MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘SARS-CoV-2’

Erie Times E-Edition Article-Antibody testing can’t confirm if you have COVID protection

Posted by M. C. on September 3, 2021

The level of antibodies needed to provide protection isn’t known.

We are two years into what is billed as the worst epidemic to hit mankind with the main emphasis being a “vaccine”. The greatest medical minds (Fauci and Gates) have been on the “case”.

Now we are told there is no way to measure antibody levels due to Covid NATURAL immunity NOR FROM VACCINES. It makes me wonder how vaccine developers can measure anything antibody related.

This is literally unbelievable. Either the greatest 21st century medical minds (like Fauci and Gates) are inept or we just aren’t meant to know.

Then again, when the vaccinated can still get covid, can still transmit and are encouraged to wear a mask after being told the vaccine was a passport to no mask, it isn’t that hard to believe.

Don’t worry about it, by all means don’t think about it, just obey or you won’t get to go to the big game.

https://erietimes-pa-app.newsmemory.com/?publink=1f8704429_1345efb

Adrianna Rodriguez USA TODAY People would like to know whether their COVID-19 vaccine is protective enough or a previous infection will keep them safe. Experts warned that taking an antibody test isn’t a good way to find out.

The tests were designed to show whether someone was recently infected with the coronavirus – not whether they have enough immune soldiers to prevent an infection.

The level of antibodies needed to provide protection isn’t known. There are nearly 90 different antibody tests on the market, most of which measure something slightly different.

Taking a test could give people a false sense of security, health experts said, or a load of unnecessary anxiety.

‘(Antibody tests) were never developed and designed to detect or tell us anything about vaccine-induced protective immunity,’ said Dr. Elitza Theel, director of the Infectious Diseases Serology Laboratory at the Mayo Clinic.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration recommend against using antibody tests to assess immunity after COVID-19 vaccination.

As of Aug. 18, the FDA authorized nearly 90 different antibody tests to detect previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Each test varies in which antibodies it detects, how well it detects them and how it reports results.

‘There are so many antibody tests out there that look for antibodies to different antigens,’ Theel said. ‘Their performance characteristics differ … there’s a lot of variability.’

A test’s sensitivity is its ability to recognize antibodies from the virus that causes COVID-19. Antibody tests can range from 85% to 99% sensitivity. Tests vary in specificity, which shows how likely a positive result is accurate.

Not all of them look for the same antibodies. Some tests look for antibodies created from a part of the virus called the nucleocapsid protein.

These antibodies serve only as a marker of previous infection and don’t provide any kind of protection against the virus, said Dr. Reynold Panettieri, professor of medicine at Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, New Jersey.

‘It’s like a smoking gun,’ he said. ‘The bullet is the virus, the smoke from the gun is the nucleocapsid … all it (says) is you’ve gotten an exposure, but it’s not going to help you prevent infection.’

Only antibodies that prevent the virus from entering a cell provide protection from infection.

The COVID-19 vaccines help the body create antibodies to only the spike protein, which means people who have been vaccinated but not previously infected will show a negative result to a test that detects only antibodies from the nucleocapsid protein.

Some tests specifically test antibodies to the spike protein, but not all antibodies are protective.

Protective antibodies bind to the virus’s spike protein ACE2 receptor and prevent the virus from entering the cell.

‘They bind to the virus in a way that they neutralize its ability to infect the cell,’ Theel said.

Non-neutralizing antibodies may bind to other parts of the spike protein and have no effect on virus entry. Most tests don’t differentiate between the two types of antibodies.

A test that yields no spike protein antibodies doesn’t necessarily mean a person is unprotected from the virus, said Dr. Daniel Kuritzkes, chief of the division of infectious disease at Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

The body has experience producing those antibodies from the vaccine, he said. Even though there aren’t any detectable at the moment of testing, the body can quickly produce them again if it encounters the virus.

‘With any vaccine, the response you measure in the blood is going to decrease over time after vaccination because the body isn’t being constantly exposed to the foreign protein,’ Kuritzkes said. ‘But if they encounter the virus, the body can very rapidly have a recall, or a memory, response that is able to basically rush to the scene of infection and contain it.’

Even if all commercial tests were able to detect neutralizing antibodies from COVID-19 vaccines, health experts said, immunity would not be guaranteed as it’s unclear what levels ensure protection.

‘One of the biggest challenges and the reason why it’s not recommended to do post-vaccination antibody testing is because we still don’t have a defined correlate of protection,’ Theel said. ‘The higher number, the more antibodies you have. But what number is clinically significant and associated with protection? We can’t say, yet.’

Measuring antibodies captures only one part of the immune system, Theel said.

T-cells are one of the most important players in cellular immunity. Whereas protective neutralizing antibodies bind to the spike protein to prevent the virus from entering the cell, T-cells search and destroy infected cells where the virus reproduces.

The FDA authorized a test that detects a T-cell immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in March, but it’s not widely available.

‘So it would be a mistake for someone to measure an antibody response five or six months after the vaccine as not having immunity because your T-cell response is going to peak at that time, (and) it’s going to be more robust in generating immunity,’ Panettieri said.

Kuritzkes said Americans shouldn’t depend on antibody tests to assess immunity after COVID-19 vaccination, but there are a few exceptions. One includes people who have an immunocompromising condition or take immune suppressing medications.

If a spike protein antibody test yields no antibodies in a person who has a compromised immune system a month after getting fully vaccinated, it’s safer to assume that person did not build a sufficient immune response from the vaccine.

‘In that situation, people need to be concerned that they may be susceptible to COVID-19 and should continue to take precautions such as wearing masks when they’re out and about and avoid large gatherings,’ Kuritzkes said.

Health and patient safety coverage at USA TODAY is made possible in part by a grant from the Masimo Foundation for Ethics, Innovation and Competition in Healthcare. The Masimo Foundation does not provide editorial input. Most tests on market measure something slightly different

Be seeing you

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

Caution Regarding Red Cross Blood Donation – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 30, 2021

I have had a mild curiosity about what else happens to my blood samples at the local lab.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/07/no_author/caution-regarding-red-cross-blood-donation/

Writes my friend:

Hi Lew,

I donated blood to the Red Cross a few weeks ago.  Today I got an email from someone at the Red Cross inviting me to take a survey on Covid-19.  When I followed the link for the survey I was shocked to see the following:

We are contacting you because you tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (i.e. we did not detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in your blood). Antibodies generally are detectable if one has been infected with the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 in the past or received a COVID-19 vaccine.

This bothers me on several points.  First, is this an initial step towards using the Red Cross to persuade me to take the vaccine?  Second, this seems to be an invasion of privacy.  Third, it makes me wonder who else they have shared this information with.

I didn’t go any further with the survey.  I will no longer donate blood to the Red Cross.

Be seeing you

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

CDC to Withdraw Emergency Use Authorization for RT PCR Test Because It Cannot Distinguish Between SARS-CoV-2 and the Flu

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2021

https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/cdc-to-withdraw-emergency-use-authorization-for-rt-pcr-test-because-it-cannot-distinguish-between-sars-cov-2-and-the-flu/

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

The CDC quietly announced last week that it was withdrawing its request to the FDA for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Most of the public is probably unaware that similar to the current COVID-19 injections that are not yet approved by the FDA, but only given Emergency Use Authorization, so too the hundreds of diagnostic tests that supposedly detect COVID-19 are also NOT approved by the FDA, but only authorized via an EUA.

What is the reason the CDC is withdrawing its EUA request for the Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel?

In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test.

CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. (Source.)

Caitlin McFall, writing for Fox News, is the only one in the corporate media I could find that even reported this, and the few reports I found in the Alternative media so far have been mostly inaccurate.

McFall reports:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) urged labs this week to stock clinics with kits that can test for both the coronavirus and the flu as the “influenza season” draws near.

The CDC said Wednesday it will withdrawal its request for the “Emergency Use Authorization” of real-time diagnostic testing kits, which were used starting in February 2020 to detect signs of the coronavirus, by the end of the year.

“CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives,” the agency said.

The U.S. has reported more than 34.4 million cases of the coronavirus since the pandemic began in 2020 and more than 610,000 deaths.

But while cases of COVID-19 soared nationwide, hospitalizations and deaths caused by influenza dropped.

According to data released by the CDC earlier this month, influenza mortality rates were significantly lower throughout 2020 than previous years.

There were 646 deaths relating to the flu among adults reported in 2020, whereas in 2019 the CDC estimated that between 24,000 and 62,000 people died from influenza-related illnesses.

The CDC urged laboratories to “save both time and resources” by introducing kits that can determine and distinguish a positive test for the coronavirus and flu. (Source.)

So there you have it. The CDC just basically admitted that many of the COVID-19 cases this past year could not be distinguished from “flu cases.” No wonder flu cases decreased to zero in so many places. See:

Health Officials Admit that Only Those Vaccinated for the Flu are Getting the Flu This Year

The ending of the EUA for the Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel will not happen until the end of the year, December 31, 2021, and the CDC recommends that laboratories start transitioning to other types of COVID-19 diagnostic tests that have been given an EUA by the FDA here.

At the time of publication of this article, the FDA has issued 251 EUAs for COVID-19 diagnostic tests since April 1, 2020. The vast majority of them are for the RT-PCR tests, including about 20 that were just issued EUAs since the beginning of this month, July, 2021.

The cash cow for these tests and the hundreds of companies that got rich selling them will now have to move on to the next phase to be able to cash in.

Diagnostic Testing Fraud: Controlling the Masses and Medical Kidnapping

We have been covering the corruption in the medical diagnostic testing field for the better part of a decade now, and we exposed it early on in the COVID-19 Plandemic last year as well.

Here are some of our previous articles from last year exposing the fraud of COVID-19 diagnostic testing.

Not a Single COVID-19 Test is FDA Approved – Do We Really Know Who has COVID-19 and Who Does Not?

Roche CEO: COVID19 Tests “Not Worth Anything – Two of us could do it Overnight in the Garage”

FAIL: The Exact Same COVID Test will Produce Different Results Depending on the Laboratory

When we started MedicalKidnap.com back in 2014, we learned that fraudulent diagnostic testing was a common way for doctors and hospitals to order children be removed from their homes.

Often they create false drug test positive results to remove children from their parents.

Alabama Lab Owner Arrested for Falsifying Results of Drug Tests Used to Medically Kidnap Children

The worst offender, by far, in medically kidnapping children by use of a medical diagnostic test, is within the field of radiology and finding “proof” of child abuse simply by looking at x-rays.

This whole field has developed a recent new class of pediatricians “certified” as “Child Abuse Pediatricians,” and the lucrative jobs of these doctors depend on them finding abused children and putting them into the lucrative child trafficking network known as “foster care.”

We have actually published an eBook on this topic, or you can look up individual cases on our MedicaKidnap.com website to learn how this evil system works.

When it comes to diagnosing “influenza,” we have exposed the fraud there as well, as pre-COVID-19 the CDC simply used estimates of cases of the flu, since they cannot verify actual numbers each year by diagnostic testing.

Annual Flu Deaths Scam Unwittingly Exposed and Replaced by the COVID Deaths Scam

So COVID-19 allowed them to just further exploit the fraud of diagnostic testing to create fear and panic, and achieve their goals of enslaving the public and rolling out their experimental mRNA injections.

With this latest announcement by the CDC that they are now going to retire the RT-PCR Diagnostic tests and replace them with other tests that can now test both COVID and influenza, it is pretty easy to see what their game plan is for later this year.

Just about everyone in the U.S. will be able to be tested “positive” for something by this Fall when the flu season starts.

This will be the “Hegelian principle” implementation for 2021. The government creates the problem, and then they create the solution, which we know now is more “vaccines” for everything in life that ails us, and try to punish those who don’t want to play their game.

I’m ready. Are you?

Be seeing you

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

If You’ve Had Covid You’re Likely Protected for Life – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 3, 2021

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/07/joseph-mercola/if-youve-had-covid-youre-likely-protected-for-life/

By Joseph Mercola

Mercola.com

If you’ve had COVID-19, even a mild case, major congratulations to you as you’ve more than likely got long-term immunity, according to a team of researchers from Washington University School of Medicine.1 In fact, you’re likely to be immune for life, as is the case with recovery from many infectious agents — once you’ve had the disease and recovered, you’re immune, most likely for life.

The evidence is strong and promising, and should be welcome and comforting news to a public that has spent the last year in a panic over SARS-CoV-2. Big surprise (not) that this message is not being shared by our public health authorities! The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) — the foremost agency tasked with protecting Americans’ health and safety — refuses to get the word out.

Instead, they’re still encouraging those who have probable natural COVID-19 immunity to get vaccinated, even while admitting that it’s rare to get sick again if you’ve already had COVID-19.2 The most obvious reason is that it would conflict with their primary objective, which is to get as many immunized with the COVID jab as possible.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

Was the Whole Pandemic About the Vaccine? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on June 8, 2021

Mass vaccinating children and women of childbearing age against COVID-19 is a profoundly bad idea that could cause mass infertility if the COVID jab triggers an immune reaction against syncytin-1.

McCullough points out that a number of countries are already talking about making the as-yet unlicensed COVID-19 vaccine compulsory, meaning anyone and everyone can be forced to take it against their will. “That’s how bad stakeholders want vaccination,” McCullough says. “They do want a needle in every arm. But why?” That’s the million-dollar question right there.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/06/joseph-mercola/was-the-whole-pandemic-about-the-vaccine/

By Joseph Mercola

Mercola.com

In my opinion Dr. Peter McCullough is one of the most courageous well credentialed academic physicians out there and I hope to interview him soon. He is vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center and despite his impeccable credentials, he has been vilified for stating during the very beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, that it was all about the vaccine and getting a global mass vaccination campaign underway.

“All roads lead to the vaccine,” McCullough said in a recent interview (video above1,2), with stakeholders banking on countries mandating the vaccine worldwide. The first video above is a 16-minute outtake from a much longer interview, which is the second video.3

McCullough points out that a number of countries are already talking about making the as-yet unlicensed COVID-19 vaccine compulsory, meaning anyone and everyone can be forced to take it against their will. “That’s how bad stakeholders want vaccination,” McCullough says. “They do want a needle in every arm. But why?” That’s the million-dollar question right there.

Unbelievable Incentives Offered

Recent weeks have seen a significant rise in all sorts of vaccination incentives in the U.S., from free doughnuts, cake,4 french fries, hot dogs and pizza,5 to arcade tokens,6 10-cent beer,7 free state park season passes,8 free Uber and Lyft rides,9 free marijuana10 and Cincinnati Reds baseball tickets,11 a chance to win a full scholarship12 and even $1 million13 and $5 million14 giveaways. Below is a more complete list of incentives, posted on vaccines.gov.15

To say the vaccine push has an air of desperation about it would be a profoundly serious understatement.

Considering the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) has logged more deaths following COVID-19 vaccination than all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 201316 — a period of 15 1/2 years — one has to wonder why our leaders are so insistent on everyone getting these experimental gene therapies.

They’re even pushing for former COVID-19 patients to get the jab, even though they already have superior permanent immunity17 and studies show they have a far higher risk of severe side effects from the COVID jab.18

If it’s really about protecting the public against COVID-19, why aren’t recovered COVID patients — whose protection is far superior to vaccine-induced immunity — offered some sort of immunity passport or granted access to sporting events or education that is now only granted to those with vaccine certificates?

What’s more, North Carolina has now passed legislation that allows children as young as 12 to get the COVID vaccine without parental consent.19 Think about that. As of May 21, 2021, 4,406 Americans had died after the COVID vaccine,20 including three teenagers,21,22,23,24 and 12-year-olds are now being encouraged to make a life and death decision without their parents?

As noted by McCullough, historically, the threshold at which an experimental vaccine program is shut down is 25 to 50 deaths, yet here we are, with over 4,000 deaths being reported in the U.S. and many thousands more in Europe.25,26

In a recent report, the Israeli People Committee, a civilian body of health experts, similarly concluded that “there has never been a vaccine that has harmed as many people.”27

After vaccinating 45 million with the pandemic swine flu vaccine in 1976, the U.S. stopped the program after only 25 deaths.28 (The number of deaths reported after the 1976 inoculation program varies from three to 53, depending on the source.29,30,31,32) And let’s remember this too: If something goes wrong, the vaccine manufacturers are completely indemnified against lawsuits. You’re on your own.

Mass Vaccination Is a Beyond Terrible Strategy

As a physician, McCullough is no longer recommending this vaccine, and other prominent virologists and physicians are calling for a stop to the program. Sadly, many are complying simply because they’re desperate to get back to the “normal” they knew before, of sending their children to school, keeping their job and leading the life they had before the pandemic.

Don’t do it, McCullough says — don’t fall for this trap because it’s only going to make things worse. By vaccinating everyone against a very narrow spectrum of immunity — the original SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which has since mutated in any number of ways and no longer exists — “we are setting ourselves up for a superbug that’s going to wipe out populations,” he says.

See the rest here

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 »