Aletho News


Informed Consent Disclosure To Vaccine Trial Subjects

By Timothy Cardozo and Ronald Veazey | PubMed | December 4, 2020

Patient comprehension is a critical part of meeting medical ethics standards of informed consent in study designs.

The aim of the study was to determine if sufficient literature exists to require clinicians to disclose the specific risk that COVID-19 vaccines could worsen disease upon exposure to challenge or circulating virus.

Methods Used To Conduct The Study:

Published literature was reviewed to identify preclinical and clinical evidence that COVID-19 vaccines could worsen disease upon exposure to challenge or circulating virus. Clinical trial protocols for COVID-19 vaccines were reviewed to determine if risks were properly disclosed.

Results Of The Study:

COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated.

Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE).

This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.

Conclusions Drawn From The Study And Clinical Implications:

The specific and significant COVID-19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.


    1. Huisman W, Martina BE, Rimmelzwaan GF, Gruters RA, Osterhaus AD. Vaccine‐induced enhancement of viral infections. Vaccine. 2009;27:505‐512. – PMC – PubMed
    2. Boyoglu‐Barnum S, Chirkova T, Anderson LJ. Biology of infection and disease pathogenesis to guide RSV vaccine development. Front Immunol. 2019;10:1675. – PMC – PubMed
    3. Chen WH, Hotez PJ, Bottazzi ME. Potential for developing a SARS‐CoV receptor‐binding domain (RBD) recombinant protein as a heterologous human vaccine against coronavirus infectious disease (COVID)‐19. Human Vacc Immunother. 2020;16:1239‐1242. – PMC – PubMed
    4. Jiang S, He Y, Liu S. SARS vaccine development. Emerg Infect Dis. 2005;11:1016‐1020. – PMC – PubMed
    5. Tseng CT, Sbrana E, Iwata‐Yoshikawa N, et al. Immunization with SARS coronavirus vaccines leads to pulmonary immunopathology on challenge with the SARS virus. PLoS One. 2012;7:e35421. – PMC – PubMed

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared no conflicts of interest for this article.

© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

August 14, 2021 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

No lockdown Belarus reports COVID mortality rates similar to neighbors that imposed draconian lockdowns

By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | August 13, 2021

The country of Belarus, which imposed no legal lockdown at all throughout the entire pandemic, has released COVID mortality figures which are broadly in line with other nearby countries which imposed draconian lockdowns.

After authorities in Belarus refused to put their citizens under lockdown, the global media had a collective hissy fit, with one headline declaring, “One leader looks hell-bent on turning COVID-19 into a catastrophe for his country.”

However, while managing to avoid all the negative impacts of lockdown, the outcome of Belarus’ no lockdown policy is far from a “catastrophe.”

Newly released overall death statistics from the start of the pandemic up to March 2021 show that the death rate is similar to neighboring countries such as Latvia, Russia and Ukraine which imposed full lockdowns.

Indeed, when compared to Poland, which imposed a particularly harsh lockdown, Belarus’ mortality rate in March 2021 was significantly lower.

Belarus is similar to Sweden, which has suffered fewer than 15,000 COVID deaths despite refusing to impose a lockdown. Figures show that cases and deaths tend to fall in waves whether a lockdown is imposed or not, proving that lockdowns are totally pointless.

“Alongside places like South Dakota, Florida, Sweden and Tanzania, Belarus is an important illustration of what can be expected from COVID-19 when restrictions aren’t imposed. Like those places, we see that the outcome is basically the same as similar places where restrictions are imposed,” writes Will Jones.

“It simply isn’t the case that a whole country becomes infected if the virus is given largely free reign, as Belarus, like other no-restriction jurisdictions, shows. Even without lockdowns and vaccines the epidemic is self-limiting and comes to an end at around the same point having infected a similar number of people. Until our leaders and their advisers grasp this crucial fact about COVID-19, they will keep pursuing pointless and ineffective but deeply harmful policies.”

Don’t expect any of this to be highlighted by the mainstream media, which has parroted the provable falsehood that repeated lockdowns were to thank for ending each “wave” of COVID.

August 14, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 1 Comment

Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism ignores Palestinian rights, narrative

By Kathryn Shihadah | Israel-Palestine News | August 14, 2021

The Jerusalem Declaration on Anti-Semitism (JDA) was released in March as a progressive variant of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) “working definition” of anti-Semitism – a definition that, despite its wide acceptance, is deeply problematic.

Progressives agree that JDA is a huge improvement over IHRA. JDA acknowledges that support for the Palestinian cause is “not on the face of it” antisemitic; it also leaves room for opposition to Zionism, criticism of Israel (including use of the word “apartheid,” or a “double standard” framing), and even the BDS (boycott, divest, and sanction) movement.

But while it makes these allowances, the parameters the Jerusalem Declaration sets for that debate leave much to be desired. Many Palestinian individuals and organizations and others have published objections, some of which are referenced below (specifically, Mark Mohannad Ayyesh, writing for Al Jazeera news network, and Samer Abdelnour, writing for Al Shabaka Palestinian Policy Network.

Proponents of justice and racial equality would do well to remember that while anti-Semitism has its victims, Zionism in the last half century arguably has had more – in 2002 Israeli author Israel Shahak wrote: “In the last 40 years the number of non-Jews killed by Jews is by far greater than the number of the Jews killed by non-Jews.” Yet Palestinians are not invited to participate in mainstream dialogue about the state that was built on land stolen from them.

Two of the most common objections to the JDA definition of anti-Semitism have to do with “Palestinian hostility” toward Israel and Jews’ right to exist in Israel as equals (presumably equal to Palestinians).

1. Palestinian hostility toward Israel

In judging whether an action is anti-Semitic, the JDA authors rightly remind readers to be context-conscious. The Preamble to the Jerusalem Declaration states:

Context can include the intention behind an utterance, or a pattern of speech over time, or even the identity of the speaker, especially when the subject is Israel or Zionism.

So, for example, hostility to Israel could be an expression of an antisemitic animus, or it could be a reaction to a human rights violation, or it could be the emotion that a Palestinian person feels on account of their experience at the hands of the State.

At first glance, this statement may resonate with justice-seekers because it acknowledges the negative encounters that Palestinians may have had with the state – something the IHRA definition lacked. But hiding below the surface of these words is an implication that Palestinian hostility might be merely an emotional reaction to an incident of perceived misconduct.

JDA leaves no room for the possibility that Palestinians have over 70 years’ worth of legitimate grievances against Israel – grievances that Palestinians have identified as coming not from Jews, but from Zionism as an ideology and from Israel as a state.

In simple terms, JDA seems to recommend that Palestinian outrage is an emotional outburst that must be tolerated: ‘It’s not antisemitism – they’re just letting off steam.’

(As an aside, notice the preposterous suggestion that Palestinians may be having “a reaction to a human rights violation.” After generations of ethnic cleansing, collective punishment, and state violence, no Palestinian has been lucky enough to endure just one human rights violation.)

2. Jews’ right to exist in Israel as equals

The Jerusalem Declaration offers examples of allegedly unacceptable, anti-Semitic language that are very similar to those in the IHRA definition, including:

  • Blaming all Jews for Israel’s conduct
  • Demanding that Jews publicly denounce Zionism
  • Assuming that non-Israeli Jews are more loyal to Israel than to their home countries
  • Denying Israeli Jews the right to exist and flourish as Jews, “in accordance with the principle of equality”

This last item is problematic for Palestinians (and their allies) for several reasons.

To begin with, the statement does not define “equality.” In fact, “equality” in the context of apartheid and ethnic cleansing is nonsense.

The “right to exist and flourish” is not reciprocal. True equality and mutual flourishing would require the dismantling of Israeli apartheid as a starting point. 

Palestinian writer Samer Abdulnour sums up his objections to the supposed antisemitic statement:

The definition discusses Jewish flourishing without any acknowledgment that since the inception of Israel until the present day, this flourishing is tied to privileges that stem from [Palestinian] dispossession and military occupation, and the denial of our collective freedom and right of return—that is, our right to exist and flourish.

Mark Muhannad Ayyash points out that the JDA document assumes as non-negotiable the idea that Jews have the right to their own Jewish state – without acknowledging that this state was founded on land inhabited by indigenous Palestinians. Ayyash asks,

So how is this “principle of equality” to be secured in a context where the Israeli state must maintain Jewish sovereignty for a Jewish majority at all costs? Are Palestinians supposed to accept that the right of Jews in the State of Israel ought to take precedence over their own sovereign rights?

From the start, Palestinians rejected the creation of the state of Israel, not because it was Jewish, but because it was on their – the Palestinians’ – land. They fought the new state precisely because it denied them – the Palestinians – the right to exist and flourish as indigenous Palestinians.

The “principle of equality” was never a factor in the creation or maintenance of the state of Israel.

Ultimately, while the Jerusalem Declaration on Anti-Semitism is a step forward from the IHRA definition, it still rejects the realities of what the Jewish State has done and is still doing to the Palestinian people.

Kathryn Shihadah is an editor and staff writer for If Americans Knew

August 14, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

Lima Group Loses Lima

By Yves Engler · August 11, 2021

The Canadian instigated Lima Group has been dealt a probably fatal blow that ought to elicit serious discussion about this country’s foreign policy. But, don’t expect the media or politicians to even mention it.

In a likely death knell for a coalition seeking to overthrow the Venezuelan government, Peru’s new Foreign Affairs Minister called the Lima Group the country’s “most disastrous” ever foreign policy initiative. Héctor Béjar said, “the Lima Group must be the most disastrous thing we have done in international politics in the history of Perú.”

Two days after Béjar’s statement St Lucia’s external affairs minister, Alva Baptiste, declared: “With immediate effect, we are going to get out of the Lima Group arrangement – that morally bankrupt, mongoose gang, we are going to get out of it because this group has imposed needless hardship on the children, men and women of Venezuela.”

Prior to Baptiste and Béjar’s statements, the Lima Group had lost a handful of members and its support for Juan Guaidó’s bid to declare himself president had failed. Considering its name, the Peruvian government’s aggressive turn against the Lima Group probably marks the end of it. As Kawsachun News tweeted a Peruvian congressman noting, “the Lima Group has been left without Lima.”

The Lima Group’s demise would be a major blow to Trudeau’s foreign policy. Ottawa founded it with Peru. Amidst discussions between the two countries foreign ministers in Spring 2017, Trudeau called his Peruvian counterpart, Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, to “‎stress the need for dialogue and respect for the democratic rights of Venezuelan citizens, as enshrined in the charter of the Organization of American States and the Inter-American Democratic Charter.” But the Lima Group was established in August 2017 as a structure outside of the OAS largely because that organization’s members refused to back Washington and Ottawa’s bid to interfere in Venezuelan affairs, which they believed defied the OAS’ charter.

Canada has been maybe the most active member of the coalition. Former Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland participated in a half dozen Lima Group meetings and its second meeting was held in Toronto. That October 2017 meeting urged regional governments to take steps to “further isolate” Venezuela.

At the second Lima Group meeting in Canada, a few weeks after Juan Guaidó proclaimed himself president, Trudeau declared, “the international community must immediately unite behind the interim president.” The final declaration of the February 2019 meeting called on Venezuela’s armed forces “to demonstrate their loyalty to the interim president” and remove the elected president.

Freeland repeatedly prodded Caribbean and Central American countries to join the Lima Group and its anti-Maduro efforts. In May 2019 Trudeau called Cuban president Miguel Díaz-Canel to pressure him to join Ottawa’s effort to oust President Maduro. The release noted, “the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Lima Group, underscored the desire to see free and fair elections and the constitution upheld in Venezuela.”

In a sign of the importance Canadian diplomats placed on the Lima Group, the Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers gave Patricia Atkinson, Head of the Venezuela Task Force at Global Affairs, its Foreign Service Officers award in June 2019. The write-up explained, “Patricia, and the superb team she assembled and led, supported the Minister’s engagement and played key roles in the substance and organization of 11 meetings of the 13 country Lima group which coordinates action on Venezuela.”

Solidarity activists have protested the Lima Group since its first meeting in Toronto. There were also protests at the second Lima Group meeting in Canada, including an impressive disruption of the final press conference. At a talk last year, NDP MP Matthew Green declared “we ought not be a part of a pseudo-imperialist group like the Lima Group” while a resolution submitted (though never discussed) to that party’s April convention called for Canada to leave the Lima Group.

Hopefully the Peruvian and St Lucia governments’ recent criticism marks the end of the Lima Group. But, we should seek to ensure it doesn’t disappear quietly. We need a discussion of how Canada became a central player in this interventionist alliance.

August 14, 2021 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism | , , | 1 Comment

Canada to introduce vaccine passports for crossing provincial borders

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | August 14, 2021

Canada’s Minister for Transport Omar Alghabra announced the introduction of vaccine passports for transport across provincial borders via plane, trains, and large water vessels.

The move underscores the growing adaptation of digital vaccine passports across the globe, particularly in developed countries.

“Vaccine requirements in the transportation sector will help protect the safety of employees, their families, passengers, their communities and all Canadians. And more broadly, it will hasten Canada’s recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic,” Alghabra said during a press conference on Thursday.

For those who cannot get the jabs, the minister said they will still be able to travel by showing proof of recent negative tests.

Alghabra said that the government was looking into practical ways to implement the vaccine passes “as quickly as possible.”

Alghabra’s announcement coincided with an announcement from the Privy Council that the government would be mandating vaccination for federal employees. The employees will be required to show proof of having received both doses of the COVID-19 vaccines.

August 14, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 6 Comments

The Evolving Definition of “Vaccine” in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary for 2021

By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | August 13, 2021

The popular online dictionary,, has had the same definition for “vaccine” for several years.

Here is the definition until early to mid-January, 2021:

By January 26, 2021 it was changed to include a section on “genetic material” and mRNA:

Apparently that was not quite good enough to silence the critics who were claiming that the COVID-19 shots did not meet the definition of a “vaccine,” so it was changed again by June 1, 2021 to include examples of mRNA “vaccines” such as Moderna and Pfizer, “viral vector” vaccines such as J&J and AstraZeneca, and a completely new definition to cover some “vaccines” the military is working on: a preparation or immunotherapy that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against noninfectious substances, agents, or diseases.

I wonder what this “definition” of “vaccines” will be expanded to include next?

Noah Webster Jr. was the original founder of America’s most famous dictionary, and in 1831, George and Charles Merriam founded the company as G & C Merriam Co.

In 1964, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. acquired Merriam-Webster, Inc.

In 1996, Britannica was purchased by Jacob E. Safra, a Jewish Swiss-bank financier.

August 14, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | | 2 Comments

Board certified occupational therapist whistleblower: More patients dying from the vaccine than from COVID

By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | August 11, 2021

Abrien Aguirre is a board certified occupational therapist who recently went public with his knowledge of working in 3 COVID units in Hawaii, two of them “isolation units.” He states that he works in the largest skilled nursing facility in Oahu, working with the geriatric population.

He was interviewed by a group known as “Hawaii Free Speech News.”

His testimony was recorded at a recent outdoor protest held at the Hawaii State Capitol in Honolulu.

He starts out his testimony by saying that the media is misrepresenting what is happening with hospitalized COVID patients. He states:

The people moved to the COVID unit, didn’t have COVID. They tested positive with the PCR test, but most of them were asymptomatic and only suffering from their pre-existing conditions.

He explains how people with terminal illnesses were put on the COVID death lists, which he says is “complete fraud.”

They rolled out the Moderna mRNA experimental injections at his facility, and he says:

I’ve seen 32 elderly people pass away immediately after taking the Moderna vaccine. None of that is being talked about on the News. It doesn’t fit their narrative.

I’ve seen more people pass away from the vaccine, than I have in COVID units.

He explains that he worked as a “Director of Rehab” in one skilled nursing facility for 5 months, and he saw where the billing department would have his therapist change medical diagnosis codes from things like pulmonary disorder to COVID because of higher reimbursements. And this even happened with cases that were not only asymptomatic, but sometimes they did not even have a positive PCR test result for COVID.

It’s just fraud on every level.

Mr. Aguirre states that he has reached out to politicians to expose this fraud, including the Governor of Hawaii, and their response is silence. Not one of them has responded.

His last advice in the interview:

My advice to people: if your elderly are sick, your grandmother, your great grandmother, your mom, don’t send them to a skilled nursing facility. They’re not going to receive adequate care.

Treatment is going to be withheld from them. They’re going to be forced to wear a mask all day, and social distance.

They’re going to become depressed and want to commit suicide. Because that is what I am seeing in our facilities.

This testimony by Abrien Aguirre is one of the most damning interviews I have ever seen. Everyone should send a copy of this video to their “elected” officials, because the U.S. medical system has now become thoroughly corrupt.

Mr. Aguirre has nothing to gain, and much to lose by going public, putting his career and possibly even his life on the line to go public with this damning information.

Since politicians are complicit with these murders and crimes, it is unlikely that they will do anything about it.

But by exposing their crimes, especially those who claim they are “just doing their jobs,” we can ensure that they will most certainly be held accountable for these murders and crimes against humanity.

There is no place in Hell too hot for where most of these people are going to end up.

This is from our Rumble Channel, and it is also on our Bitchute Channel.

August 14, 2021 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, Video | , | 1 Comment