually nil.

“There might be a 2.5 times higher incidence of myocarditis in those who get the Moderna vaccine compared with Pfizer’s vaccine.” Any risk at all for young people under 17 is unacceptable https://t.co/vz1REfaaj8 — Sue Cook (@SueC00K) August 20, 2021

The Internet’s social-media censors have been extremely vigilant at suppressing every tidbit of COVID vaccine “misinformation” that comes their way. So, as readers might imagine, drawing attention to publicly released data about the rare (but sometimes deadly) side effects associated with both mRNA and adenovirus-vector jabs has been…a challenge.
Hey @jack what happens to all those who were banned for warning about this?https://t.co/E9mFoFLqGS
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 20, 2021
But let’s back up: over the past couple of months, health authorities in the US and Israel connected rare instances of myocarditis – that is, inflammation of the heart – to the mRNA jabs produced by Pfizer and Moderna. After a hurried secret meeting with its advisors in late June, the FDA reluctantly released a warning about a “likely association” between incidences of myocarditis and the new side effects.



And now, a new twist: On Thursday evening, the Washington Post published a report claiming that the Moderna coronavirus vaccine may be associated with a higher risk of myocarditis in younger adults than previously believed. The report relies on new data from a Canadian study that has yet to be released.
How much more dangerous is the Moderna jab than the Pfizer? Well, the preliminary data leaked to WaPo show the risk of myocarditis might be as much as 2.5x higher for the Moderna jab.
The news represents the latest bump in the road for Moderna’s high-flying stock, as patients (especially younger men in their 20s and 30s deemed at highest risk to suffer the side effect) now have an incentive to prefer Pfizer’s jab over Moderna’s (if they still have any confidence in the mRNA jabs at all, that is).
WaPo’s sources stressed that the new research hasn’t yet been concluded, and that there’s still plenty of work to be done before the FDA decides whether to attach another warning label to the Moderna jabs. The sources also claimed that the new data “are not slam bang”.
The investigation, which involves the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is focusing on Canadian data that suggests the Moderna vaccine may carry a higher risk for young people than the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, especially for males below the age of 30 or so. The authorities also are scrutinizing data from the United States to try to determine whether there is evidence of an increased risk from Moderna in the U.S. population.
The two people who described the investigation spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing review because they were not authorized to discuss it.
One of the people familiar with the review emphasized it is too early to reach a conclusion. The person said the agencies must do additional work before deciding whether to issue any kind of new or revised warning or recommendation about the situation. In June, the FDA added a warning label for the Pfizer and Moderna shots — both known as mRNA vaccines — about increased risk of myocarditis.
“We have not come to a conclusion on this,” one of the people familiar with the investigation said. “The data are not slam bang.”
The FDA and CDC both said they’re looking into the data. To be sure, WaPo notes that the side effects remain “extremely rare” – or at least “very uncommon.” Probably…
The myocarditis side effect is extremely rare and even if it is more likely in people receiving the Moderna vaccine, it probably is still very uncommon. Officials want to be careful not to cause alarm among the public, especially when officials are trying to persuade more people to be vaccinated amid a surge of cases fueled by the fast-moving delta variant.
So far, the FDA and CDC’s official position is that the threat posed by COVID is far worse than any threat posed by vaccine side effects, and that all Americans over the age of 12 should get the jab. But as with any recent scientific judgment, there are others in the community who disagree – some who believe that the risk of side effects for young people might just outweigh the risk of harm from contracting COVID, which – as we have reviewed before – is virtually nil.
“There might be a 2.5 times higher incidence of myocarditis in those who get the Moderna vaccine compared with Pfizer’s vaccine.” Any risk at all for young people under 17 is unacceptable https://t.co/vz1REfaaj8
— Sue Cook (@SueC00K) August 20, 2021

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sticks, Not Carrots: Vaccines Must Be Forced, Says Indiana University Health Chief | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on July 19, 2021

What the Indiana University chief health officer failed to mention in his case for the mass vaccination of children was that the mRNA shots are actually dangerous to that same age group.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) itself is investigating this, following a record-breaking increase in the number of adverse reactions suffered by people of all ages and a considerable increase in heart-related ailments suffered by the young and healthy following the Pfizer shots. 

https://mises.org/wire/sticks-not-carrots-vaccines-must-be-forced-says-indiana-university-health-chief

Alice Salles

Vaccine mandates are coming. Good, said Indiana University chief health officer Aaron E. Carroll. 

“When it comes to incentives, most people like carrots,” Carroll wrote in his New York Times essay. “Sometimes, though, people need sticks.”

Carroll laments the fact that incentives such as access to events, donuts, french fries, and even hard cash are no longer moving many Americans to fall in line with what’s expected of them by the vaccine pushers. 

Does he mean that only the threat of violence will? His silence on what exactly the stick would be speaks volumes.

Carroll then points to George Washington, asking, If the Revolutionary War general could force the thousands of new Continental Army recruits to inoculate against smallpox in early America’s war against the British, then why can’t we jab a nation of 383 million to fight covid?  

But a workable approach isn’t what Carroll was after. He was, however, ready to compare covid-19, a virus associated with an infection that has a 99 percent recovery rate among the young and that poses a much lower death risk than influenza among children, with more deadly ailments caused by highly contagious pathogens.

When the United States was fighting smallpox long ago, it took mandates to get enough people vaccinated. To eradicate polio, the same was true. Nearly all major infectious diseases in the country—measles, mumps, rubella, pertussis, diphtheria and more—have been managed through vaccine mandates by schools. The result is that the vast majority of children are vaccinated, and in time, they grow into adults who are vaccinated. That’s how the country achieves real herd immunity.

But this process can take decades. Covid-19 is an emergency, and we don’t have that much time.

Forcing parents to vaccinate kids against covid now, Carroll argues, might just do the trick.

It’s the Science, Stupid

What the Indiana University chief health officer failed to mention in his case for the mass vaccination of children was that the mRNA shots are actually dangerous to that same age group.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) itself is investigating this, following a record-breaking increase in the number of adverse reactions suffered by people of all ages and a considerable increase in heart-related ailments suffered by the young and healthy following the Pfizer shots. 

While the CDC is trying to downplay the issue, saying heart-related complications in children, teens, and young adults are rare and often mild, data from the US Department of Health and Human Services’ Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) paints another picture. in which hundreds of the vaccinated who suffer heart-related conditions turn up at the ER. Some are even dying as a result

In Carroll’s op-ed, he estimates that once the vaccines are fully approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), it should be easy for federal and state officials to begin imposing mandates. But what would happen to the noncompliant? While the Indiana University health chief doesn’t acknowledge that the stick analogy could be interpreted as code for violence, he doesn’t offer a different interpretation.

Despite his faith in the process, it’s important to note that a full OK from the FDA doesn’t mean much. 

Cronyism: Bad for Your Health

It’s no secret that a number of major drug companies use the state to squash competition, not help patients. 

Agencies like the CDC take sizable donations from the very pharmaceutical companies that push the drugs and treatments approved by America’s health czars, while the FDA employs advisors tasked with reviewing new drugs and treatments who are directly paid by these same companies. For example, the four physicians who were on the reviewing committee for Brilinta, a drug produced and sold by AstraZeneca,  later accepted generous cash gifts from the same drug company, causing a scandal.  

But that’s not the only way the FDA helps pharmaceutical companies.  

By putting drug makers through a drug approval process that costs $3 billion on average, the FDA “eliminates any competition from un-patentable treatments,” author Hunter Lewis pointed out in this article for the Mises Institute. That money “also flows into the salaries of FDA employees, who consequently tend to take a friendly view of drug companies and zealously guard the legal exclusivity of their products.” 

Congress is also filled with lawmakers whose political campaigns were supported by the same type of professionals. This is the case of Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-DE), who after receiving over $100,000 each in political contributions from political action committees tied to drug manufacturers in 2019 are now fighting to expand the array of items eligible to be patented, a move that would directly benefit drugmakers and companies developing medical treatments. 

With several other examples proving that the relationship between healthcare giants and Congress clearly helps to guide health policy in America, it is clear that we’re far from having a free market in healthcare. Without a free market in healthcare, how can anybody trust the FDA and the drugs its bureaucratic apparatus approves?

By giving the state yet more power to dictate our health decisions, we also hand the same large companies that fund health officials carte blanche to push experimental treatments on the young and old alike, all the while actively playing down any reports of injury, disease, or death associated with these treatments. 

If Indiana University’s chief health officer wants to give these power players even more control over his students’ health, he won’t be doing Hoosiers any favors. Instead, he will be simply serving as an enabler of tyranny. Author:

Alice Salles

Alice Salles was born and raised in Brazil but has lived in America for over ten years. She now lives in Fort Wayne, Indiana with her husband Nick Hankoff and their three children.  

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Scientific reasons for waiting to get the COVID vaccine – American Thinker

Posted by M. C. on July 9, 2021

It’s still an experimental vaccine; it doesn’t have FDA approval; and although mRNA vaccines have been studied for years, they were not used before. 

My biggest fear of the vaccine is that I can’t get any information about why mRNA vaccines were not used before COVID.  I can Google plenty of information about how wonderful the vaccine is, but I can’t find anything at all about why mRNA vaccines were not approved for human trials before.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/07/scientific_reasons_for_waiting_to_get_the_covid_vaccine.html

By Pandra Selivanov

I voted for Donald Trump twice, but that has nothing to do with my hesitancy to get the vaccine.  I’m a Christian, and that has nothing to do with it, either.  Even the fact that I had COVID and should be immune doesn’t matter to me.  My reason is based on science and science alone.  It’s still an experimental vaccine; it doesn’t have FDA approval; and although mRNA vaccines have been studied for years, they were not used before. 

My biggest fear of the vaccine is that I can’t get any information about why mRNA vaccines were not used before COVID.  I can Google plenty of information about how wonderful the vaccine is, but I can’t find anything at all about why mRNA vaccines were not approved for human trials before.

There is a lot of invective directed at people who are hesitant about getting the vaccine.  I have been called a murderer for being hesitant, and I have been accused of refusing to get the vaccine because of my political leanings.  I’ve also been called a religious fanatic.  I don’t think asking about the science of mRNA vaccination means that I am a Jesus freak, a Trumpanzee, or a serial killer.  When I am called these names, it doesn’t make me think I should agree with the name-callers and run out to get the vaccine.  It makes me think that if I am being treated hatefully for asking scientific questions, there must be something wrong with the science of the vaccine.

Is mRNA unstable and likely to cause unwanted side effects?  Does it create an unacceptably strong immune response?  Was it some technical problem, like delivery system problems, that caused mRNA vaccines to be restricted?  I’m not opposed to getting the vaccine if I have reason to believe that it is safe and will not harm my health in some unforeseen fashion.

Since I can’t get any information at this time on these points, I will wait until FDA approval of the vaccine.  I’m not interested in adding to the pool of subjects that have been created by the millions who have rushed to get the vaccine.  There are enough people who have been vaccinated under emergency approval protocols.  They don’t need me to swell their ranks, nor do I need to risk my health with an experimental vaccine.  I prefer to wait until there are enough long-term data to scientifically show that the vaccine is safe. 

Pandra Selivanov is the author of The Pardon, a historical novel about the thief on the cross.  You can find that book and more great reading here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

The Spike Protein Is the Killer – Beware of mRNA “Vaccines” – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

Posted by M. C. on June 25, 2021

The spike proteins being activated in virtually every cell of the human body are overwhelming the body’s immune system, thus, fighting it, rather than enhancing it. This may lead to numerous complications and infections over time. Some of them, like blood clotting, resulting in thrombosis and other heart ailments – and death – may be immediate results after the inoculation. Other potentially fatal effects, many of neurological nature, may not show up immediately but only over time – after one, two, or three years? It will then be difficult to trace the infirmity produced by the Spike Protein back to the vaccine.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/spike-protein-killer-beware-mrna-vaccines/5748384

By Peter Koenig

Beware of the Spike Protein! Beware of mRNA injections!

To do so, you have to absolutely avoid taking or being coerced into accepting the mRNA “non-vaccine” – experimental gene therapy. Because that’s what it is. The experiment is you. Already in SARS-1 of 2002 / 2003, the original, affecting principally the Chinese genome, as did this first covid-19 virus, more appropriately called SARS-CoV-2; it addressed the Chinese DNA. Complements of Harvard’s clandestine, illegal Chinese DNA harvesting in the late 1990s and 2000. See this.

When the Harvard people finally were caught and kicked out of China, it was too late. They had already collected hundreds of thousands, if not millions of DNA samples – upon which most-likely US P4 bio-war labs manufactured this particular corona virus.

This is how Josh MIttledorf puts it:

“The spike protein is the part of the virus structure that interfaces with the host cell. SARS 1 and SARS 2 viruses both have spike proteins that bind to a human cell receptor called ACE-2, common in lung cells but also present in other parts of the body. Binding to the cell’s ACE-2 receptor is like the wolf knocking at the door of Little Red Riding Hood’s grandmother. “Hello, grandmama. I’m your granddaughter. Please let me in.” The virus is a wolf wearing a red cape and hood, pretends to be an ACE-2 enzyme molecule seeking entrance to the cell.” See this.

Covid-19, alias SARS-CoV-2, is a perfected version of SARS-1, the original one of 2002 / 2003 that hit primarily China. In early 2020, once Wuhan and much of the Hubei Province, and later other parts of China, were sealed off and under lockdown, because Chinese scientists reacted fast to what they immediately knew, this was a new attempt at attacking China, the Chinese health system – the Chinese population. The Chinese authorities were called dictatorial – and followed by the usual denigrations – but they were successful in containing the virus and in dominating it, keeping the damage it caused within boundaries.

Due to these various lockdowns and other hygienic and health measures, close to 80% of the Chinese manufacturing capacity was closed, which had an enormous impact on the rest of the world, depending on Chinese supply chains. Thanks to China’s severe measures to overcome the pandemic as quickly and health-efficiently as possible, China’s economy was up and running again within about six to eight months, and practically to full capacity by the end of 2020.

The inventor of the mRNA-type of vaccine, Dr. Robert Malone, says that the vaccine causes lipid nanoparticles to accumulate in different organ tissues, and specially “in high concentration” in ovaries, meaning, it causes infertility and / or often miscarriages in pregnant women. See this – including a 15 min. video interview with Dr. Malone and evolutionary biologist Dr. Bret Weinstein. What makes the mRNA “non-vaccine”, better called by its CDC assigned name – experimental gene-therapy – so dangerous, is that it produces spike proteins throughout every cell in the human body.

The cause for this rapid and often deadly proliferation of the spike protein is what Dr. Jane Ruby, medical expert and pharmaceutical researcher, calls “Magnetofection”, an aggressive magnetic gel delivery system, included in the injection – to transport the spike protein in “warp speed” into every cell of the human body.

The German manufacturer, Chemicell GmbH, Berlin (see this) of this special magnetic gel says it’s not for use in humans. Yet, Moderna and Pfizer are using it in their mRNA experimental gene-therapy, about which they lie and call it falsely “vaccine”. – Watch Dr. Jane Ruby’s 9 min video here.

This magnetofection transport system is so powerful, that people, who got their jab, were able to stick magnets on their body. The COVID “non-vaccine” injected lipid nanoparticles tell the body to produce the spike protein. Thanks to the magnetic gel, they rapidly leave the injection site and accumulate in organs and tissues. See this by Dr. Alex Pierson.

The spike proteins being activated in virtually every cell of the human body are overwhelming the body’s immune system, thus, fighting it, rather than enhancing it. This may lead to numerous complications and infections over time. Some of them, like blood clotting, resulting in thrombosis and other heart ailments – and death – may be immediate results after the inoculation. Other potentially fatal effects, many of neurological nature, may not show up immediately but only over time – after one, two, or three years? It will then be difficult to trace the infirmity produced by the Spike Protein back to the vaccine.

In a compelling 1-minute video, Dr. Mike Yeadon, former Pfizer Vice President and Chief of Science, warns, Everyone who takes the experimental vaccine cannot escape death”. See this.

We can only hope that these “compromised” mostly western governments will come to their senses and realize in time what they are doing to the very populations that elected them – and are paying for their livelihood.

If these so-called “world leaders” – imagine, 193 UN member governments follow the same script – something is not quite right, does not fit the agenda of health protection, but fits rather an evil plan against humanity – if these “world leaders” continue following the dictates of their dark satanic masters, they may end up in a Nuremberg 2.0 kind of Court of Justice for crimes against humanity.

Dr. Reiner Füllmich, German-American lawyer and leading member of the German Corona Investigative Committee, has already filed several lawsuits, including class action suits in Canada and the US, and initiated legal prosecution against individuals and institutions mostly in Europe. See the video below – Crimes against Humanity – and this.

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/zlVZoZ68Q5Iq/

Sociologist, philosopher, teacher and writer, Ed Curtin, had this to say:

I know that the experimental mRNA “vaccines” that are being pushed on everyone are not traditional vaccines but dangerous experiments whose long-term consequences are unknown. And I know that Moderna says its messenger RNA (mRNA) non-vaccine “vaccine” functions “like an operating system on a computer” and that Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA vaccine technology, says that the lipid nanoparticles from the injections travel throughout the body and settle in large quantities in multiple organs where the spike protein, being biologically active, can cause massive damage and that the FDA has known this.

Additionally, I know that tens of thousands of people have suffered adverse effects from these injections and many thousands have died from them and that these figures are greatly underestimated due to the reporting systems.  I know that with this number of casualties in the past these experimental shots would have been stopped long ago or never started.  That they have not, therefore, convinces me that a radically evil agenda is under way whose goal is harm not health because those in charge know what I know and much more. See full text of Ed’s essay here.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he has worked for over 30 years on water and environment around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A Vaxxing Question – OffGuardian

Posted by M. C. on May 4, 2021

Moreover, why on earth aren’t people tested for prior immunity before taking any vaccination considering the concerns associated with over-immunization?

It would be hard to see therefore how vaccine efficacy could be determined if those taking the vaccine had not been tested for prior immunity or if those on trials were only ‘suspected’ of having had the disease, without having had a test to confirm it.

https://off-guardian.org/2021/05/03/a-vaxxing-question/

Suzie Halewood

In 1956 German pharmaceutical company Chemie Grünenthal GmbH, licensed a new experimental drug designed to treat colds, flu, nausea and morning sickness. Known as Distaval in the UK, Distillers Biochemicals Ltd declared the drug could ‘be given with complete safety to pregnant women and nursing mothers without adverse effect on mother or child’ – a basic pre-requisite for licensing a drug.

While forty-nine countries licensed the drug under multiple different names, the then head of the FDA Dr. Frances Kelsey, a physician-pharmacologist with a profound interest in fetal development, refused authorization for use in the US market due to her concerns about the lack of evidence regarding the drug’s safety.

The drug was also known as Thalidomide.

Sixty-five years on and the stringent safety measures brought in to avoid another scandal on the scale of Thalidomide have been swept aside in order to fast track the approval of experimental mRNA vaccines. This is in spite of concerns voiced by (among others) Dr Wolfgang Wodarg and Dr Michael Yeadon who petitioned the European Medical Agency (EMA) with a Administrative/Regulatory Stay Of Action in regard to the BioNtech/Pfizer study on BNT162b – not just in regard to concerns about pregnant women, the foetus and infertility – but also in regard to the effect of the mRNA vaccines on those with prior immunity, for whom immunization could lead to a hyperinflammatory response, a cytokine storm, and a generally dysregulation of the immune system that allows the virus to cause more damage to their lungs and other organs of their body.

No previous research into treating illness or disease with messenger RNA or mRNA vaccines has been successful and this is the first time mRNA vaccines have been used on humans.

The concerns of Yeadon, Wodarg and others appear to be borne out by data from the King’s College Zoe app that records adverse events from the mRNA vaccines. Taken from a pool of 700,000, data reveals that 12.2% of those vaccinated with the Pfizer jab experienced adverse events or side effects, a number which tripled to 35.7% for those with prior immunity. Adverse events from the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab were already high at 31.9% but increased to 52.7% for people with immunity.

Ellie Barnes, professor of hepatology and immunology at Oxford University and a member of the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium referred to the discovery – that when you’ve had a COVID-19 infection your T-cells become activated and become memory T cells – as ‘emerging’ as though this was something revelatory. Yet the dangers of over-immunization had been flagged up multiple times and well before vaccine rollout.

It gets worse.

In spite of additional research from New York’s Mount Sinai Hospital and the University of Maryland which indicated that those who had previously developed Covid-19 were effectively already immune and wouldn’t need a second dose (arguably they didn’t need the first dose if they already had immunity), Eleanor Riley, professor of infectious diseases at Edinburgh University said that ‘Incorporating this into a mass vaccination program, may be logistically complex’, adding ‘it may be safer overall to ensure everyone gets two doses’.

May be safer? Many in the study group had already had an adverse event from the first dose, so how could it be ‘safer’ when second doses have been shown to increase the adversity of an event.

And how is it logistically complex to notify those who have already experienced an adverse event? The medical data of the 700,000 patients has already been logged into the Zoe App system, otherwise the Zoe App wouldn’t be able to differentiate between those with or without prior immunity. Therefore, those with prior immunity from having had Covid-19 – or those for whom an adverse event would perhaps indicate prior immunity – can be notified that there is no need for a second dose.

Moreover, why on earth aren’t people tested for prior immunity before taking any vaccination considering the concerns associated with over-immunization?

Alarming data is also emerging from the Yellow Card Scheme.

Set up following the Thalidomide scandal, it allows both doctors and patients to record adverse medical events from drugs and vaccines circulating in the UK market. Up to and including 29 April 2021, the MHRA via Yellow Card Reporting received 149,082 suspected reactions from the COVID-19 mRNA Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (from Dec 9 onwards) and 573,650 suspected reactions from the COVID-19 Oxford University/AstraZeneca (from Jan 4 onwards).

As of 29/4/21, the death toll from both vaccines stands at 1045. With 685 of those deaths from the AstraZeneca vaccine since Jan 4, that equates to 5.9 deaths per day for AstraZeneca alone. Deaths from COVID-19 on Monday 26th April stood at 6. And the data doesn’t cover all those vaccinated. Only 3-5 cards per 1,000 of doses (0.3-0.6%) administered have been filed (10% reported side effects during trials) which may indicate that many people are unaware of the existence of the Yellow Card Scheme and that therefore adverse events are being underreported.

The current mRNA vaccine take-up suggests many believe the vaccines will prevent transmission and that the 90-95% vaccine efficacy reported by the BBC equates to a high chance of prevention. These figures are taken from the FDA’s report on the efficacy of the mRNA Pfizer vaccine, which itself refers to the potential of reduction of the viral load – i.e. symptomatic COVID-19 – not transmission. It does not mean that 95% of people vaccinated are protected from contracting the virus, something The Lancet refers to as ‘a misconception’.

Even the 90-95% claim of reduction in viral load is questioned by a BMJ report (and others), which estimates the mRNA vaccine’s efficacy in the reduction of COVID-19 symptoms to be more within the 19-29% range – less than the 35% efficacy of dexamethasone used by the NHS.

This appears to be backed up by further reporting from Shahriar Zehtabchi, MD who explains why ‘suspected but unconfirmed’ COVID-19 cases cannot clarify which study patients had the disease in any group.

It would be hard to see therefore how vaccine efficacy could be determined if those taking the vaccine had not been tested for prior immunity or if those on trials were only ‘suspected’ of having had the disease, without having had a test to confirm it. The mRNA vaccines are also predominantly for those with high risk of complications from COVID-19 which – judging by ONS statistics – is a minority.

According to ONS figures, the number of those under sixty-five with no serious underlying health issues who died ‘due’ to Covid-19 in 2020 was 1,549. For the healthy 30-year-old age group (i.e. those with no serious underlying health issues), taking the experimental mRNA vaccine would be the statistical equivalent of 164,125 people jumping off a cliff because a hungry bear was approaching. The bear only wants one meal and he’s going to get the slowest runner. If you are fit, you have little to no chance of the bear getting you. Jumping off the cliff however can lead to injury or death. It is a leap into the unknown. As are the mRNA vaccines.

Yet there are still those who believe they need a vaccination in order to travel. Not so. Greece, Cyprus, Portugal, France, Austria and Israel are the first to announce they will accept proof of antibodies and/or a negative COVID-19 test in order to visit. Furthermore, the vaccinated will also need to show proof of a COVID-19 negative test, presumably because there are still doubts from these countries and others as to the efficacy levels of the vaccines in regard to transmission. Not even British Airways demands proof of vaccination. The airline was quick off the blocks to offer a subsidized £33 online Covid-test for those planning to travel. After the financial losses of lockdown, most airlines and countries will no doubt follow suit. Demand is what fuels the market.

Not that any of the above will slow down the UK Government’s manic roll out of the vaccine drive to the next 40-49-year-old target range of guinea-pigs. Do the majority of these 40-49-year-olds need the mRNA vaccine? Not according to WHO and ONS data. For a healthy 40-49 year old, the chances of dying from COVID-19 is 1 in 46,242. Will this next target range group be put off by the fact so many doctors and healthcare workers are refusing to take the vaccine? They should be.

It took five years after the initial licensing of Thalidomide before anyone realised Thalidomide crossed the placental barrier and caused serious birth defects, a discovery hampered by the fact the drug had been marketed under multiple different names across 49 countries. It took a further five years to mount a legal challenge. Nobody was found guilty. Not until the mid-seventies following a fierce moral crusade by the late, great investigative journalist and editor Harold Evans (who referred to investigative journalism as ‘attacking the devil’) did the families of those children who died or who were born with limb, eye and heart problems receive commensurate compensation. Fifty years later, Chemie Grünenthal GmbH apologised. Evans believed the Thalidomide scandal was a lesson in how a government can betray its duty. They’re still doing it.

Chief Executive of the MHRA Dr. June Raine was ‘delighted’ to approve the AstraZeneca vaccine for use on the citizens of the UK. ‘No stone is left unturned when it comes to our assessments’ she said. That there had been ‘a robust and thorough assessment of all the available data’ and that her staff had ‘worked tirelessly to ensure we continue to make safe vaccines available to people across the UK’.

I doubt Dr. Frances Kelsey would see it that way. Or Harold Evans.

Suzie Halewood is a mathematician and filmmaker

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ Are Gene Therapy

Posted by M. C. on March 16, 2021

The reason for masks forever even if you take the “vaccine”.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/16/mrna-vaccine-gene-therapy.aspx

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola

Story at-a-glance

  • By referring to COVID-19 vaccines as “vaccines” rather than gene therapies, the U.S. government is violating its 15 U.S. Code Section 41, which regulates deceptive practices in medical claims
  • The mRNA injections are gene therapies that do not fulfill a single criteria or definition of a vaccine
  • COVID-19 “vaccines” do not impart immunity or inhibit transmissibility of the disease. They only are designed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you get infected. As such, these products do not meet the legal or medical definition of a vaccine
  • Since a vast majority of people who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 have no symptoms at all, they’ve not even been able to establish a causal link between the virus and the clinical disease
  • By calling this experimental gene therapy technology a “vaccine,” they are circumventing liability for damages that would otherwise apply

Did you know that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines aren’t vaccines in the medical and legal definition of a vaccine? They do not prevent you from getting the infection, nor do they prevent its spread. They’re really experimental gene therapies.

I discussed this troubling fact in a recent interview with molecular biologist Judy Mikovits, Ph.D. While the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots are labeled as “vaccines,” and news agencies and health policy leaders call them that, the actual patents for Pfizer’s and Moderna’s injections more truthfully describe them as “gene therapy,” not vaccines.

Definition of ‘Vaccine’

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,1 a vaccine is “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.” Immunity, in turn, is defined as “Protection from an infectious disease,” meaning that “If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.”

Neither Moderna nor Pfizer claim this to be the case for their COVID-19 “vaccines.” In fact, in their clinical trials, they specify that they will not even test for immunity.

Unlike real vaccines, which use an antigen of the disease you’re trying to prevent, the COVID-19 injections contain synthetic RNA fragments encapsulated in a nanolipid carrier compound, the sole purpose of which is to lessen clinical symptoms associated with the S-1 spike protein, not the actual virus. 

They do not actually impart immunity or inhibit transmissibility of the disease. In other words, they are not designed to keep you from getting sick with SARS-CoV-2; they only are supposed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you do get infected.

As such, these products do not meet the legal or medical definition of a vaccine, and as noted by David Martin, Ph.D., in the video above, “The legal ramifications of this deception are immense.”

15 U.S. Code Section 41

As explained by Martin, 15 U.S. Code Section 41 of the Federal Trade Commission Act2 is the law that governs advertising of medical practices. This law, which dictates what you may and may not do in terms of promotion, has for many years been routinely used to shut down alternative health practitioners and companies.

“If this law can be used to shut down people of good will, who are trying to help others,” Martin says, “it certainly should be equally applied when we know deceptive medical practices are being done in the name of public health.”

Per this law, it is unlawful to advertise:

“… that a product or service can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made.”3

What Constitutes ‘The Greater Good’?

Martin points to the 1905 Supreme Court ruling in Jacobson vs. Massachusetts,4 which essentially established that collective benefit supersedes individual benefit. To put it bluntly, it argued that it’s acceptable for individuals to be harmed by public health directives provided it benefits the collective.

Now, if vaccination is a public health measure that is supposed to protect and benefit the collective, then it would need to a) ensure that the individual who is vaccinated is rendered immune from the disease in question; and b) that the vaccine inhibits transmission of the disease.

Only if these two outcomes can be scientifically proven can you say that vaccination protects and benefits the collective — the population as a whole. This is where we run into problems with the mRNA “vaccines.”

Moderna’s SEC filings, which Martin claims to have carefully reviewed, specifies and stresses that its technology is a “gene therapy technology.” Originally, its technology was set up to be a cancer treatment, so more specifically, it’s a chemotherapy gene therapy technology.

As noted by Martin, who would raise their hand to receive prophylactic chemotherapy gene therapy for a cancer you do not have and may never be at risk for? In all likelihood, few would jump at such an offer, and for good reason.

Moreover, states and employers would not be able to mandate individuals to receive chemotherapy gene therapy for a cancer they do not have. It simply would not be legal. Yet, they’re proposing that all of humanity be forced to get gene therapy for COVID-19.

Click here to learn more

COVID-19 Vaccines — A Case of False Advertising

Now, if the COVID-19 vaccine really isn’t a vaccine, why are they calling it that? While the CDC provides a definition of “vaccine,” the CDC is not the actual law. It’s an agency empowered by the law, but it does not create law itself. Interestingly enough, it’s more difficult to find a legal definition of “vaccine,” but there have been a few cases. Martin provides the following examples:

• Iowa code — “Vaccine means a specially prepared antigen administered to a person for the purpose of providing immunity.” Again, the COVID-19 vaccines make no claim of providing immunity. They are only designed to lessen symptoms if and when you get infected.

• Washington state code — “Vaccine means a preparation of a killed or attenuated living microorganism, or fraction thereof …” Since Moderna and Pfizer are using synthetic RNA, they clearly do not meet this definition.

Being a manmade synthetic, the RNA used is not derived from anything that has at one point been alive, be it a whole microorganism or a fraction thereof. The statute continues to specify that a vaccine “upon immunization stimulates immunity that protects us against disease …”

So, in summary, “vaccine” and “immunity” are well-defined terms that do not match the end points specified in COVID-19 vaccine trials. The primary end point in these trials is: “Prevention of symptomatic COVID-19 disease.” Is that the same as “immunity”? No, it is not.

There Are More Problems Than One

But there’s another problem. Martin points out that “COVID-19 disease” has been defined as a series of clinical symptoms. Moreover, there’s no causal link between SARS-CoV-2, the virus, and the set of symptoms known as COVID-19.

How is that, you might ask? It’s simple, really. Since a vast majority of people who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 have no symptoms at all, they’ve not been able to establish a causal link between the virus and the clinical disease.

Here’s yet another problem: The primary end point in the COVID-19 vaccine trials is not an actual vaccine trial end point because, again, vaccine trial end points have to do with immunity and transmission reduction. Neither of those were measured.

What’s more, key secondary end points in Moderna’s trial include “Prevention of severe COVID-19 disease, and prevention of infection by SARS-CoV-2.” However, by its own admission, Moderna did not actually measure infection, stating that it was too “impractical” to do so.

That means there’s no evidence of this gene therapy having an impact on infection, for better or worse. And, if you have no evidence, you cannot fulfill the U.S. Code requirement that states you must have “competent and reliable scientific evidence … substantiating that the claims are true.”

Why Are They Calling Them Vaccines?

As noted by Martin, you cannot have a vaccine that does not meet a single definition of a vaccine. So, again, what would motivate these companies, U.S. health agencies and public health officials like Dr. Anthony Fauci to lie and claim that these gene therapies are in fact vaccines when, clearly, they are not?

If they actually called it what it is, namely “gene therapy chemotherapy,” most people would — wisely — refuse to take it. Perhaps that’s one reason for their false categorization as vaccines. But there may be other reasons as well.

Here, Martin strays into conjecture, as we have no proof of their intentions. He speculates that the reason they’re calling this experimental gene therapy technology a “vaccine” is because by doing so, they can circumvent liability for damages.

You’re being lied to. Your own government is violating its own laws. They have shut down practitioners around the country, time and time again, for violating what are called ‘deceptive practices in medical claims.’ Guess what? They’re doing exactly that thing. ~ David Martin, Ph.D.

As long as the U.S. is under a state of emergency, things like PCR tests and COVID-19 “vaccines” are allowed under emergency use authorization. And as long as the emergency use authorization is in effect, the makers of these experimental gene therapies are not financially liable for any harm that comes from their use.

That is, provided they’re “vaccines.” If these injections are NOT vaccines, then the liability shield falls away, because there is no liability shield for a medical emergency countermeasure that is gene therapy.

So, by maintaining the illusion that COVID-19 is a state of emergency, when in reality it is not, government leaders are providing cover for these gene therapy companies so that they can get immunity from liability.

Under the Cover of ‘Emergency’

As noted by Martin, if state governors were to lift the state of emergency, all of a sudden the use of RT PCR testing would be in violation of 15 U.S. Code FTC Act, as PCR tests are not an approved diagnostic test.

“You cannot diagnose a thing [with something] that cannot diagnose a thing,” Martin says. “That a misrepresentation. That is a deceptive practice under the Federal Trade Commission Act. And they’re liable for deceptive practices.”

Importantly, there’s no waiver of liability under deceptive practices — even under a state of emergency. This would also apply to experimental gene therapies. The only way for these gene therapies to enjoy liability shielding is if they are vaccines developed in response to a public health emergency. There is no such thing as immunity from liability for gene therapies.

Propaganda and Vaccine Rollout Run by Same Company

Martin brings up yet another curious point. The middleman in Operation Warp Speed is a North Carolina defense contractor called ATI. It controls the rollout of the vaccine. But ATI also has another type of contract with the Department of Defense, namely managing propaganda and combating misinformation.

So, the same company in charge of manipulating the media to propagate government propaganda and censor counterviews is the same company in charge of the rollout of “vaccines” that are being unlawfully promoted.

“Listen,” Martin says. “This is a pretty straight-forward situation. You’re being lied to. Your own government is violating its own laws … They have thrown this book [15 U.S. Code Section 41] on more people than we can count.

They have shut down practitioners around the country, time and time again, for violating what are called ‘deceptive practices in medical claims’ … Guess what? They’re doing exactly that thing.”

Martin urges listeners to forward his video to your state attorney, governor, representatives and anyone else that might be in a position to take affirmative action to address and correct this fraud.

Defense contractors are violating FTC law, and gene therapy companies — not vaccine manufacturers — are conducting experimental trials under deceptive medical practices. They’re making claims of being “vaccines” without clinical proof, and must be held accountable for their deceptive marketing and medical practices.

CDC Owns Coronavirus Patents

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »