EU accuses Russia of ‘unprecedented’ referendum interference
RT | October 21, 2024
Brussels has accused Moscow of pressuring Moldova over its EU integration referendum and presidential election on Sunday.
A constitutional amendment which sets the goal of eventually joining the European Union is poised to pass by a razor-thin margin. Russia has called the vote unfree and described it as suspicious.
On Monday, EU spokesman Peter Stano said, “We noted that this vote took place under unprecedented interference and intimidation by Russia and its proxies aiming to destabilize the democratic processes.”
Early results reported by Moldovan election officials indicated a slight majority of votes cast against the constitutional amendment proposed by pro-Western President Maia Sandu, who is running for a second term in office. During counting overnight, the pro-integration vote pulled into the lead.
Sandu declared victory on the issue after 98.6% of the votes were counted, with preliminary results showing 50.27% of the vote cast in favor and 49.73% against. Moldovan citizens residing in Western nations, whose ballots were counted last, reportedly tipped the balance in favor of the initiative.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Monday that the dynamics of the tally were “difficult to explain.”
“Any observers with basic understanding of political processes can attest to those anomalies with the vote count,” Peskov said. He added that considering Chisinau’s crackdown on the opposition, the reported outcome was significant.
Moscow previously claimed that the Moldovan government restricted the ability of citizens living in Russia to participate in the vote. Only two polling stations worked in the country, with 5,000 ballots available at each, while an estimated 500,000 Moldovan citizens live in Russia, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said earlier this month.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) praised Moldovan officials for the organization of the election, but acknowledged that it had issues with opposition representation. The conditions “did not provide the contestants with a level playing field,” Urszula Gacek, the head of the body’s observer mission, said on Monday.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen visited Moldova earlier this month to meet with Sandu and announce an EU plan to invest €1.8 billion ($1.95bn) in the country’s economy between 2025 and 2027. She urged Moldovans to vote for the president’s proposal.
Moldovan election observer tells RT she was ‘openly threatened’ at polling station in EU nation
RT | October 21, 2024
An observer at a Moldovan presidential election polling station in the central Italian city of Perugia has told RT she faced threats from the local election committee.
On Sunday, Moldovans at home and abroad voted for their new leader in an election that also involved a referendum on whether to include the nation’s EU aspirations in its constitution.
The observer, Larisa Brunescu, told RT by phone that election officials had allowed her into the polling station, but wanted to force her out once she tried to film what was going on inside.
“They told me I should not send any videos, [record] conversations, [send] figures, nothing,” Brunescu, who represents the Renaissance Party of former Prime Minister Vasile Tarlev, said.
According to Brunescu, at one point, she was told that the documents allowing her to be an observer were “not OK” and that she should leave.
The committee claimed her documents were not “filled out properly,” Brunescu said, which she denied. Election officials “were openly threatening” her, she added.
According to Brunescu, the committee also tried to prevent her from taking photos, and insisted that she could only report figures which they would provide. The officials looked at her “like dogs,” she added.
The actions of the committee members “speak of some serious irregularities,” Brunescu believes. She claimed that she counted fewer than 1,000 voters at the polling station, though the committee had “4,000 ballots.”
“They can rig the ballots,” she added, while acknowledging that she did not see the committee actually doing so.
Earlier on Sunday, Moldova’s opposition Victory alliance accused the authorities of allowing massive violations at the polling stations, claiming that hundreds of irregularities were reported during the first half of the day. The political bloc also stated that observers were outright banned from accessing some polling stations both at home and abroad “without any valid reasons.” Victory also accused the authorities of suppressing votes that it deemed undesirable.
Moldovan President Maia Sandu was seeking a second term, running against Alexandr Stoianoglo, a former prosecutor general, and Renato Usatii, a former mayor of Moldova’s second largest city, Balti, with seven other candidates also running.
Five out of ten candidates criticized the referendum, arguing that it was held only to ensure Sandu’s reelection. On Sunday evening, it was reported that most voters rejected the pro-EU constitutional changes.
Moldova has been actively pushing for EU and NATO membership since 2020, when Sandu, a critic of Russia and supporter of EU integration, came to power. The opposition has criticized the president for failing to resolve the economic and energy crisis in the country, which is among the poorest in Europe.
Moldova reports dramatic late turnaround in referendum on EU
RT | October 21, 2024
A knife-edge majority of Moldovans have approved incumbent pro-Western President Maia Sandu’s EU accession plans, election officials said on Monday, following an almost complete count of a ballot on the issue.
According to Moldova’s Central Electoral Commission, with 99.5% of the ballots counted, 50.4% of voters backed Sandu’s plan to enshrine integration with the EU in the former Soviet country’s constitution, while 49.6% voted against the step.
The tally came as something of a surprise, given that preliminary results issued late on Sunday had indicated that a slight majority of voters were against the move. According to media reports, the ‘yes’ camp received a last-minute push from ballots cast by Moldovans living abroad, which were counted towards the end.
The ‘yes’ vote means Moldova’s constitution will be supplemented with two new paragraphs. One will state that the identity of the Moldovans will be changed to ‘Europeans’, while the second will name integration into the EU as a strategic goal of the country.
A total of over 1.5 million people, or more than 51% of the electorate, cast their votes in Sunday’s referendum, well above the one-third required for the ballot to be considered valid.
While the referendum has revealed a nearly 50-50 split among Moldovans over EU integration, it is expected that Sandu, who is seeking a second term in office, will press ahead with the plan if reelected.
In a simultaneous presidential election held on Sunday, the incumbent leader failed to secure an absolute majority of 50% plus one vote. Sandu is now set to face off with former prosecutor general Alexandr Stoianoglo, leader of the Party of Socialists (PSRM), in a runoff scheduled for November 3. The two garnered 41.9% and 26.3% of the vote respectively in the first round.
Earlier on Monday, Sandu challenged Stoianoglo to a debate, saying that the two should present their ideas on the country’s future to the public and let Moldovans decide which path to take. Stoianoglo has accepted the challenge, but suggested the debate be held on a “neutral platform,” not those of “government-dependent media.” Sandu has been repeatedly criticized for the reported closure of news outlets that are not pro-Western, as well as for allegedly targeting opposition figures and those who do not support her EU drive.
Moldova rejects EU integration in referendum
RT | October 20, 2024
Voters in Moldova have rejected the government-backed proposal to enshrine eventual integration with the EU in the former Soviet country’s constitution.
During Sunday’s referendum, held simultaneously with a presidential election, voters were asked whether the constitution should be amended to reflect the “irreversible European course” of the country and affirm the “integration into the European Union as a strategic objective” of the nation.
With more than 86% of the ballots counted, 54.55% voted against the proposal, while 45.45% voted in favor, according to the preliminary results cited by the news channel TVR.
The highly contentious presidential election is likely heading to a second-round runoff, as no candidate has succeeded in winning 50% of the votes.
With more than 85% of the ballots counted, the pro-EU incumbent president, Maia Sandu, is leading with 37.08%. Former prosecutor general Alexandr Stoianoglo, the leader of the Party of Socialists (PSRM), is second with 29.1%.
The high-stakes election was marred by the accusations of rigging and voter manipulation from the government and the opposition alike.
The opposition alliance ‘Victory’ accused the authorities of allowing irregularities, ranging from organized busing of voters to polling stations to allegations of voter intimidation.
Chisinau, meanwhile, has accused Russia of attempting to influence the outcome of the election and has shut down several TV channels critical to the government. “Moldova has come under an unprecedented attack. Criminal groups, united with foreign powers, have attacked our country with lies and propaganda,” Sandu said during a press conference shortly after the preliminary results were announced. She claimed to have “evidence and information that a criminal group had attempted to buy 300,000 votes.”
The election, widely seen as pivotal to Moldova’s aspirations to join the EU, were dominated by the issues of corruption and low living standards, as well security concerns stemming from the ongoing fighting between Russia and Ukraine.
Prostate Cancer: Over-Testing and Over-Treatment
By Bruce W. Davidson | Brownstone Institute | October 17, 2024
The excessive medical response to the Covid pandemic made one thing abundantly clear: Medical consumers really ought to do their own research into the health issues that impact them. Furthermore, it is no longer enough simply to seek out a “second opinion” or even a “third opinion” from doctors. They may well all be misinformed or biased. Furthermore, this problem appears to predate the Covid phenomenon.
A striking example of that can be found in the recent history of prostate cancer testing and treatment, which, for personal reasons, has become a subject of interest to me. In many ways, it strongly resembles the Covid calamity, where misuse of the PCR test resulted in harming the supposedly Covid-infected with destructive treatments.
Two excellent books on the subject illuminate the issues involved in prostate cancer. One is Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers by Dr. Mark Scholz and Ralph Blum. Dr. Scholtz is executive director of the Prostate Cancer Research Institute in California. The other is The Great Prostate Hoax by Richard Ablin and Ronald Piana. Richard Ablin is a pathologist who invented the PSA test but has become a vociferous critic of its widespread use as a diagnostic tool for prostate cancer.
Mandatory yearly PSA testing at many institutions opened up a gold mine for urologists, who were able to perform lucrative biopsies and prostatectomies on patients who had PSA test numbers above a certain level. However, Ablin has insisted that “routine PSA screening does far more harm to men than good.” Moreover, he maintains that the medical people involved in prostate screening and treatment represent “a self-perpetuating industry that has maimed millions of American men.”
Even during approval hearings for the PSA test, the FDA was well aware of the problems and dangers. For one thing, the test has a 78% false positive rate. An elevated PSA level can be caused by various factors besides cancer, so it is not really a test for prostate cancer. Moreover, a PSA test score can spur frightened men into getting unnecessary biopsies and harmful surgical procedures.
One person who understood the potential dangers of the test well was the chairman of the FDA’s committee, Dr. Harold Markovitz, who decided whether to approve it. He declared, “I’m afraid of this test. If it is approved, it comes out with the imprimatur of the committee… as pointed out, you can’t wash your hands of guilt … all this does is threaten a whole lot of men with prostate biopsy… it’s dangerous.”
In the end, the committee did not give unqualified approval to the PSA test but only approved it “with conditions.” However, subsequently, the conditions were ignored.
Nevertheless, the PSA test became celebrated as the route to salvation from prostate cancer. The Postal Service even circulated a stamp promoting yearly PSA tests in 1999. Quite a few people became wealthy and well-known at the Hybritech company, thanks to the Tandem-R PSA test, their most lucrative product.
In those days, the corrupting influence of the pharmaceutical companies on the medical device and drug approval process was already apparent. In an editorial for the Journal of the American Medical Association (quoted in Albin and Piana’s book), Dr. Marcia Angell wrote, “The pharmaceutical industry has gained unprecedented control over the evaluation of its products… there’s mounting evidence that they skew the research they sponsor to make their drugs look better and safer.” She also authored the book The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It.
A cancer diagnosis often causes great anxiety, but in actuality, prostate cancer develops very slowly compared to other cancers and does not often pose an imminent threat to life. A chart featured in Scholz and Blum’s book compares the average length of life of people whose cancer returns after surgery. In the case of colon cancer, they live on average two more years, but prostate cancer patients live another 18.5 years.
In the overwhelming majority of cases, prostate cancer patients do not die from it but rather from something else, whether they are treated for it or not. In a 2023 article about this issue titled “To Treat or Not to Treat,” the author reports the results of a 15-year study of prostate cancer patients in the New England Journal of Medicine. Only 3% of the men in the study died of prostate cancer, and getting radiation or surgery for it did not seem to offer much statistical benefit over “active surveillance.”
Dr. Scholz confirms this, writing that “studies indicate that these treatments [radiation and surgery] reduce mortality in men with Low and Intermediate-Risk disease by only 1% to 2% and by less than 10% in men with High-Risk disease.”
Nowadays prostate surgery is a dangerous treatment choice, but it is still widely recommended by doctors, especially in Japan. Sadly, it also seems to be unnecessary. One study cited in Ablin and Piana’s book concluded that “PSA mass screening resulted in a huge increase in the number of radical prostatectomies. There is little evidence for improved survival outcomes in the recent years…”
However, a number of urologists urge their patients not to wait to get prostate surgery, threatening them with imminent death if they do not. Ralph Blum, a prostate cancer patient, was told by one urologist, “Without surgery you’ll be dead in two years.” Many will recall that similar death threats were also a common feature of Covid mRNA-injection promotion.
Weighing against prostate surgery are various risks, including death and long-term impairment, since it is a very difficult procedure, even with newer robotic technology. According to Dr. Scholz, about 1 in 600 prostate surgeries result in the death of the patient. Much higher percentages suffer from incontinence (15% to 20%) and impotence after surgery. The psychological impact of these side effects is not a minor problem for many men.
In light of the significant risks and little proven benefit of treatment, Dr. Scholz censures “the urology world’s persistent overtreatment mindset.” Clearly, excessive PSA screening led to inflicting unnecessary suffering on many men. More recently, the Covid phenomenon has been an even more dramatic case of medical overkill.
Ablin and Piana’s book makes an observation that also sheds a harsh light on the Covid medical response: “Isn’t cutting edge innovation that brings new medical technology to the market a good thing for health-care consumers? The answer is yes, but only if new technologies entering the market have proven benefit over the ones they replace.”
That last point especially applies to Japan right now, where people are being urged to receive the next-generation mRNA innovation–the self-amplifying mRNA Covid vaccine. Thankfully, a number seem to be resisting this time.
Bruce Davidson is professor of humanities at Hokusei Gakuen University in Sapporo, Japan.
Lights out for the city on the hill

By Stephen Karganovic | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 20, 2024
Throughout the decades of the Cold War, whilst the blocs were competing, two major attractions worked powerfully to the advantage of the West. Firstly, the comfort and prosperity that it was able to provide to its citizens, which its Eastern rivals could hardly match. The second feature that in the eyes of the world gave the West a huge competitive edge was the comparatively better performance of its institutions with regard to individual liberties.
The twin advantages of prosperity and the impression that the West valued freedom successfully neutralised much of the theoretical critique of the capitalist social and economic model. In particular, the West’s ostensible commitment to personal liberties acted as a powerful magnet. As a political weapon it served its purpose effectively. It is indisputable that so long as scrupulous adherence to the rule of law and respect for individual rights were seen as the distinguishing characteristic of Western societies they were widely perceived as a desirable alternative to the competing systems, which often disregarded strict legality and did little to diminish arbitrariness.
This is the state of affairs that prevailed until roughly the 1990s, when the Western bloc finally reached the pinnacle of its global might and was widely perceived as triumphant over its adversaries. But ever since the social gains which had made the lives of common people relatively comfortable and safe, and society cohesive across class lines, are being dismantled throughout the Western world. The sense of legal security that for decades citizens of Western countries unquestionably enjoyed proved equally evanescent. The phenomena of lawless abuse and vulnerability to the powers that be, normal elsewhere but long extirpated from the practice of Western societies and largely faded from the memory of their citizens, have reappeared with a vengeance. On both the domestic and international levels, the “rule of law” rapidly morphed into its unrecognisable caricature. That metamorphosis ultimately became jokingly known as the “rules based order.”
With scant internal opposition or even much public awareness, the core countries of the collective West became infected with the contagion of arbitrariness in the interpretation of inherent human rights and application of legal principles erected to protect them. The transformation, which in historical terms took place with lightning speed, was spearheaded by a ruthless and duplicitous political cabal and was implemented with the connivance of a judiciary which was utterly corrupt and shamefully impotent.
The breakdown of legality is generally a precursor of worse things to come, which almost invariably takes the form of increasingly egregious abuse of power. The point can be illustrated with disturbing but by no means isolated examples of the emerging state of affairs in the countries of the collective West that used to be envied for their freedom. Readers will recall the famous line, “they hate us for our freedom.” The utterance in 2001 of that false assertion whilst doing nothing to advance the cause of freedom did introduce an orgy of destruction and mass slaughter.
The most striking representation of the breakdown of the legal order can be cited today is the illegal kidnapping and incarceration by the German judicial system of German-American lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, under fabricated embezzlement charges. There are many solid reasons for deep state cabal’s virulent hatred of Dr. Fuellmich. He was the spoiler who in 2020 had the temerity to found the Covid pandemic research committee, just as the social control experiment was gaining momentum. The committee’s outstanding work in uncovering the sordid motives and homicidal objectives of the orchestrators of the bogus medical emergency was a major blow to them, especially because it was delivered successfully under conditions of nearly total informational blockade. Dr. Fuellmich’s ultimate, and perhaps overambitious and naively conceived goal of a medical Nurenberg to bring the culprits to justice was never achieved but the very thought of it must have caused nightmares to those he intended to be prosecuted.
“This agenda has been long planned,” Dr. Fuellmich summarised his Committee’s findings. “It’s ultimately unsuccessful precursor was the swine flu some 12 years ago, and it is cooked up by a group of super-rich psychopathic and sociopathic people who hate and fear people at the same time, have no empathy, and are driven by the desire to gain full control over all of us, the people of the world.”
The time came for the psychopaths to seek their sweet revenge, and the operation was not exceedingly difficult because they happen to control the mechanisms of power. Eleven months ago Dr. Fuellmich was imprisoned in Germany on the false allegation of a colleague who had been infiltrated into the Covid Committee that he misused the organisation’s assets for personal benefit. A charge that under German law is a misdemeanour and for which there is no precedent of lengthy pre-trial imprisonment resulted in incarceration that has now lasted for over 400 days under Abu Ghraib conditions, except that it is in Germany and not in Iraq. For a shocking portrayal of those detention conditions, see here. And see here for the disgraceful procedural deficiencies of the trial itself, which is currently in progress, stained by practices incompatible with the image of Rechtsstaat, that Germany along with the collective West regimes associated with it are misleadingly cultivating.
The lawless persecution of Dr. Fuellmich for the “offence” of performing a remarkable public service by uncovering and documenting the fraudulent nature and sinister background of the Covid “pandemic” is, however, but the tip of the iceberg in the collapse of the rule of law in the societies that portray themselves as its champions. Additional examples illustrate the breakdown and flesh out the picture of the legal disarray which undercuts the elementary freedoms of citizens and renders them defenceless before the demands of unaccountable Power.
In Ireland, the entire Burke family of Christian believers who refuse to bend their knee to the dictates of gender ideology is being targeted for vindictive persecution. One of the sons, Enoch, who is a school teacher, has so far spent over 400 days in solitary confinement, like Dr. Fuellmich in Germany. His “offence” is that in formerly Christian and Catholic Ireland he refuses to use the pronoun preferred by one of his students who claims other than his biological gender, because Burke holds that acquiescence to the gender identity charade would be a violation of his religious principles. Enoch Burke is being punished for refusing to debase himself as a professional educator and as a free human being by falsely confessing under the duress of his persecutors that 2 + 2 = 5. Nothing short of such a recantation of his conscientiously held beliefs would satisfy his country’s legal and educational overseers, who have gone berserk. He therefore remains in an Irish prison, despite being assured of instant release if only he manifested submission to their lunatic demand. For an insight into the broad official scope of that lunacy, see here.
Enoch’s brother Simeon, who has completed his law studies with honours, is being excluded from admission to the Irish Bar for reasons that have not yet been revealed with full clarity but which appear to also be related to his firmly held religious world-view, identical to his brother’s, which in contemporary Ireland apparently disqualifies one from working in a professional setting. For good measure, Enoch and Simeon’s father, Enoch Burke Sr., has been punished for objecting to LGBT symbols on Irish postal vehicles. For his temerity, taxpayer Burke was informed that henceforth he may come to the local post office to pick up his mail, but that it will no longer be delivered to him.
As in the Fuellmich case, the collective and exemplary punishment meted out to the Burke family is being kept out of the public eye as much as possible. Political and even religious figures refuse to take a stand or comment on it, and the controlled media studiously avoid discussing the subject.
Not to round off this complex picture of civilizational decline but merely to supplement it with another unsettling detail, the institution of thought crime portrayed in George Orwell’s novel, once considered no more than literary fiction, appears now to be enshrined in British law. For the present it appears to be a pilot programme, perhaps a precursor of even more frightening things to come. It operates as a prohibition of prayer within a designated exclusion perimeter around abortion “clinics” in Great Britain. The incriminating prayer would presumably be for the souls of children that departed this world due to the medical attention that they received in those establishments. The private performance of such unauthorised religious offices is now prohibited as it may cause “harassment and distress” to the employees of the “clinics” and their clients. And ominously, according to the Home Office, “anyone found guilty of breaking the law will face an unlimited fine.” One wonders if the European Court of Human Rights would have anything to say about such open-ended punishment schemes. Was anything of the sort ever before recorded in the annals of civilised jurisprudence?
Interaction between the thought police, who of course are merely “following orders,” and citizens suspected of mentally violating the “law” may be watched here by all who cherish their liberty and human integrity.
Wretched British jurisprudence (sceptics should also see here) now boasts its first successful prosecution of a thought crime violator. British Army veteran Adam Smith-Connor was recently found guilty of silently praying for his aborted son inside an abortion “clinic” buffer zone, was sentenced conditionally to two years in prison, and fined £9000 in costs for His Majesty’s court’s expense and trouble in prosecuting him. The courts still are not imposing “unlimited fines,” as the Home Office recommends, but for a retired person who must support a family arguably even that is a considerable sum.
Smith-Connor, be it noted, is far from the only victim of abortion-related thought crime harassment in the United Kingdom.
And also for the record, the theme here is not one’s personal position on Covid, transgenderism, or abortion. The central issue in every one of the cited instances, and others of a similar nature too numerous to mention, is the evident crumbling in the collective West of the legal order. That now makes it possible to impose on peaceful citizens draconian punishments wholly disproportionate to the alleged conduct they are being accused of. To what limits will the severity of punishment extend, or is it potentially as “unlimited” as the threat of monetary assessment the British Home Office is prepared to impose on those undertaking to silently pray in public for unborn babies?
The famed “City on the Hill” that many had been tricked into believing was illuminating mankind from on high is now forlorn and largely deserted. Its lights are getting progressively dimmer, life in it increasingly intolerable. Its deceived inhabitants and ardent admirers are dispersing in every direction. Word is out that a new City of great luminosity and magnetic attraction is being erected elsewhere, and that its architects will soon meet, in Kazan.
Germany and UK to sign ‘historic’ defence pact – Sunday Times
RT | October 20, 2024
The UK and Germany will sign a bilateral defense agreement this week, paving the way for both nations to step up their military drills near Russia’s borders, The Sunday Times has reported.
Under the terms of the deal, Britain and Germany will cooperate on arms procurement and development, with the agreement serving as a “first step” for a larger deal between the UK and EU next year, the British newspaper reported.
The pact “is expected to enable British and German forces to conduct joint military exercises on NATO’s eastern border with Russia, most probably in Estonia and Lithuania,” The Times noted, without offering further explanation.
Britain and Germany already take part in NATO exercises, such as this year’s ‘Steadfast Defender’ drills. Conducted near Russia’s western borders, ‘Steadfast Defender’ involved 90,000 troops from all 32 NATO states, and was perceived in Moscow as open preparation for “a potential armed clash with Russia.”
In addition to these multilateral exercises, Germany already takes part in smaller-scale bilateral exercises, such as Germany’s ‘Grand Quadriga’ drills with Lithuania earlier this year, and its ‘Baltic Tiger’ maneuvers with Estonia in 2022. The Times’ article suggests that Britain could join these exercises once the new deal is signed.
British Defense Secretary John Healey told the newspaper that the deal is modeled on the 2010 Lancaster House agreement between the UK and France. Under this agreement, Britain and France pledge to create a joint expeditionary force to take part in military drills, to collaborate on developing drones and submarine technology, and to share nuclear-weapons data with each other.
During a two-day NATO summit in Brussels this week, Healey also announced that British troops stationed in Estonia will receive new drone warfare equipment and training, and that the UK will work with Germany, France, Poland and Italy to create new long-range missiles for Ukraine.
55 Undeclared Chemical Elements — Including Heavy Metals — Found in COVID Vaccines
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | October 15, 2024
A group of Argentine scientists identified 55 chemical elements — not listed on package inserts — in the Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, CanSino, Sinopharm and Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccines, according to a study published last week in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research.
The chemical elements include 11 heavy metals — such as chromium, arsenic, nickel, aluminum, cobalt and copper — which scientists consider systemic toxicants known to be carcinogenic and to induce organ damage, even at low exposure levels.
The samples also contained 11 of the 15 lanthanides, or rare earth elements, that are heavier, silvery metals often used in manufacturing. These chemical elements, which include lanthanum, cerium and gadolinium, are lesser known to the general public than heavy metals but have also been shown to be highly toxic.
“The detection of multiple undeclared toxic elements, including heavy metals and lanthanides, in COVID-19 vaccines raises a dual and multiplied concern for human health,” James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., a member of the journal’s editorial board who was not involved in the research, told The Defender. “Individually, these chemicals are known to cause neurological, cardiovascular and immunological damage.”
“Together, their synergistic toxicity could exacerbate these risks far beyond what regulators and manufacturers have disclosed or studied,” Lyons-Weiler added.
The research builds on a series of studies conducted since 2021 using different analytic techniques to analyze COVID-19 vaccine vials from major manufacturers. Previous studies also identified significant numbers of chemical elements not listed on vaccine labels.
Research efforts included a 2022 study by a German working group, including the late pathologist Arne Burkhardt, submitted to the German government; a 2021 study by scientists in England; a 2022 study by Canadian Dr. Daniel Nagase; and a 2023 Romanian study by Dr. Geanina Hagimă.
Across those global studies, by the end of 2023, researchers had identified 24 undeclared chemical elements in the COVID-19 vaccine formulas.
Marcela Sangorrín, Ph.D., co-author of the Argentine study, told The Defender these different international studies are important because there is “a significant gap in the quality control of biological products by the national regulatory authorities of each country.”
“This situation is even more urgent and concerning when we consider the rapid advancements observed in cutting-edge biotechnological developments, the complexity of which requires a more thorough legislative and regulatory framework to ensure the safety of individuals who choose to use these therapies,” Sangorrín said.
CDC makes vaccine excipient information ‘almost impossible to find’
For the Argentine study, researchers aimed to corroborate the previous findings of undeclared elements and to detect and measure any elements not identified in those studies.
They analyzed 13 vials from different lots of six brands of the COVID-19 vaccines at a lab at the National University of Córdoba. They used a highly sensitive analytic technique — inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry — which makes it possible to measure elements at trace levels in biological fluids.
The researchers analyzed at least two vials of each vaccine, except for CanSino, a viral vector vaccine made in China, for which they analyzed only one vial.
Their paper included a long list of COVID-19 vaccine components declared by the manufacturers. The components vary by vaccine maker. The researchers obtained the lists through public information requests.
With the exception of Sputnik V and Sinopharm, manufacturers don’t declare the quantities of the named excipients in their vaccines, which the researchers flagged as a “very serious omission at the regulatory level.”
Vaccines often include excipients — additives used as preservatives, adjuvants, stabilizers or for other purposes. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), substances used in the manufacture of a vaccine but not listed in the contents of the final product should be listed somewhere in the package insert.
Listing excipients is important, researchers argue because excipients can include allergens and other “hidden dangers” for vaccine recipients.
OpenVAERS reports that the CDC has made publicly available vaccine excipient information “almost impossible to find.” OpenVAERS offers a comprehensive list of vaccine of excipients by type and by vaccine.
However, the OpenVAERS website also notes that independent tests of vaccine vials have found “contaminants that go well beyond those publicly disclosed by the manufacturers,” as identified in this study.
The researchers found the results of their chemical analysis varied by vaccine and also by vial tested. In some cases, the vials were subjected to repeated testing on different dates and produced slightly different results.
In one lot of the AstraZeneca vaccine, researchers identified 15 chemical elements, of which 14 were undeclared. In the other lot, they detected 21 elements of which 20 were undeclared. In the CanSino vial, they identified 22 elements, of which 20 were undeclared.
The three Pfizer vials contained 19, 16 and 21-23 undeclared elements respectively. The Moderna vials contained 21 and between 16-29 undeclared elements. The Sinopharm vials contained between 17-23 undeclared elements and the Sputnik V contained between 19-25 undetected elements.
82% of vaccines tested contained undeclared arsenic
Overall, researchers identified 55 different undeclared elements across the 17 samples analyzed.
All of the heavy metals detected are linked to toxic effects on human health, the researchers wrote. Although the metals occurred in different frequencies, many were present across multiple samples.
“There are undeclared chemical elements in common, such as boron, calcium, titanium, aluminum, arsenic, nickel, chromium, copper, gallium, strontium, niobium, molybdenum, barium and hafnium in all of the brands” of COVID-19 vaccines, the researchers wrote.
Others, such as chromium and arsenic, which increase the risk of serious cancers and skin diseases, were present as undeclared elements in 100% and 82% of the samples respectively. The researchers also found the lanthanide cerium, which can damage the liver and cause lung embolisms, in 76% of the samples.
These chemical elements are just a few examples of the 62 undeclared chemical elements identified by this study and previous studies combined, the researchers wrote.
They concluded that given the “diversity and notable presence in all brands, along with the peculiar characteristics of the elements found,” is unlikely the findings are due to contamination or accidental adulteration.
‘Utmost urgency’ that governments investigate these products
The researchers, who said the exploratory study was limited by the small sample size, called for a broader analysis of a larger number of samples. They suggested the broader analysis would confirm the trends they identified.
Sangorrín said this should be the work of government researchers.
“It is of utmost urgency that governments around the world conduct relevant investigations into these products, as is typically done in response to quality complaints identified through pharmacovigilance,” she said.
Those seeking justice, she added, must call on the World Health Organization, the pharmaceutical companies and governments to take urgent action, “in accordance with the severity of the situation, given the rise in global mortality rates, recorded adverse effects and the clear demonstration that these products were not developed with the intention of providing immunity.”
The authors underscored the high rates of serious adverse events, including deaths, associated globally with the COVID-19 vaccines. They suggested the adverse events and deaths, which are likely substantially undercounted, could be linked to the toxins they identified.
Lyons-Weiler also called for regulatory action to protect public health.
“Regulatory agencies must take immediate action to halt the use of these vaccines, thoroughly investigate how these toxins were missed, and ensure that the full spectrum of ingredients is transparently declared and the public duly and fully warned,” he said.
“The public’s health can no longer be gambled with in the face of such profound uncertainties.”
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Fired for Free Speech: Alison Morrow’s Battle Against Government Censorship
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | October 19, 2024
Alison Morrow (formally Westover), an accomplished journalist, found herself in the throes of a legal battle over her right to free speech. Represented by the Silent Majority Foundation, Morrow has filed a lawsuit against the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and its top officials, citing wrongful termination after she was dismissed for airing an interview on her YouTube channel. The channel, a personal project crafted during her tenure as an environmental reporter at KING 5 in Seattle, became the subject of controversy following her post featuring a highly censored doctor, Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, and his views on COVID-19.
We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.
Morrow’s career at KING 5, which spanned from 2013 to 2019, was marked by significant accolades, including two Emmy awards. Recognized for her independent journalism, DNR was fully aware of her YouTube activities when they recruited her as a communications specialist. Initially, her independent media pursuits were supported by DNR, but the tide turned with her decision to feature Dr. Kheriaty. DNR’s leadership warned Morrow that her continued interviews could lead to termination, a threat she met with a staunch refusal to abandon her First Amendment protections.
Determined to uphold her freedoms of speech, press, and association, Morrow chose to defy DNR’s directive to adhere to approved narratives. This act of resistance ultimately led to her dismissal, prompting her to seek legal assistance from the Silent Majority Foundation, which took up her case to safeguard these fundamental rights.
“The 1st Amendment is one of the most sacred rights of Americans. It is what differentiates our country from most others, that we have the freedom to question our government. It is also central to a free press. I was willing to lose my job – and all that it provided for our family – in order to stand up against the encroaching erosion of this right that I was witnessing at the time, not just in my case but in thousands of others across the country during the pandemic,” Morrow stated. “There was no way to do science or journalism, in the culture of censorship that was driven by our government at the time. That meant millions of people made decisions without informed consent. Given my commitment to seeking truth wherever it leads, I was unwilling to acquiesce to a demand that I remain silent.”

