Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Why Does the UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance Report Never Mention Side-Effects?

BY AMANUENSIS | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | NOVEMBER 3, 2022

In the past few months I’ve read newspaper articles warning of the increased risk of death following gardening, stress at work, solar flares, sleeping in front of the television, hot weather, cold weather, shock of high energy bills, the price of food, laughing too much and sleeping in the wrong position – these recent warnings add to the multitude of stories on the health consequences of our dietary choices, sedentary lifestyle and climate change. If that wasn’t scary enough, we’ve also seen efforts to educate the public about how common sudden deaths are in younger adults and teenagers. Given this background of suddenly emerging risks to life resulting from our modern lifestyle, it is clearly very important to fully understand all risks that might be emerging resulting from the Covid vaccines, no matter how trivial.

With the above in mind, it is perhaps rather surprising that the Vaccine Surveillance Report from the UKHSA has never actually mentioned vaccine side-effects or complications. Sure, the word ‘safe’ is typically used a few times in each report, but there’s never been a mention of side-effects and their rates. They don’t even like to use the term ‘rare side-effects’ – as far as the Vaccine Surveillance Reports are concerned the vaccines are simply ‘safe’. They’ve never reported any of the data from the Yellow Card side-effect reporting system, nor mentioned any of the increasing numbers of scientific studies reporting on an increasing number of ‘complications’ after receiving the various vaccines.

I suppose at this point I could stop – since side-effects aren’t covered in the Vaccine Surveillance Reports, and this is a series of posts reviewing the UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance Reports, there’s nothing to discuss.  However, vaccine side-effects and complications are important, so I hope that I can be forgiven for exploring this aspect of the vaccines a little further in this post.

Over the past 18 months there have been many studies which have found worrying high side-effect rates following vaccination. The results of these studies have been discussed in multiple places across the internet, and many of these studies have been covered by the Daily Sceptic. The only common theme has been the remarkable insistence by authorities worldwide on ignoring the results of these studies, except where the evidence has become overwhelming and they are forced into some response.

The vast array of side-effects found by these investigative studies is now too voluminous to cover completely here, so instead I’ll focus on a few specific side-effects and discuss the response to these new findings.

Thrombocytopenia and blood-clotting related problems

The first inkling that there might be a risk of thrombocytopenia (low blood platelet count) after vaccination came in January 2021, a mere month after the vaccinations started, after a doctor in New York died of complications following acute thrombocytopenia about two weeks after being given the Pfizer vaccine.  Pfizer responded with a statement that this definitely wasn’t anything to do with their vaccine, despite acute thrombocytopenia being relatively rare and the doctor not being in a risk group. In the months that followed, many more cases of thrombocytopenia and other blood clotting disorders occurred, from Pfizer and the other vaccine offerings, but the official response remained coincidence. Eventually the volume of problems became too large to ignore, and in June 2021 the U.K. authorities decided that those aged under 40 shouldn’t be offered the AstraZeneca vaccine. I found this restriction to the AstraZeneca vaccine a bit odd, as the other vaccines appeared to have similarly high rates of clotting problems in the weeks following vaccination, but it appears that the authorities had chosen their demon to blame. Of course, older adults weren’t too keen to be told that they were going to have to take these risks, and demand for the AstraZeneca vaccine plummeted. A few months later the AstraZeneca vaccine was only made available to those who were unable to take the Pfizer vaccine (the only alternative in the U.K. at that time). Even though the known problems of clotting related disorders post-vaccination are bad enough, it isn’t clear if the instances of severe clotting related problems (resulting in hospitalisation) are also accompanied by higher numbers of clotting problems below the clinical threshold (‘microclotting’), or whether these mild cases might have longer term consequences. Another area of post-vaccine effects that demands more research.

Myocarditis

The risk from myocarditis first appeared in a leaked report out of Israel in April 2021 suggesting worryingly high rates occurring in younger males. Quite why it was deemed necessary for this safety-related information to be kept secret isn’t clear, but authorities worldwide responded quickly once the information was leaked to reassure everyone that this risk was very very low and that the vaccines were very very safe (and effective, of course). While the official line is that post-vaccination myocarditis is rare, studies keep on finding higher and higher incidence rates, particularly in the young male risk group. Indeed, in August a scientific paper describing the impact of Covid vaccination in Thailand suggested that the conditions suggestive of myocarditis and pericarditis after vaccination were found in over 29% of vaccine recipients aged between 13 and 18 years of age, and a similar result has since been described after vaccination in Switzerland. The longer term impact of these ‘mild problems related to the heart’ aren’t yet known.

Period related problems

All clinical studies into side-effects are mindful of the need to treat any issues related to sexual function carefully – individuals are less likely to seek medical attention when it comes to sex-related problems and those related to our reproductive systems in general. Thus it should have been a huge red-flag when anecdotal reports of heavy or missed periods following vaccination started to appear early in 2021. Alas, our authorities simply responded with the usual ‘it definitely isn’t the vaccines’ and ignored the problem. The complex situation regarding reporting of side-effects related to reproductive function is nicely illustrated by the number of problems reported to the Yellow Card side-effect reporting system – early May 2021 saw a huge increase in reporting of side-effects related to menstruation. The reason? Most likely, an article on the problem on BBC Radio 4’s Women’s Hour in late March, in which listeners were urged to report any problems into the Yellow-Card system. It is very disappointing that our side-effect reporting system could be so heavily influenced by a radio programme in this way. Really there should have been active monitoring of post-vaccination complications and side-effects, but the inadequate Yellow Card system is all we had. Official guidelines now state that problems related to menstruation are relatively rare but even if they do occur they’ll be of no consequence whatsoever and women shouldn’t worry about taking the vaccines. Eventually we’ll find out if this reassurance was correct.

What’s also troubling is the way that the only side-effects that are discussed in the traditional media are the ones that have been officially recognised (albeit under duress). What about the increase in hospital consultant activity for stroke victims over the last 18 months?

Or the increase in consultant activity for hormonal problems?

Or the increase in referrals for suspected cancers?

Like the significant increase in excess deaths that we’ve seen this year, there seems to be much going on but little interest on the part of our authorities to investigate these issues at all. Maybe they’re all the result of the lockdowns, maybe they’re due to Covid itself, maybe it was the vaccines, and perhaps it is all just a massive coincidence – but it simply isn’t good enough to decide that it can’t possibly be the vaccines and refuse to even discuss undertaking the research that might clarify the situation.

At least in recent weeks we’ve had an increase in calls for some robust investigations to be undertaken, such as discussed in the Daily Sceptic in mid October.  Then again, we’ve also had the brief hour-and-a-half spent a week ago by the House of Commons to debate the issues around vaccine safety. Despite some MPs detailing concerns about the safety of the vaccines, the Chair was quick to respond with empty reassurances and the debate ended with a statement urging people to get vaccinated to protect themselves, others and the NHS. I fear that there’ll be quite some way to go before the full impact of the vaccines is accepted by our authorities.

An important aspect of the rate of side-effects and complications is the impact on the risk-benefit analysis used by our authorities to determine who should take the vaccines. The risk of side-effects should be tolerable so long as the benefit offered by any medical product is greater than the risks. Since the vaccines were introduced back in December 2020 we have seen marked changes both in the risks posed by the vaccines (more side-effects and complications have come to light) and the benefits offered (the vaccines clearly offer little protection against infection, their protection against hospitalisation and death appears to be rather less than claimed, and at the same time Covid appears to have evolved to become much less virulent). In addition, nearly everyone in the Western world will now have had a Covid infection, resulting in at least some natural immunity. Unfortunately, our authorities have never actually published any of their risk-benefit analyses and how the ratio changes with age and morbidity, so we can’t tell how new information on risks and benefits has changed the calculation. Then again, I suppose it is easier to be inconsistent if you never actually tell anyone what factors your decisions are based upon.

One of the big problems regarding the Covid mRNA vaccines in particular is that there were only sparse data published on how long the mRNA would remain active in the body and where it would end up (pharmacokinetics and biodistribution). Originally the reassuring voices told us that the mRNA would break down within hours, and that the mRNA vesicles would remain close to the point of injection. However, evidence has emerged in the months since our authorities proceeded to inject everyone in the world that has suggested that the mRNA remains active for many weeks following vaccination, that it travels to multiple organs in the body and that the pharmaceutical companies knew this prior to the vaccines being released. Even worse, a recent study has suggested that the mRNA is present in breast milk for a short time following vaccination (for fairness I must point out that our authorities still think that it is completely and utterly safe for recently vaccinated mothers to continue breastfeeding). I find it concerning that we’re only now starting to find out the full complexity of the interaction of the mRNA vaccines with the body.

Recent studies have estimated the current rate of serious short-term side-effects after the Covid vaccines at around one in 800. I find this number interesting, as I suspect that this is as bad a side-effect rate as could be found for a supposedly benign or prophylactic treatment. I estimate that an incidence rate of around one in 1,000 marks the point at which problems become apparent even to a casual observer, provided sufficient numbers are given the medical product. If a side-effect rate for a benign or prophylactic treatment is worse than this people would notice and demand that the medicine or medical treatment is withdrawn. Thankfully, there aren’t too many examples of terrible medical mistakes – probably the most famous example is Thalidomide, where around one in 1,000 mothers who took the drug gave birth to a child with serious physical malformations. Even so, it took three years before the nature of the problem was understood and Thalidomide was withdrawn from sale. It is perhaps interesting to note that at least in the early stages of the problem being recognised the blame was put on the nuclear tests that had occurred in previous years – was this the 1950s equivalent of ‘climate change’?

Where serious side-effects are more common than this for a supposedly benign product, the response is typically more rapid. The famous example here is Elixir Sulphanilamide, a treatment for bacterial infections created in the 1930s that caused over 100 deaths in the few weeks that it was for sale. The problem with Elixir Sulphanilamide was that it hadn’t been tested before release and the manufacturers hadn’t realised that a primary component was highly toxic. The owner of the company that made the elixir famously denied responsibility, stating that “we have been supplying a legitimate professional demand and not once could have foreseen the unlooked for results”. It was this scandal that led to the creation of the FDA in the USA, along with stringent requirements for the testing of new medical products. After the disaster it was demanded that never again would a medical treatment be released and given to many thousands of people without being fully tested to explore all potential problems (and not simply the ‘looked-for’ problems). As a side note, the outcome of the Elixir Sulphanilamide scandal was that the scientist who developed the formula committed suicide as a result of the extreme guilt of causing so much harm, while the company that released the medicine without testing was given a nominal fine. The manufacturer went on to produce further drugs (and profits) and after a succession of takeovers is now part of the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline.  Funny how it all works.

Next time I’ll discuss one of the most wildly enthusiastic aspects of the Vaccine Surveillance Report – the predictions made by computer-models of the reduction in infections, hospitalisations and deaths offered by the vaccines.

Amanuensis is an ex-academic and senior Government scientist. He blogs at Bartram’s Folly.

November 6, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Research: Countries That Sought ‘Zero-COVID’ Lockdowns Have The Least Immunity

Kevin Frayer/Getty Images
By Steve Watson | Summit News | November 4, 2022

New research has revealed the countries that implemented the harshest lockdowns as part of ‘zero-COVID’ policies now have the least immunity from the virus itself.

The analysis by The Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington’s School of Medicine estimates that China, which still has multiple lockdowns in place, has the lowest level of immunity to COVID-19 on the planet.

Other nations that didn’t institute harsh lockdowns, including Russia, Singapore and Brazil are thought to have the highest immunity levels, according to the research.

The research estimates immunity rates according to infection numbers, vaccination rates and how much time has passed in the interim.

The analysis posits that as of the end of October 2022, just 17.2% of the Chinese population have immunity from the virus, while Russia on the other hand is estimated to have an immunity rating of 74.5% with everyone in the country having contracted the virus.

While Singapore’s immunity rating is thought to be around 70%, and Brazil’s 68%, Japan, another country that put into place harsh restrictions is believed to have just 38.9% immunity.

The U.S. is believed to have 60.5% immunity at this time, according to the analysis.

Ironically, given the IHME’s COVID model being used to laud strict restrictions, the analysis again highlights the futility of lockdowns in preventing the spread of the virus in the longterm.

Johns Hopkins University previously concluded that lockdowns have had a much more detrimental impact on society than they have produced any benefit, with researchers urging that they “are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.”

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report released last month highlighted how a record number of children in the U.S. are now being hospitalised with common colds due to weakened immune systems.

The CDC data is consistent with research by scientists at Yale who warned that it is not normal to see children with combinations of seven common viruses, including adenovirus, rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), human metapneumovirus, influenza and parainfluenza, as well as COVID-19.

As we previously highlighted, there has also been a global outbreak of hepatitis cases in children, with the media asserting the cause is “unknown.”

Biden administration officials have continuously pushed for children to keep wearing masks in schools, and there are still hordes of hypochondriacs forcing their children to do so, despite COVID posing virtually no risk to the health of children in normal circumstances.

The European Medicines Agency’s (EMA), Europe’s equivalent of the FDA, has also warned that relying on endless rounds of booster shots to fight COVID-19 could end up causing “immune response” problems.

November 6, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Leave a comment

What We Knew In the Early Days

Brownstone Institute | November 4, 2022

The claim is now everywhere: we had to lock down because we just didn’t know about this virus. It was all very confusing and we had to play it safe. We had no other option because we just had no clarity about what we were dealing with. The precautionary principle dictated the unprecedented actions.

Actually, the precautionary principle goes both directions. It also dictates that we not enact policies that we know for sure would wreck lives and liberties. They did it anyway, without sufficient knowledge that the measures would achieve any positive good.

We approach the third year and people have forgotten that all the harms of lockdowns were strongly warned about by many voices in many venues. In addition, the virus was much better understood back then and openly discussed. We knew for certain that the panic and fear were being wildly overblown.

Below follows resources assembled by the ‘Robber Baron‘ and many others who write for the Brownstone Institute. These citations from newspapers, magazines, academic journals and interviews, with many respected voices, show that we certainly knew tremendous amounts in the early days. All the warnings and information were readily available to anyone paying attention.

We certainly live in an age of short attention span but many of these signs and warnings came weeks or months before the world locked down and they chronicled the damage as it was happening. Why all this came to be completely ignored remains the burning question.

November 6, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

How Doctors and Nurses Betrayed Patients – and Themselves

Dr. Vernon Coleman | 21st Century Wire

NOTE: This article was first published over two years ago – on 12.7.20. Sadly, it remains perfectly valid today.

A growing number of doctors and nurses appear to be waking up and questioning the absence of any science behind the coronavirus hoax.

That’s very nice, and I congratulate them.

But what the devil took them so long?

Why did they wait so long to speak out?

Their silence betrayed their patients, their profession and themselves.

Only a complete moron could have thought that this manufactured ‘crisis’ necessitated the closure of hospitals and GP surgeries.

How could doctors stand by seeing cancer patients deprived of essential treatment? The NHS should have been stoned not clapped.

There was never any greater risk than there is with the flu every year.

Indeed, the figures show that the ordinary flu bug has always posed a much bigger risk than the coronavirus.

So far this year the coronavirus has affected 10 million people worldwide.

The flu can affect 1 billion people in the same period.

And the mortality rates for the two are almost identical.

We don’t close down hospitals and clinics whenever the flu appears.

So, obviously, this was a politically motivated closure of hospitals, shops, businesses and so on. And doctors should have seen that.

And just as the closure of hospitals will result in far more deaths than covid 19 so the wearing of masks will result in far more deaths than could possibly be saved. Wearing a mask reduces blood oxygen levels. I have seen car drivers with masks on. I’ve even seen bus drivers wearing masks. These things reduce blood oxygen. There will, before long, be a disaster with a bus crashing because the driver was wearing a mask and became hypoxic.Why else do you think governments everywhere admit that people with respiratory or heart problems don’t have to wear a mask?

And the stupid rules about social distancing were never justified. There was never any science to support them.

Anyone who believes in the twin heresies of social distancing and masks is, by definition, either certifiably insane, a cretin or on the dark side of the human race. Most are left wing, pro EU fascists and believers in the climate change nonsense.

Doctors and nurses who are now waking up to the fact that they’ve been tricked are claiming that they were told that if they spoke out they would be punished.

DANCING NURSES: In 2020, exhibitionist medical staff in the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada took to social media and proceeded to make a mockery of a locked-down populace who were ordered to stay at home to in order to ‘save the healthcare system from being overloaded.’

Well, it’s true that the authorities are punishing doctors who dare to question the official line. I know of a doctor in the UK who was struck off the medical register for questioning the coronavirus story. And in the USA Dr Scott Jensen, a doctor who is also a state senator, is being investigated for making statements about the similarity of the coronavirus to the flu and about the way death certificates were being signed.

And it is also true that simple and effective remedies have been banned or demonised simply so that we could all be prepared for the vaccine.

But if most of the doctors in a big hospital spoke out no bureaucrat would dare to strike them all off the register. If 500 doctors stood up for the truth it would be impossible to take away all their licenses.

`I work in a hospital,’ wrote one brave NHS employee. ‘So far none of the nurses, doctors or domestics has been off sick. And patients with the coronavirus are transported all around the hospital, to X-ray, to CT scan and to the ward and yet mysteriously no one gets infected.’

What sort of spineless people are working in health care these days? That’s the sort of excuse popular with lesser war criminals.

Still, looking on the slightly bright side, some of them are waking up and now realise that the coronavirus hoax was exactly that – a piece of political trickery, conceived and executed by people with hidden agendas. The damage done by the hospital closures will be massive. And the mental issues caused by the fear will be long-lasting – even permanent. Millions are suffering from severe depression as a result of the lies that have been told. Suicide rates are going to rocket.

Any doctors who are still social distancing and wearing masks outside the operating theatre should be ashamed of themselves. They, like much of the rest of the population, have been made fools of and if they had any professional pride left they would be red-faced, embarrassed by their own gullibility and ashamed of how easily they’ve been made part of a wicked conspiracy and made to look like fools.

Now is the time for the medical and nursing professions to stand up and to demand some answers and explanations from the leaders of their professions and from the administrators who gave the orders which have led to tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths.

They should also insist that hospitals are now opened fully, and that patients are told that there is nothing to fear.

For although a growing number of doctors now realise that the coronavirus scare is hoax there are still hospitals and administrators who are behaving as though we were in the middle of an outbreak of the bubonic plague.

The latest piece of lunacy in the NHS is for the people in charge to suggest that patients who want treatment at an Accident and Emergency department should telephone and make an appointment.

NHS England’s national medical director has reportedly told the House of Commons health and social care committee that the health service wanted patients to telephone first and be given a timed slot to attend the A&E department.

I’ve heard everything now.

Patients who are desperate for help, bleeding, in pain, with bones sticking out at funny angles will be expected to telephone and make an appointment to be seen in the accident and emergency department. Triage will, it seems, now be done by teenagers on the telephone. What qualifications will they have? GCSE in woodwork, perhaps?

Distraught relatives will have to telephone and fix an appointment before going to the hospital. Is the plan simply to kill more patients? Did the hospital closures not kill enough?

I will tell you what is going to happen.

Everyone is going to ring for an ambulance. And who can blame them?

As for hospitals, well even the Royal College of Physicians admits that many NHS services will not get back to full capacity for more than a year.

Millions of patients will wait too long. Patients in pain will have to wait for more than a year for treatment. Waiting times will be obscenely long. Tens of thousands will not be seen until it is too late. Tens of thousands of people who could have lived will die.

Around the world the death toll from the hoax will be measured in millions.

Comparatively few will have died of the coronavirus.

The vast majority will have died because they were shut out, abandoned or too frightened to seek help.

And the medical and nursing professions have to take responsibility for all that pain, that sorrow and those deaths.

Doctors should not have accepted the unscientific gibberish behind the coronavirus hoax. Before allowing hospitals to be shut down they should have asked questions. It was never difficult to see that mistakes were being made.

Doctors and nurses betrayed their patients and their professions but they also betrayed themselves.

Too many were happy to accept the weekly applause and the praise when they knew that they deserved neither.

It is time now for the healing professions to make amends.

They should make it clear to the administrators and the politicians that they are no longer prepared to accept the coronavirus nonsense.

They should demand their government’s medical advisors be sacked. They should demand that all members of the elite, medical establishment be sacked too.

They should demand that social distancing be abandoned and that masks should be burned.

They should tell the public that there is nothing to fear.

And they should be prepared to work long hours to clear the backlog of patients as quickly as possible.

There really is no choice.

If doctors and nurses do not stand up then they will be truly unworthy.

This article was originally a script for a YouTube video in July 2020. The video was taken down almost as quickly as it was put up.

Vernon Coleman’s book Coleman’s Laws: Twelve Essential Medical Secrets Which Could Save Your Life is available as an eBook and a paperback on Amazon. His book Superbody: How to Boost Your Immune System is also available as a paperback and an eBook.

November 6, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

Some States Say ‘No’ to Coronavirus Shots Mandate for Students Despite CDC’s Childhood Vaccine Schedule Change

By Adam Dick | RonPaul Institute | November 2, 2022

In October, a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advisory committee voted to add yearly experimental coronavirus “vaccine” shots to the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule. Many state governments have a history of looking to this CDC schedule to guide their imposing of shots mandates for students.

Which states will follow along to mandate the newly added shots? As we start the month following the committee’s vote, it is good to take a look across the country to see what different state governments have done to protect against or welcome the CDC schedule’s addition of these yearly shots that have proven to be neither safe nor effective and that are asserted to target a threat that has been long known to pose a miniscule risk of serious sickness or death for children. Young adults in college have also tended to be at very low risk, though you wouldn’t know it from the draconian policies many universities imposed in the name of countering coronavirus.

Compounding the absurdity and detestability of including the coronavirus shots in the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule is that the much-hyped coronavirus that people were worried about during the coronavirus scare is long gone. What is not gone is the risk of serious sickness or death from the shots.

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo advised well when he posted the following at Twitter last week:

Parents, don’t hold your breath… CDC & FDA abandoned their posts. Keep sticking with your intuition and keep those COVID jabs away from your kids.

Unfortunately, when faced with a shots mandate for school attendance, many parents may, against their better judgment, give in to the pressure and authorize their children being given the shots. Older students at universities that have more commonly imposed coronavirus shots mandates since last year have faced similarly terrible pressure to take the shots.

The good news is that, according to tracking by the National Academy for State Health Policy (NASHP), 21 state governments have taken at least some action to prohibit mandating coronavirus shots for students. Still, even where state governments have taken action against mandated coronavirus shots for students, there is in many cases room to make that protection against pushing these shots on students both stronger and broader.

Check out NASHP’s map of America where you can see information regarding states standing up against or supporting mandated coronavirus shots for students. Put the cursor over a state to find out some details regarding a particular state’s policy on mandating the shots.

Copyright © 2022 by RonPaul Institute.

November 5, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Study: Incidence Of Acute Cardiac Involvement After mRNA Booster “800 Times Higher”

By P Gosselin | NoTricksZone | November 2, 2022

“Alarming: 1 in 35 booster patients has lab values indicating acute heart damage.”

That’s the headline of an article by at transparenztest.de.

The finding is based on results by a Swiss observational study by Prof. Christian Eugen Mueller published here.

1 of 35 individuals showed laboratory values indicative of acute cardiac injury after booster mRNA vaccination.

Researchers led by Prof. Christian Eugen Müller of the University Hospital Basel investigated the extent to which cardiac involvement occurs after mRNA booster vaccinations. Heart damage from the mRNA booster shots appears to be a much higher risk than previously thought, the recent findings show.

777 employees of Basel University Hospital, median age 37 years and 69% female, had received booster vaccination. After 3 days, their troponin levels (hs-cTnT) were measured. Troponin is a laboratory value that indicates acute damage to the heart.

Much higher in women

“40 subjects showed elevated troponin levels. In 18 of these cases, other causes were present. The remaining 22 cases corresponded to an incidence of 2.8%. The incidence in women was 3.7% and in men only 0.8%,” reports transparenztest.de. “Most of the subjects had no cardiovascular history. Three days after vaccination, their troponin levels (hs-cTnT) were measured to detect cardiac damage. If levels were elevated, another hs-cTnT measurement and imaging examination followed the next day.”

The surprising results were presented at the 2022 ESC Congress.

It had been previously suggested that such complications were very rare, with an incidence in the range of only 0.0035%. But the new study results suggest it’s far worse.

800 times higher than previously shown

According to Prof. Christian Müller: “The study confirms the hypothesis that the incidence of acute cardiac involvement is higher than thought. At 2.8% it was 800 times higher than in passive observational studies. But now that we need annual booster vaccinations, there could be a lot of vaccine-related cardiac involvement.”

Prof. Christian Müller adds. “From day 3 to day 4, we observed a clear drop in troponin in almost all participants, indicating that this was an acute problem.”

“Alarmingly high”

“The incidence of 2.8% of acute cardiac involvement is alarmingly high,” transparenztest.de warns.  “Thus, 1 out of 35 boostered persons shows such values shortly after the mRNA vaccination. Converted, one would have e.g. with 350,000 booster vaccinations consequently 10,000 persons or with 3.5 million 100,000 persons, who show such laboratory values of an acute heart damage.”

Also see: Dr. John Campbell 

November 4, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment

Revealed, how the ‘safe’ Covid jab triggers a toxin blitz on the body

By Neville Hodgkinson | TCW Defending Freedom | November 3, 2022

Over the last weeks Neville Hodgkinson, the former medical and science correspondent of several national newspapers, including the Sunday Times, Sunday Express and Daily Mail, has been researching and preparing a ’round-up’ for TCW detailing the scores of indications of harm from the Covid mRNA jabs, from myocarditis, menstrual irregularities and infertility to teen and under-30s deaths and increased rates of cancer. In a series of articles, he will focus on each of these adverse effects and more. His introduction today explains exactly why the novel technology mRNA jab has triggered such a wide range of alarming reactions.

Go to the UK’s National Health Service website and it will tell you Covid vaccines are ‘safe and effective’, and that booster jabs are the next stage in ‘the biggest and most successful vaccination programme in health service history’.

It is now widely accepted that the jab does not prevent infection or transmission, but regulators believe lives saved far outweigh the price paid through side-effects. Dr Robert Malone, who played a foundational role in developing the technology on which the mRNA vaccines are based, disagrees.

In this recent talk, he says that on paper, it looked as though the mRNA jabs should be safe. They deliver a gene sequence for producing the famous ‘spike’ protein, characteristic of the Covid virus, and it was hoped this would prime the immune system so as to lessen the impact of SARS-COV-2 itself. The protein is toxic, and is at the heart of what made the genetically engineered bat microbe a threat to human health.

Normally, when cells make RNA (ribonucleic acid), it lasts for only a few hours.  Scientists believed the same would happen with the vaccine, so that if someone had a toxic reaction, it would soon be gone. That has turned out to be a big mistake.

The RNA used in the jabs was modified with an insert, called pseudouridine, aimed at making it last long enough to produce enough of the protein to ensure an immune response.

It turns out that this is super-effective, so much so that levels of spike protein post-jab are much higher than the levels found through natural infection.  With the latter, the virus slowly starts to replicate, and the immune system gradually starts to neutralise the protein.

With the jab, as Malone puts it, ‘the body gets a truckload of spike antigen that’s basically dumped into the bloodstream on a very short time course – very different from natural infection.’

Regulators and manufacturers also thought that after injection in the shoulder muscle, both the RNA and the protein would travel to the lymph system, to be filtered safely from the body after activating the immune system.

It is now known, however, that the jab products enter the bloodstream and become distributed throughout the body, where in some vaccinated people they continue to be active for at least 60 days.

‘This is not theoretical,’ Malone says. ‘This is putting needles into patients’ axillary lymph nodes, taking a sample, and asking is the RNA there; and taking blood samples and asking how much protein is in those blood samples. So that explains a lot of what we’ve experienced.’

Another major problem, he says, is that immunity gained naturally is far superior to immunity gained from the jab.  This is because when we are infected by the virus, the immune system mounts a defence based on recognising many of the virus proteins, such that when variants emerge there are still a range of ways of defeating the virus.  By contrast, the jab induces only the production of antibodies to the spike protein, so protection is far less.

‘The data are in now,’ Malone says. ‘Natural immunity is more robust, longer-lasting, and more protective.’

A third related problem arises from receiving multiple jabs.  These train the immune system to respond only to the spike protein produced by the original virus strain, in a phenomenon called immune imprinting.  ‘This is why when you get multiply jabbed – and I think these boosters are going to make it even worse – you actually become more susceptible to the viral infection,’ Malone says.

He adds that when Pfizer, which produces one of the main jabs used, was forced by court order to release data accumulated from all over the world by its pharmacovigilance team, page after page of adverse events were reported.

These included general disorders, nervous system disorders, musculoskeletal disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, respiratory disorders, skin disorders, infections, heart and blood vessel disorders, psychiatric disorders, blood and lymph system disorders, eye disorders. ‘It goes on and on’, says Malone.

But are these side-effects ‘extremely rare’, as the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) – in common with most other regulatory bodies – insists?

That claim is hard to reconcile with the fact that many expert warnings about the dangers are now validated by actual experience, including unprecedented levels of deaths and injuries reported after the jabs.

Over the next few days, TCW will take a look at some of the warnings given, and the mounting evidence for their validity with regard to specific threats to health.

Tomorrow: Heart and blood vessels.   

 

November 4, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | | Leave a comment

The Biosecurity State With James Corbett & Meryl Nass

Good Morning CHD | November 3, 2022

Good Morning CHD is a daily news show by Children’s Health Defense TV bringing you the latest health freedom news.

Contact us at GoodmorningCHD@childrenshealthdefense.org

November 4, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Reverse Transcription—Permanent Installation of mRNA Genetic Code

By Dr. Peter McCullough & John Leake | Courageous Discourse | November 2, 2022

When we heard about Operation Warp Speed there was sense of shock and awe. American greatness was poised to strike the “China Virus” and it was going to be defeated in a matter of weeks. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) created a project many years ago called ADEPT Pandemic Prevention Platform (P3) whose stated goal was to “end pandemics in 60 days with mRNA technology.”[i]

Our government has had a love affair with mRNA for over a decade for precisely a time such as the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. Hardly a virus from China, we have learned that Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill has been publishing on coronaviruses since the 1990’s. Baric and his consortium including Harvard and two Swiss labs conceived the projects, wrote the federal grants, and once awarded, did their development work in the Wuhan Institute of Virology biosecurity annex level 4. The laboratory built by Stephane Bancel formerly at BioMérieux and now CEO of Moderna, the NIH partner in the mRNA patent.[ii]

I wonder in all the DARPA and NIH meetings that occurred in the last ten years on mRNA, did they ever consider reverse transcription? If the mRNA stays long enough in the cytosol and is not dissolved by enzymes, the human cell could find base pairs of nucleic acids and create a mirror image of the genetic code which could be brought into the nucleus of the cell for insertion into the human genome. This is such a giant consideration because genetic code for a damaging and lethal protein installed into our own cells permanently would be passed down to somatic daughter cells and from spermatocytes and oocytes to an embryo. Forever changing the human genome for future generations must have been a large part of the safety discussion in those DARPA and NIH transcripts—only investigation and release of documents will tell the story. In the meantime, Alden et al have demonstrated integration of the center 444 base pair amplicon or reporter region from the Pfizer vaccine into the human nucleus in a hepatoma cell line.[iii]

This paper has not been challenged by any credible authority nor disproven by any other experiments.

Kyriakopoulos et al (including Dr. McCullough) have illustrated what the ramifications would be for those cells that have been permanently installed with Pfizer or Moderna genetic code.[iv]

In addition to the nine well recognized effects of the Spike protein in the human body, one of the potential consequences is oncogenesis. By suppression of the natural tumor surveillance system(s) in even one cell, it is conceivable that reverse transcription could lead to cancer with a single ill-advised injection of mRNA if it was delivered to a cancer-prone cell line in a susceptible person.

November 3, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Willful Blindness

When people don’t see what’s right in front of them

Bill & Elliott Rothstein in “The Last Ride of the Elephant Princess”
By John Leake – Courageous Discourse – November 3, 2022

Author’s Note: The following post is Part I of a series on Willful Blindness, Ideological Blindness, and other failures of perception.

According to Wikipedia:

Action is an American dark comedy series about a Hollywood producer named Peter Dragon, who is trying to recover from his last box-office failure. It aired on Fox during the 1999–2000 season. The series was critically praised for its irreverent and sometimes hostile look at Hollywood culture.

Peter Dragon’s Vice President of Production at Dragonfire Films is a former child actress named Wendy Ward, who also works as a high end courtesan for wealthy Hollywood denizens.

Episode 13, “The Last Ride of the Elephant Princess,” was shot in 2000. Action was cancelled before it was aired, but the episode was released on DVD and posted on YouTube. In this episode, Peter desperately needs to acquire a script, and is distressed to discover it is owned by Bill and Elliott Rothstein—extremely boorish brothers who have a knack for spotting and acquiring valuable properties.

Peter visits them at their favorite restaurant and offers to purchase the script. They tell him to have his cute Vice President, Wendy Ward, deliver the check to their house the following evening. Being an exceptionally good sport, Wendy decides to go into the Lion’s Den. Though she succeeds in her mission, she is so traumatized by her encounter with the Rothstein Brothers that she leaves Hollywood forever. As she puts it: “I’m through with this, Peter. I called a cab and I’m gonna go home and pack and I’m gonna move some place, some place clean.”

It now seems astonishing that such a brutal depiction of Hollywood was made for what was intended to be a popular television series. It also seems obvious that Bill and Elliott Rothstein are modeled after Bob and Harvey Weinstein. The habits, manners, and appearance of the former strongly resemble the latter.

A few years later, at a 2005 comedy event, Courtney Love was interviewed on the red carpet by comedian Natasha Leggero, who asked her if she had any advice for young girls moving to Hollywood. “If Harvey Weinstein invites you to a private party at his Four Seasons [hotel room] don’t go,” she said.

As “The Last Ride of the Elephant Princess” and Courtney Love indicated, it was no secret that being alone with Harvey Weinstein was a grave occupational hazard for a young woman’s body and soul.

Human affairs are more complicated and messy than we are often comfortable acknowledging. We all want things, and much of life is about gauging how much we are willing to accept and tolerate in order to get them. When Gwyneth Paltrow thanked Harvey Weinstein at her Academy Award acceptance speech in 1999, and Meryl Streep thanked him at the 2012 Golden Globe Awards by calling him “God,” both women were probably being perfectly sincere. During those moments, they were thinking about his extraordinary talent as a film producer, and not his terrible reputation with women.

Willful blindness—averting one’s gaze from bad conduct—is usually done with a simple calculation—namely, I can’t object to this conduct because doing so would prevent me from receiving a benefit I really want.

Most of us occasionally engage in some degree of willful blindness. It would be wildly impractical to go through life protesting every bit of bad behavior we encounter. However, it seems to me that—since around 2000—willful blindness on a spectacular scale has been endemic to American business, culture, and politics. The corporate scandals of the early 2000s, the Iraq War under false pretenses, massive fraud on Wall Street leading to the Financial Crisis, the Federal Reserve bailouts of the same people who caused the crisis. Then there was the Russian Collusion Hoax and the related, swamp of US government corruption in Ukraine—now a full-blown orgy for arms dealers and money launderers. Last but not least, the stupendous fraud and homicidal bad faith of the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex and its friends in Washington during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

All of the above could only happen because thousands of people in an array of organizations and institutions found it expedient to turn a blind eye to the innumerable signs they were participating in corrupt enterprises. It reminds me of a (perhaps apocryphal) quote attributed to Cicero: “Rome is made out of marble but it’s built on a sewer.”

November 3, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Russophobia, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

New Zealand says “misinformation” and Covid policies seen to be “infringing on rights” could fuel extremism

A secret service initiative

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | November 3, 2022

New Zealand authorities have released a guide to help people identify signs of violent extremism.

The secret service says they are usually closely monitoring between 40 to 50 potential terrorists, adding that most used to be motivated by their white identity or by religion – but in the past six months a third group has supposedly emerged; those motivated by politics, particularly around Covid.

“Recognizing a potential warning sign and then alerting New Zealand SIS or police could be the vital piece in the puzzle that ultimately saves lives,” NZSIS Director-General Rebecca Kitteridge said.

“To pay attention and to be alert so that if they see or hear about something that seems off, that worries them and concerns them, they might have a look at this information to say ‘does this indicate to me that this person is actually on the road to committing an attack.’”

The Director-General mentioned Covid specifically, adding that a growing number of people are also concerned about infringement on rights.

“So it could be the Covid measures that the Government took, or it could be other policies that are interpreted as infringing on rights and it’s a kind of what I describe as a hot mess of ideologies and beliefs fueled by conspiracy theories,” Kitteridge said.

Prime Minister  also had comments:

“It would be wrong to imply that we have this significant surge in threat in that regard – are there individuals who subscribe to a particular ideology that may border and dip into violent extremism? Yes,” she said.

On the topic of online misinformation, Ardern said, “it’s not about censorship,” adding “It’s about equipping people to identify when they may be subject to misinformation, making sure we’re building our resilience in our young people to be able to identify it… and to create trusted sources where people know they can go.”

November 3, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

RSV OUTBREAKS LEAVE MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | October 27, 2022

No longer a seasonal childhood illness, respiratory syncytial virus has been seen for the second year in a row outside its normal window. Speculation on cause has become a focus for sources on every side of the Covid equation.

November 3, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »