Timeless or most popular

National suicide is looming, but don’t dare ask any tough questions

By Frank Wright | TCW Defending Freedom | August 18, 2022

Britain appears to be turning into Italy, and not merely because it is seemingly impossible – or illegal – to stop the Boat People Invasion in either country. We also share the Italian habit of having unstable government.

Italy, of course, was until recently ruled by a technocrat. A manager with no real political convictions beyond the ruling ideology. This is the norm.

Apart from the spasm of direct democracy that was Brexit, British politics has consistently worked to exclude anyone from power with genuine political motivation.

Five years on and there is not much left of Brexit. The lesson to be learned is that even when you don’t lose, you will not be permitted to win. Brexit was a bloody nose to the metropolitan establishment which runs the country against the interests and opinions of the people it governs.

The number one issue amongst people was immigration, and it will certainly still be in the top three. The cost-of-Covid crisis should be number one – were anyone to ask.

If this cost took into account the massive transfer of wealth to the rich from the ordinary, the destruction of our ancient liberties and the compulsion to take injections which have become the leading cause of tragic coincidence, then the next question should be whether Argos does guillotines.

There is no way of knowing how the other real issues which threaten the survival of the nation play with the electorate – because these questions are simply never asked.

Migration, low birth rates, the insane cult of white hatred which demands ‘decolonisation’ (destruction) of everything of value. Does anyone get questioned on their feelings about our vanishing population? Is everyone perfectly happy that in London – and increasingly in other cities – your children will be an ethnic minority in their own schools?

Why should anyone have to worry about their children being given a bawdy sex show by a middle-aged man dressed as a woman? This is a legitimate concern, and not one which features on opinion polls.

Do people really think they should pay far higher fuel bills to subsidise some Net Zero entrepreneur, who had the lucky connections to government to help himself to our money? If they care about the planet, why are the rivers all polluted and the seas full of plastic?

Perhaps we could hope to discuss these issues freely on the major discussion platforms of the day. Simply saying this sounds either sarcastic or hopelessly naive. To engage with people on a digital platform is to be policed by zelotic Liberal extremists, whose job it is to compel you to entertain every opinion but your own.

Most of the time you know where the line is – beyond which you will be banned. This is a bit like the Overton Window, that frame which is used to describe what is politically acceptable to mention at any time.

It is never politically acceptable to mention any issue which might actually improve the lot of the nation and its people. It is slogans, grandiose talk, and the same programme regardless. Why is this?

The centrist settlement – Blairite, neoliberal, consumerist – marches under the rainbow flag and does nothing to preserve family, culture or nation. It promotes aggression abroad and dissolution at home.

The consumer angle is obviously hand in glove with the anti-natalist and sexuality-based lifestyle current, as people who produce no children have more to spend on the trash that stimulates growth.

Ask yourself whether any of these wars have done you any good. The Bush wars, the Blair wars, the one on now and the one to come – how have these wars made anything better for you?

How’s the local school looking? Is it safe to let the kids out? Why does Britain share with Sweden the highest rates of rape in Europe? These questions are never on the polls. No one in politics is going to do anything about them.

In 2006 the Euston manifesto was signed by journalists, academics – Liberals – setting out the neoliberal consensus which is the armature of our political settlement.

It talks about rights a lot, and supports military action to promote democracy and freedom abroad. Elections and consumerism are seen as the pinnacle of human aspiration. There is nothing better than Liberalism, which is why we all have to have it, like it or not. Even if it kills you.

The consumer economy is an addiction economy. Is any politician going to do anything about that? Buying endless trash, being horribly fat, being on what my Nana used to call ‘tablets’ – these are your patriotic duty.

The consumer economy promotes compulsive buying, insatiable appetite, mental illness and the dependence on drugs legal and otherwise. Everything is a condition to be treated with a tablet – this is called ‘medicalising’ behaviour – because tablets are a product on sale. The market, however, is not fixing us.

Would you prefer to live in a nation than in a market? No politician will ask this question, either. That is the kind of question to which we would have to turn to answer the problem of the Brexit vote.

What is the future of Britain – of Northern Ireland – outside of the European Union? It is to ask a serious question about the health of the nation and what that might mean, but we have no serious people to ask it. Instead, late-empire corruption, a scramble for the spoils, and the chaos of extreme individualism in crazy identity politics. Madness is mainstream. Politics is all about the grift.

We have managers, media performers, careerists with contacts in the press. Practically everything these people do is some kind of stunt which gestures to their voter base.

Anti-woke, pro-trans – these issues of the so-called culture war are symptoms of an insanity in our politics where nothing can ever be realistically done to prevent national suicide. The question on the ballot paper is how much tax you will pay to fund it.

August 18, 2022 Posted by aletho | Civil Liberties, Supremacism, Social Darwinism, Timeless or most popular | Human rights, UK | Leave a comment

CARBON EMISSIONS SCORES & THE CONTROL OF EVERYTHING

Computing Forever | August 17, 2022

Support my work on Subscribe Star: https://www.subscribestar.com/dave-cullen
Support my work via crypto: https://computingforever.com/donate/
Follow me on Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/hybM74uIHJKg/

Sources: https://computingforever.com/2022/08/17/carbon-emissions-scores-the-control-of-everything/

Subscribe to The Ice Age Farmer: https://www.youtube.com/c/IceAgeFarmer

August 18, 2022 Posted by aletho | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment

Monkeypox Vaccine Insanity — Too Many Risks and Now, Liability-Free

The Defender | August 17, 2022

For totalitarians and technocrats bent on shredding constitutional protections and wresting control from ordinary people over personal decision-making in areas ranging from health to finances, the events of the past two-and-a-half years were a proving ground — showing that promises of safety via injection could persuade many people to act against their own best interests, often with disastrous results.

But with the public growing increasingly ho-hum about the COVID-19 pandemic and the U.S. discarding tens of millions of COVID-19 vaccines — including over a quarter of some states’ doses — tyrants wanting to “further advance draconian biosecurity policies and global power grabs” needed a new emergency to keep the injection scam going.

In May 2022, right on cue, entered monkeypox, with (echoes of decades past) cases reported “predominantly … in networks of men who have sex with men.”

Just like the coronavirus Event 201, the reported monkeypox outbreak was prefigured by a “tabletop simulation” one year prior and by “suspiciously” timed, before-the-fact clinical trials of monkeypox treatments and vaccines.

With the “outbreak” thus positioned in the headlines, what happened next?

After allowing suspense to build for a couple of months but with fewer than a dozen deaths worldwide, the World Health Organization (WHO) head Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus in late July “side-stepped” his own advisors to pronounce monkeypox a “public health emergency of international concern,” the WHO’s first such ruling since SARS-CoV-2.
With no U.S. deaths, the Biden administration and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) followed suit, declaring a public health emergency.
Around the same time, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Robert M. Califf soothingly told Americans, “We understand … an emerging disease may leave people feeling concerned and uncertain, but it’s important to note that we already have medical products in place …”

One of the “products in place” was the Jynneos smallpox vaccine (brand names Imvanex or Imvamune), which the FDA licensed for adults in September 2019, conveniently approving it not only for smallpox but for “prevention” of monkeypox — even though in primate studies, pox lesions developed just the same.

At the time of licensure, the CEO of Bavarian Nordic — the Danish biotech company that developed the smallpox jab in partnership with the U.S. government, funneling millions of doses into America’s Strategic National Stockpile — crowed that the green light for monkeypox would create “new commercial opportunities.”

At present, a suddenly woke WHO is “accepting proposals” to rebrand monkeypox so as to “avoid offense,” but with the historically loaded “pox” word planted in the public’s subconscious — a word that calls to mind not only unsightly skin eruptions but social stigma and Shakespearean curses — the damage has been done.

Officials no doubt expect the latest “pox” — which also has exotic associations with prairie dogs and African rodents — to stoke the types of fears that will send people running straight into the arms of the nearest vaccinator.

In cities like San Francisco — where long lines of “mostly men” reportedly have been queuing up in the wee hours of the morning for a chance at a shot — the drum-beating about a “rapid rise in cases” already appears to be working.

What’s the big deal?

The same fallacious PCR (polymerase chain reaction) technology used to conjure up large numbers of COVID-19 “cases” out of thin air — a technology that inventor Kary Mullis warned should never be used for diagnosis — is once again the WHO’s preferred laboratory test for monkeypox.

Setting aside the thorny PCR issue, there are many other questions one could ask about monkeypox and its supposed discovery in humans in 1970, including why, after half a century in which the condition labeled monkeypox “never really [got] off the ground outside of a couple of countries in Africa,” it is “suddenly in every Western nation and being hyped up by public health authorities, the mainstream media and the World Health Organization.”

Other than the skin lesions, the symptoms of so-called monkeypox “could describe hundreds of millions of cases of simple flu-like illness or even the common cold.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) characterizes monkeypox as “generally a mild disease,” involving little more than rashes, fevers and chills that typically require “no specific treatment.”

A public health expert at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health said, “Monkeypox is not likely to kill anybody in the United States,” with short-lived pain being about the worst that it might do.

In the 2021 pandemic tabletop exercise focused on monkeypox, one of the features of the “fictional” scenario under discussion was that an “unusual strain” of monkeypox would come along to wreak global havoc.

Obligingly, media accounts in 2022 are evoking a monkeypox that “seems to have changed,” though reporters are issuing mixed messages.

In a conversation on NPR, for example, a science reporter described “very localized” and “extremely subtle” monkeypox symptoms not “matching up” to the “horrible rash” depicted in medical textbooks, prompting the interviewer to remark on the “good news” of a milder disease — at which point the reporter felt compelled to correct the benign impression, adding, “it can also be really severe and really painful” and “make you sick for, like, up to four weeks.”

Skin reactions of all kinds are well-documented adverse consequences of vaccination. In Israel, a renowned vaccine scientist has been making the case that the immune system breakdown caused by COVID-19 mRNA vaccines is the culprit responsible for the current monkeypox situation.

Why else, others are asking, would symptoms appear simultaneously in multiple countries and continents that just happen to correspond to the locations that deployed Pfizer’s COVID-19 jab?

Atrocious smallpox vaccine track record

From their earliest days through today, smallpox vaccines had a dreadful track record — and this fact is not even particularly controversial.

In 2003, researchers openly characterized the smallpox vaccine available at the time, Wyeth’s Dryvax, as “less safe than other vaccines,” describing “known adverse events that range from mild to severe,” including death, brain swelling, lesions and other skin problems.

They concluded the “net harm would result if smallpox vaccine were made available to the general public on a voluntary basis” and that some individuals would be “unable to weigh the risks and benefits for true informed consent.”

Although Dryvax fell out of favor in the mid-1980s, it continued to be used to vaccinate groups such as military personnel, lab workers and others deemed “high risk.”

In 2007, the FDA approved Acambis’s ACAM2000, made with a “clone” of Dryvax and grown in lab cultures of African green monkey kidney (Vero) cells.

Right after Acambis won a 10-year contract to supply the U.S. government with the vaccine, the company was gobbled up by Sanofi Pasteur.

The U.S. military, which by then had given Dryvax to more than 1.4 million military personnel and contractors, immediately switched to ACAM2000, albeit with a first-ever, FDA-imposed requirement that each person vaccinated receive a “medication guide.”

ACAM2000’s “unwieldy” method of administration involves using a two-pronged needle to make “a series of tiny jabs at the skin” designed to elicit a “kind of gnarly pustule” which, if it doesn’t show up a week later, necessitates yet another attempt.

In an article published by The Defender in November 2020, Pam Long, an Army veteran, described smallpox vaccination (whether Dryvax or ACAM2000) as one of “four horsemen of pharma” destroying veterans’ health.

Long highlighted cardiac risks, in particular.

Back in 2003, CDC authors described adverse reactions from Dryvax ranging from “benign, if frightening in appearance” to “life-threatening,” conceding that myopericarditis was “truly” an adverse outcome but admitting to not knowing about long-term consequences.

In 2021, when the Military Vaccine Agency published a study involving monthly surveillance of clinically “adjudicated” cardiac and neurological adverse events experienced in temporal association with ACAM2000 vaccination, it reported a significantly higher rate of myopericarditis in younger men (under age 40), and overall rates of “any cardiovascular event” of 1.14 per 1,000.

As Long noted, the FDA documented a much higher incidence of 6.9 cardiac events per 1,000 for ACAM2000, and one study reported myocarditis in one in every 175 recipients.

New kid on the block

By June 2022, the media build-up promoting monkeypox vaccination and the Jynneos injection in particular was on full display, with headlines playing up the idea of hordes eager for jabs that are in short supply.

To tee up demand for the “newer generation” — and largely unfamiliar — Jynneos vaccine, CNBC classified its competitor, ACAM2000, as practically a dinosaur, an “older generation smallpox vaccine that can have serious side effects.”

In late July, Vox agreed there would be “trade-offs” if the U.S. were to tap into its “100 million-odd doses” of ACAM2000 “currently sitting on the shelves at the Strategic National Stockpile, largely untouched” — trade-offs such as “potentially concerning side effects, the complex way it has to be administered, and limits on who can safely receive the vaccine” (no immunocompromised individuals, no pregnant women, no one with eczema and no babies).

While ACAM2000’s “cumbersome” mode of administration does not lend itself to “assembly-line” distribution, Jynneos, Vox assured us, “can be given in public venues, like festivals and even bathhouses.”

However, we know very little about Jynneos, other than the serious adverse events listed in the package insert — Crohn’s disease, sarcoidosis (an inflammatory disease affecting multiple organs, notably the lungs), eye weakness and throat tightness (a potential sign of anaphylaxis).

A higher proportion of Jynneos recipients (1.3%) also experienced cardiac adverse events compared to placebo recipients (0.2%) who received saline.

A CDC scientist who led a clinical trial that was supposed to provide information about efficacy and side effects — a trial that recruited subjects in the Democratic Republic of the Congo from 2017 to 2020 — gave a monkeypox briefing to CDC advisors in late June but, according to Dr. Meryl Nass, scientific advisor to Children’s Health Defense, he was “coy” about sharing the study’s results.

Liability-free yet again

Nass also pointed out that although Jynneos is licensed and, under ordinary circumstances, would be susceptible to vaccine injury lawsuits, the FDA and HHS pulled a fast one yet again that effectively shields Bavarian Nordic and the U.S. government from liability.

Using vaccine “shortages” as their excuse, they arranged the liability shield by putting Jynneos under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) umbrella that shifts the U.S. over to administering “fractional doses” and using a different mode of administration (injection into the skin rather than between skin and muscle).

The EUA also permits administration of Jynneos to children if they are deemed “high risk.”

After the EUA announcement, Bavarian Nordic’s CEO expressed “reservations” about the altered dosing and mode of administration, stating further studies would have been a “prudent” step “before overhauling the nation’s monkeypox vaccine strategy.”

The Biden administration’s rejoinder was that Bavarian Nordic was just voicing sour grapes about “a potential loss in profits.”

The company needn’t worry — its stock has gone up by more than 150% since the announcement of a “moneypox” outbreak.

As for Americans, we have a choice: We can join the crowds supposedly clamoring for yet another vaccine that doesn’t prevent anything.

Or we can “just say no,” recognizing that there just might be something “unusual about a global pandemic occurring just months after a simulation of a global pandemic of exactly that kind, followed shortly after by the first-ever global outbreak of an even-more-obscure virus just months after a simulation of an outbreak of exactly that kind.”

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.

August 17, 2022 Posted by aletho | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | FDA | Leave a comment

What to Know Before Deciding to Take The Novavax Injection

Accepting an injection of spike protein hoping it is safe or effective is absurd. Yet, many are again forced to make a decision threatening their health and ability to support their family.

By Pierre Kory, MD, MPA | August 17, 2022

A subscriber asked me to write a post about my thoughts on Novavax because she “really trusts my judgement.” Flattered, I felt like I should share what they are. So here goes.

Before any medical intervention, but especially in the case of a novel or barely tested one, a long standing practice of medical ethics is that informed consent must be obtained. The emphasis should be on the informed part and not the consent part. Note that informed consent has been one of the foundations of medical ethics, essentially an inviolable standard, or at least it used to be before this “emergency” came along where now you have pharmacists injecting children with barely a mention of the risks, “because they might be too scared to take the shot.”

Informed consent discussions are simple in structure but often complex and time-consuming to conduct. It relies on providing the patient with as detailed and comprehensive a knowledge of the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the intervention.

So, should we go through an informed consent discussion with the novel Novavax injection? Actually, I would not. Why? Because I don’t hold informed consent discussions for interventions I do not recommend or would not want my patient to consider. I instead tell them not to consider and give them my reasons for that recommendation. Thus, I only conduct informed consent discussion for interventions that I feel would bring about greater benefits than risks (generally much greater), and I would only do so for patients with active illness in order to get them better. A vaccine is a much different proposition as they are given to patients without disease.

Why would I not even consider Novavax as a reasonable option? Simple:

There has never been a successful or safe coronavirus vaccine. The last 18 months have shown that COVID vaccines lead to increased chances of getting ill, equal or increased chances of transmitting, and higher likelihood of entering hospital and dying. And that is leaving unmentioned the lethality and toxicity of the mRNA platform ones. See my “Vaccine Exemption Letter” post for the data to support these statements. The coronavirus is a rapidly mutating virus, thus vaccines will always be non-neutralizing because by the time they are manufactured and ready for injection, the virus has mutated into forms poorly responsive to older, narrower antibodies.
Novavax is still formulated with a two and a half year-old protein for this rapidly mutagenic coronavirus, so it would be like giving a two and a half year old flu shot for this years flu (worse actually). Yet our health system, including every single academic medical center in the country is still mandating and eager to adopt use of an outdated viral protein. I would love to say this is beyond belief, but this is the world we live in now.
We now have the omicron variant circulating, which is generally well tolerated by most, particularly those who are healthy or young (and even the old), and especially those with natural immunity.
The country now has abundant natural immunity, which even the CDC now admits offers equal protection (actually, natural immunity offers better protection but let’s give the CDC some credit for telling at least a partial truth). So why are we still vaccinating and/or mandating in those who have recovered from COVID?
Vaccinating against respiratory viruses works very poorly as the antibodies do not reach high concentrations in the nasal and respiratory mucosa which is where the virus enters. The flu vaccine is almost completely ineffective, even when you get this years flu shot. Not known by most.
Vaccinating against respiratory viruses with non-neutralizing vaccines actually weakens and warps the immune system such that you are more likely to get other respiratory viruses or illnesses as well (this has been well reported after flu vaccinations given that those vaccinated against the flu are more susceptible to other respiratory viral infections).
Proposing a novel and barely tested product coming out of the pharmaceutical industry to a patient is a wicked proposition in modern times. Note the pharmaceutical industry is a documented criminal industry which has repeatedly put out unsafe and ineffective products (even deadly, i.e opioids, Avandia, Vioxx, Bextra, the list goes on), followed by burying the adverse event data while pushing their wares through control of professional societies, federal/state legislation, and captured agencies. They have paid over $12 billion in criminal fines and over $16 billion in civil fines, just in the last 20 years across the 20 largest settlements. Their history of these actions stretches even longer.
The history of criminality around the COVID vaccines dwarfs any actions the industry has done in the past. The Pfizer documents that the PFDA (the P is not a typo) tried to hide for 75 years reveal insane amounts of manipulations to try to show they work and are safe. They didn’t and weren’t. Further the testimony from the Ventavia/Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson reveals that the studies were so poorly done with such little follow-up of patients that they are simply not credible. Remember, Pharma. Does. Not. Care. About. Your. Health. Just your wallet (actually the government’s wallet, which I suppose is also your wallet).

So, conceptually, I think the idea of getting any coronavirus vaccine at this point is preposterous. However, let’s try to do a more traditional informed consent using the structure of risks/benefits/alternatives. The following is what I think other providers (or pharmacists egads) should be telling people prior to offering them Novavax, or more accurately, in order to get them to avoid it.

Yes, Novavax is a “non-mRNA” vaccine and is designed more along the line of a traditional vaccine in that an amount of viral protein is injected into the arm, it is then recognized as a “foreign” protein by our immune system which then makes antibodies against it. These antibodies are then thought (“hoped” remember) to help clear the virus rapidly and efficiently after exposure such that we avoid illness. Sounds good on paper. Not. Just ask Geert Vanden Bossche, one of the worlds top immunologists and vaccine experts.

RISKS

Novavax delivers the spike protein. As a self-described clinical expert in spike-protein induced disease, the spike protein is a pathogen. A pathogen is a substance or organism that is capable of inducing illness. Note that I call myself an expert because there are very few of us out here studying it’s pathogenicity, however I would argue Professor Paul Marik has taken the lead across the globe in amassing all the basic science and clinical research underlying the knowledge of the mechanisms and treatments of spike-protein induced diseases. That scholarly document is in evolution, and has over 300 scientific references at this point, with rapid evolutions and additions each week. Note that it appears to be the world’s sole “comprehensive” scholarly work on spike protein pathogenicity and empirically proposed treatments.

Another great sadness about the US COVID response is that almost the entire health system and all of academia have yet to recognize the spike as a pathogen or formulate any approach to treating Long-Haul or Post-Vaccine Injury. Until they do, they will continue to fail to recognize the causes or mechanisms of these syndromes as well as to offer effective treatments. And, it goes without saying, they will not be able to discuss this in thier ill-informed consent discussions. Their deplorable failure at treating these disabling diseases is astounding and will continue for the foreseeable future. Remember, the system docs won’t treat because they are all members of the Church of RCT Fundamentalism (a.k.a “evidence based medicine.”) You know, where they will sit there paralyzed until some massive randomized controlled trial is published in a high-impact medical journal and then is recommended by a federal agency or national medical society. You know what that system produces by now if you read my Substack. Not only will it leave patients untreated for months to years, but while the docs sit around waiting, Pharma, via the agencies and media, will suppress or attack any generic medicines or supplements that front-line doctors and patients have found effective. They will do this with ferocity and depravity until such a time they can “save the day” with the massive promotion of a novel, pricey Big Pharma pill which they will get our government to pay for at a price they set. Think about what happened to ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine until Pharma saved the day with the pathetic and poisonous Paxlovid using our government coffers. Rinse repeat here.

The two major and complex diseases unleashed by the spike are what we call “long haul” and “post-vaccine injury” syndromes. I probably should differentiate post-vaccine into two subtypes, with one being an acute, sudden death syndrome caused by massive heart attacks, myocarditis (which can cause lethal arrhythmias or pump failure), and/or massive strokes. Excess mortality amongst the vaccinated in 2021 skyrocketed and is showing up in Life Insurance industry data in both the U.S and other countries. However I don’t see those events in my practice because they are sudden deaths occurring in asymptomatic patients (who are often swimming or running or doing something else fun until they suddenly drop dead). My practice instead sees patients who suffer with the more chronic subtype consisting of myriad, disabling symptoms across multiple organ systems. Now, whether there is enough spike in Novavax to produce similar deadly events or chronic syndromes in the future, who knows. More on that below.

SHORT TERM RISK DATA

Not looking good here folks. Let’s take a look at the actual published trial of Novavax, and their chart detailing the “side effects.” Then let’s compare it to Pfizers mRNA “vaccine” trial published in December 2020. Look carefully. I will interpret these charts below.

Click for full size

Here is how I interpret the data:

The “local” and “systemic” adverse events are absurdly high in both. I remember thinking back in December 2020 when I was reading the Pfizer trial, I said to myself, “Wow, that does NOT look friendly!” Not just the wickedly high frequency of really sore arms with redness and swelling, but the very high rates of “systemic symptoms” of fatigue, headache, chills, vomiting, muscle pain. Very high rates of those. Ouch.
Next, look at the “dose response,” meaning look at the incidence of adverse events after the 2nd shot compared to the 1st shot. If it is higher after the 2nd, it indicates a “dose-response relationship,” which, when we are talking about a therapeutic, is a pillar of evidence to support the efficacy of the drug. For instance, ivermectin in COVID has a strong dose response relationship, meaning the higher the dose, the more effective it is (that is why all the high impact trials tried as much as they could to limit the dose of ivermectin, in particular during history’s most fraudulent trial called the TOGETHER trial).

Conversely, a dose-response in terms of side effects is a pillar of the measure of toxicity. The more you give, the sicker you get. Not cool. Now take a look at Pfizers published chart above, keeping in mind, these are only the short term systemic side effects.

Pfizer: fatigue goes from 47% after the 1st to 59% after the 2nd in young folks and 34% up to 51% in older folks. Chills: 14% to 35% in young, 6% to 23% in old. Same pattern and increases with muscle pains and also joint pains and use of anti-pyretic medications.
Now, take a look at Novavax. Note how they don’t give you the numeral percentages and instead make you crane your neck and use a ruler to estimate the actual incidences and increases. But just looking at the height of the bars from shot 1 to shot 2 and the increases in the yellow at the tops of the bars (yellow = “Grade 3” reactions – i.e. more severe), you see again what looks like a scary shot to me with some of the local and systemic events reported even higher than with Pfizer’s mRNA shot! So, is Novavax safer?

LONG TERM SIDE EFFECTS. Unknown. Remember the famous, “I guess we will just have to give it to see how safe it is” by one of the nations top vaccine experts. I swear, again, and I say this often, you just cannot make this stuff up. So, an informed consent discussion should relate that long term side effects are unknown. Remember as well, we are not in a supposed “emergency” anymore, despite the fact our government keeps renewing its emergency powers. If the person conducting this discussion tries to argue that in terms of long term effects, it is safe and effective because the mRNA vaccines were safe and effective, that is so categorically ridiculous it does not even bare addressing. Again, read my “Vaccine Exemption Letter” post for the data on toxicity and lethality of those vaccines. Do not proceed. My caution would be that spike protein is a pathogen with sequences that we know generate antibodies that then are capable of attacking many tissues (what are called autoantibodies which cause a category of diseases called “auto-immune” diseases). Also, spike protein, when broken down by the body is known to generate amyloid like fragments which are highly thrombogenic (i.e. cause clotting). Spike protein also stimulates immune cells called monocytes and macrophages which disturb numerous organ functions. Spike protein is also toxic to mitochondria which are the energy producing parts of each cell. In summary, don’t sign up for any more spike protein than is already circulating in the world.

Also, Novavax, like the mRNA vaccines uses “nanoparticles” in a “saponin-based adjuvant” solution which is novel and proprietary, patented only in 2020. Well, thats reassuring no? Their published paper states that the adjuvant and the vaccine was found to be “safe and immunogenic” in Phase 1 and 2 trials. Then I found this in the supplementary appendix from one of the earlier trials, ”the mechanism of Matrix-M1 (the adjuvant) is not well defined, but it has been associated with a potent induction of leukocyte activation and migration into the draining lymph nodes in their previous study.” Not reassuring.

EFFICACY

Unknown, but likely ineffective as it has not been tested against Omicron, or any of its sub-variants or whatever future variant will be circulating when it rolls out. Plus, as we know now, all the predicted efficacy reported from COVID-19 vaccine trials were never observed in the real-world, again likely due to trial shenanigans and data manipulations and removal and/or miscategorization of those who fell ill during the trial or simply due to the fact the virus is rapidly mutating. Even if it were effective, we know from the past two years, it would be short lived. I again have to mention natural immunity. It already protects against severe disease and reasonably well from re-infection, and there is no credible data to suggest adding an even older spike protein vaccine using a newly patented adjuvant will better protect you or make you healthier.

ALTERNATIVES TO VACCINATION

For readers of my Substack, you all know that you can always just skip the vaccine and instead just rely on early treatment which has been shown to be near perfectly effective in achieving rapid recovery and avoidance of hospitalization and death, especially when given in synergistic combinations like the FLCCC’s or the AAPS’s protocols. In fact, as you know, no vaccine would ever get an EUA or approval if effective treatments were available. Further, there are now over three dozen effective treatments supported by controlled trials, with many of them repurposed and/or over the counter. I suppose you could also just rely on Paxlovid given its demonstration of such incredible efficacy in treating President Biden and Dr. Fauci.

Hope this helps.

P.S. I opened a tele-health clinic providing care not only in the prevention and treatment of acute COVID, but with a specialized focus on the study and treatment of both Long-Haul and Post-Vaccination injury syndromes. If anyone needs our help, feel free to visit our website at www.drpierrekory.com.

P.P.S. I am getting professional help (hah!) to write a book about what I have personally witnessed and learned during Pharma’s historic Disinformation war on ivermectin. Pre-order here for:

August 17, 2022 Posted by aletho | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | COVID-19 Vaccine, Flu vaccine, Novavax | Leave a comment

RNA for Moderna’s Omicron Booster Manufactured by CIA-Linked Company

BY WHITNEY WEBB | ~~UNLIMITED HANGOUT~~ | AUGUST 17, 2022

Since late last year, messenger RNA for Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines, including its recently reformulated Omicron booster, has been exclusively manufactured by a little known company with significant ties to US intelligence.

Earlier this week, the United Kingdom became the first country to approve Moderna’s reformulated version of its COVID-19 vaccine, which claims to provide protection against both the original form of the virus and the significantly less lethal but more transmissible Omicron variant. The product was approved by the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) with the support of the UK government’s Commission on Human Medicines.

Described by UK officials as a “sharpened tool” in the nation’s continued vaccination campaign, the reformulated vaccine combines the previously approved COVID-19 vaccine with a “vaccine candidate” targeting the Omicron variant BA.1. That vaccine candidate has never been previously approved and has not been the subject of independent study. The MHRA approved the vaccine based on a single, incomplete human trial currently being conducted by Moderna. The company promoted incomplete data from that trial in company press releases in June and July. The study has yet to be published in a medical journal or peer reviewed. No concerns have been raised by any regulatory agency, including the MHRA, regarding Moderna’s past history of engaging in suspect and likely illegal activity in past product trials, including for its original COVID-19 vaccine.

The approval comes shortly before several Western countries, including the UK, plan to conduct a massive COVID-19 booster vaccination campaign this fall. Moderna has also noted that approval for its Omicron booster vaccine are pending in the US, EU, Australia and Canada – all of which are also planning fall vaccination campaigns focused on COVID-19. The company’s CEO, Stéphane Bancel, has called the reformulated vaccine “our lead candidate for a Fall 2022 booster.”

Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel, Source: ClockworkOrange

However, unlike the company’s original COVID-19 vaccine, the genetic material, or messenger RNA (mRNA), for this new vaccine, including the newly formulated genetic material meant to provide protection against the Omicron variant, is being manufactured, not by Moderna, but by a relatively new company that has received hardly any media attention, despite its overt links to US intelligence. Last September, it was quietly announced that a company called National Resilience (often referred to simply as Resilience) would begin manufacturing the mRNA for Moderna COVID-19 vaccine products. Under the terms of the multi-year agreement, “Resilience will produce mRNA for the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine at its facility in Mississauga, Ontario, for distribution worldwide.”

“Reinventing Biomanufacturing”

National Resilience was founded relatively recently, in November 2020, and describes itself as “a manufacturing and technology company dedicated to broadening access to complex medicines and protecting biopharmaceutical supply chains against disruption.” It has since been building “a sustainable network of high-tech, end-to-end manufacturing solutions with the aim to ensure the medicines of today and tomorrow can be made quickly, safely, and at scale.” It further plans to “reinvent biomanufacturing” and “democratize access to medicines,” namely gene therapies, experimental vaccines and other “medicines of tomorrow.”

In pursuit of those goals, the company announced it would “actively invest in developing powerful new technologies to manufacture complex medicines that are defining the future of therapeutics, including cell and gene therapies, viral vectors, vaccines, and proteins.” It was founded with the reported intention “to build a better system for manufacturing complex medicines to fight deadly diseases” as a way to improve post-COVID “pandemic preparedness.”

The company initially marketed its manufacturing capabilities as “the Resilience platform”, and offers principally “RNA Modalities”, including RNA development for vaccines, gene editing and therapeutics; and “Virus Production”, including viral vectors, oncolytic viruses (i.e. a virus engineered to preferentially attack cancer cells), viruses for use in vaccine development and gene-edited viruses for unspecified purposes. It is worth noting that, to date, many controversial “gain-of-function” experiments have justified modifying viruses for the same purposes as described by National Resilience’s Virus Production capabilities. In addition, National Resilience offers product formulations and other modalities, such as biologics and cell therapies, to its clientele and the “Virus Production” of its website has since been removed.

Resilience CEO Rahul Singhvi, Source: Resilience

National Resilience, being such a young company, has very few clients and there is little publicly available information on its manufacturing capabilities aside from the company’s website. The firm only acquired its first commercial manufacturing plant in March 2021, located in Boston, MA and purchased from Sanofi, followed shortly thereafter by the acquisition of another separate plant located in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. Makeovers were announced for the plants, but little is publicly known about their progress. Prior to the acquisitions, the company had been subleasing a Bay area facility in Fremont, California. Reporters were puzzled at the time as to why a company with roughly 700 employees at the time had acquired a total of 599,00 square feet of manufacturing space after having only emerged from stealth less than 6 months prior.

In April 2021, National Resilience acquired Ology Bioservices Inc., which had received a $37 million contract from the US military the previous November to develop an advanced anti-COVID-19 monoclonal antibody treatment. This acquisition also provided National Resilience with its first Biosafety Level 3 (BSL-3) laboratory and the ability to manufacture cell and gene therapies, live viral vaccines and vectors and oncolytic viruses.

Despite being in the earliest stages of developing its “revolutionary” manufacturing capabilities, National Resilience entered into a partnership with the Government of Canada in July of last year. Per that agreement, the Canadian government plans to invest CAD 199.2 million (about $154.9 million) into National Resilience’s Ontario-based subsidiary, Resilience Biotechnologies Inc. Most of those funds are destined for use in expanding the Ontario facility that Resilience acquired last March and which is now manufacturing the mRNA for Moderna’s COVID-19 products. Canada’s Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, François-Philippe Champagne, asserted at the time that the investment would “build future pandemic preparedness” and help “to grow Canada’s life science ecosystem as an engine for our economic recovery.” More recently, in 2022, the company has announced a few new clients – Takeda, Opus Genetics and the US Department of Defense.

According to National Resilience’s executives, the company’s ambitions apparently go far beyond manufacturing RNA and viruses. For instance, Resilience CEO Rahul Singhvi has claimed that the company is seeking to build “the world’s most advanced biopharmaceutical manufacturing ecosystem.” Yet, Singhvi has declined to offer much in the way of specifics when it comes to exactly how the company plans to become the planet’s most elite biomanufacturing company.

In an interview with The San Francisco Business Times, Singhvi states that Resilience is looking to fill its massive manufacturing plants with “technologies and people that can set and apply new standards for manufacturing cell therapies and gene therapies as well as RNA-based treatments.” Prior to Resilience, Singhvi was CEO of NovaVax and an operating partner at Flagship Pioneering, which played a major role in the creation and rise of Moderna.

Singhvi has further insisted that National Resilience is “not a therapeutics company, not a contractor and not a tools company” and instead aims “to boost production using the new therapeutic modalities” such as RNA-based treatments, which have become normalized in the COVID-19 era. Whereas contract manufacturers “are like kitchens, with pots and pans ready for any recipe,” “what we’re trying to do is fix the recipes,” Singhvi has explained. One member of Resilience’s board of directors, former FDA Commissioner and Pfizer Board member Scott Gottlieb, has described the company as seeking to act as the equivalent of Amazon Web Services for the biotechnology industry.

Essentially, Resilience bills itself as offering solutions that will allow “futuristic” medicines, including mRNA vaccines, to be produced more quickly and more efficiently, with the apparent goal of monopolizing certain parts of the biomanufacturing process. It also appears poised to become the manufacturer of choice for mRNA vaccines and experimental therapeutics in the event of a future pandemic, which some public health “philanthropists” like Bill Gates have said is imminent.

Perhaps the company’s most noteworthy ambition relates to their claims that they support clients through the government regulatory process. Given the company’s emphasis on speedy mass production of experimental gene therapies, its stated intention of getting the “futuristic” medical products it manufactures to market as quickly as possible seems at odds with the slower, traditional regulatory processes. Indeed, one could easily argue that the approvals of mRNA vaccines for the first time in human history during the COVID-19 crisis were only possible because of the major relaxing of regulatory procedurse and safety testing due to the perceived urgency of the situation.

Resilience seems intent on seeing that phenomenon repeat itself. As previously mentioned, the company claims to allow for the setting and application of “new standards for manufacturing cell therapies and gene therapies” and also says it plans to become a “technology-aggregating standards bearer that helps therapies come to market more efficiently.” It previously offered on its website “regulatory support” and “strategy consulting” to clients, suggesting that it would seek to mediate between clients and government regulators in order to fulfill its goal of having the products it manufactures taken to market more quickly. In addition, upon launch, the company claimed it planned to obtain unspecified “regulatory capabilities.” If so, it is certainly notable that former top Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials are either on the company’s board or, as will be noted shortly, played a major role in the company’s creation.

The People Behind Resilience

Resilience was co-founded by Biotech venture capitalist Robert Nelsen, who is known for listening “to science’s earliest whispers, even when data are too early for just about anyone else.” Nelsen was one of the earliest investors in Illumina, a California-based gene-sequencing hardware and software giant that is believed to currently dominate the field of genomics. As mentioned in a previous Unlimited Hangout investigation, Illumina is closely tied to the DARPA-equivalent of the Wellcome Trust known as Wellcome Leap, which is also focused on “futuristic” and transhumanist “medicines.” Nelsen is now chairman of National Resilience’s board, which is a “Who’s Who” of big players from the US National Security State, Big Pharma and Pharma-related “philanthropy.”

Bob Nelsen of ARCH Venture Partners, Source: ARCH Venture Partners

However, while Nelsen has been given much of the credit for creating Resilience, he revealed in one interview that the idea for the company had actually come from someone else – Luciana Borio. In July of last year, Nelsen revealed that it was while talking to Borio about “her work running pandemic preparedness on the NSC [National Security Council]” that had “helped lead to the launch of Nelsen’s $800 million biologics manufacturing startup Resilience.”

At the time of their conversation, Borio was the vice president of In-Q-tel, the venture capital arm of the CIA that has been used since its creation in the early 2000s to found a number of companies, many of which act as Agency fronts. Prior to In-Q-Tel, she served as director for medical and biodefense preparedness at the National Security Council during the Trump administration and had previously been the acting chief scientist at the FDA from 2015 to 2017.

Borio is currently a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations, a consultant to Goldman Sachs, a member of the Bill Gates-funded vaccine alliance CEPI, and a partner at Nelsen’s venture capital firm ARCH Venture Partners, which funds Resilience. Nelsen’s ARCH previously funded Nanosys, the company of the controversial scientist Charles Lieber. Around the time of her conversation with Nelsen that led to Resilience’s creation, Borio was co-writing a policy paper for the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security that recommended linking COVID-19 vaccination status with food stamp programs and rent assistance as a possible means of coercing certain populations to take the experimental vaccine.

Borio is hardly Resilience’s only In-Q-Tel connection, as the CEO of In-Q-Tel, Chris Darby, sits on the company’s board of directors. Darby is also on the board of directors of the CIA Officers Memorial Foundation. Darby was also recently a member of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI), where members of the military, intelligence community and Silicon Valley’s top firms argued for the need to reduce the use of “legacy systems” in favor of AI-focused alternatives as a national security imperative. Among those “legacy systems” identified by the NSCAI were in-person doctor visits and even receiving medical care from a human doctor, as opposed to an AI “doctor.” The NSCAI also argued for the removal of “regulatory barriers” that prevent these new technologies from replacing “legacy systems.”

Resilience Board Member Drew Oetting, Source: 8VC

Another notable board member, in discussing Resilience’s intelligence ties, is Drew Oetting. Oetting works for Cerberus Capital Management, the firm headed by Steve Feinberg who previously led the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board under the Trump administration. Cerberus is notably the parent company of DynCorp, a controversial US national security contractor tied to numerous scandals, including scandals related to sex trafficking in conflict zones. Oetting is also part of the CIA-linked Thorn NGO ostensibly focused on tackling child trafficking that was the subject of a previous Unlimited Hangout investigation.

Oetting is also the co-founder of 8VC, a venture capital firm that is one of the main investors in Resilience. 8VC’s other co-founder is Joe Lonsdale and Oetting “started his career” as Lonsdale’s chief of staff. Lonsdale is the co-founder, alongside Peter Thiel and Alex Karp, of Palantir, a CIA front company and intelligence contractor that is the successor to DARPA’s controversial Total Information Awareness (TIA) mass surveillance and data-mining program. In addition, Oetting previously worked for Bill Gates’ investment fund.

Also worth noting is the presence of Joseph Robert Kerrey, former US Senator for Nebraska and a former member of the conflict-of-interest-ridden 9/11 Commission, on Resilience’s board. Kerrey is currently managing director of Allen & Co., a New York investment banking firm which has hosted an annual “summer camp for billionaires” since 1983. Allen & Co. has long been a major player in networks where organized crime and intelligence intersect, and is mentioned repeatedly throughout my upcoming book One Nation Under Blackmail. For instance, Charles and Herbert Allen, who ran the firm for decades, had considerable business dealings with organized crime kingpins and frontmen for notorious gangsters like Meyer Lansky, particularly in the Bahamas. They were also business partners of Leslie Wexner’s mentors A. Alfred Taubman and Max Fisher as well as associates of Earl Brian, one of the architects of the PROMIS software scandal – which saw organized crime and intelligence networks cooperate to steal and then compromise the PROMIS software for blackmail and clandestine intelligence-gathering purposes. Allen & Co. was a major investor in Brian’s business interests in the technology industry that Brian used in attempts to bankrupt the developers of PROMIS, Inslaw Inc. and to market versions of PROMIS that had been compromised first by Israeli intelligence and, later, the CIA.

In addition to these intelligence-linked individuals, the rest of Resilience’s board includes the former CEO of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Susan Desmond-Hellmann; former FDA Commissioner and Pfizer board member, Scott Gottlieb; two former executives at Johnson & Johnson; former president and CEO of Teva Pharmaceuticals North American branch, George Barrett; CalTech professor and board member of Alphabet (i.e. Google) and Illumina, Frances Arnold; former executive at Genentech and Merck, Patrick Yang; and Resilience CEO Rahul Singhvi.

To Boost or Not to Boost

It is certainly telling that the normally publicity hungry Moderna has said so little about its partnership with Resilience and that Resilience, despite its ambitious plans, has also avoided the media limelight. Considering Moderna’s history and Resilience’s connections, there may be more to this partnership that meets the eye and concerned members of the public would do well to keep a very close eye on Resilience, its partnerships, and the products it is manufacturing.

Given that we now live in a world where government regulatory decisions on the approval of medicines are increasingly influenced by corporate press releases and normal regulatory procedures have fallen by the wayside for being too “slow,” there is likely to be little scrutiny of the genetic material that Resilience produces for the “medicines of tomorrow.” This seems to be already true for Moderna’s recently retooled COVID-19 vaccine, as there has been no independent examination of the new genetic sequence of mRNA used in the Omicron-specific vaccine candidate or its effects on the human body in the short, medium or long term. For those who are skeptical of the outsized role that intelligence-linked companies are playing in the attempted technological “revolution” in the medical field, it is best to consider Resilience’s role in the upcoming fall vaccination campaign and in future pandemic and public health scenarios before trying its “futuristic” products.

Whitney Webb has been a professional writer, researcher and journalist since 2016. She has written for several websites and, from 2017 to 2020, was a staff writer and senior investigative reporter for Mint Press News. She currently writes for The Last American Vagabond.

August 17, 2022 Posted by aletho | Book Review, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Canada, COVID-19 Vaccine, Gates Foundation, UK, United States | Leave a comment

Memo to Globalist Central: Agent Covid mission accomplished

By Niall McCrae | TCW Defending Freedom | August 16, 2022

Political power advances like a car with a manual gearbox. Normal motion is forward, going through the gears, but occasionally reverse gear is engaged. Sometimes the electorate react against policies going too far, or being taken on a ride not of their choosing. Such was the impetus for Brexit and Donald Trump, both portrayed by the establishment as populist regression that risked undoing social and economic progress. Fearing further democratic shocks, progressive leaders got back into the driving seat and put their foot down in the direction of one-world government.

As rather too confidently anticipated by US medical administrator Anthony Fauci on the eve of Trump’s inauguration, there was ‘no doubt’ the incoming president would be confronted with a ‘surprise’ infectious disease outbreak.

Looking back, there are strong indications that certain people knew what was coming, whatever the plausible deniability. A pandemic would enable a giant stride towards a highly regulated society, with the traditional social structures of faith, flag and family obliterated, and citizens neutered. A ‘new normal’ would be instilled, disingenuously justified by a public health emergency. Mortal fear would have more immediate impact than the other contrived crisis of climate change.

And so it came to pass. With remarkable speed World Economic Forum leader Klaus Schwab wrote a book on how to ‘build back better’ from the contagion. In The Great Reset, published in June 2020, he enthused that ‘the pandemic represents a rare but narrow opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world’.

Anybody undecided about the masterplan of the WEF, which our politicians and mainstream media either ignore or deride as conspiracy theory, should read its blueprint Future Focus, published in June 2022. The Executive Summary asserts that ‘societies, the global economy and the planet face unprecedented challenges and disruptions that remain urgent and require an unprecedented transformation of the world’s economic, environmental and social systems’. The future is encapsulated in a terrifying hub-and-spoke diagram, in which every aspect of our lives revolves around digital identity: education, health, banking, food and travel. The tentacles of the WEF monster are spreading all over us.

The three missions of Future Focus are a fairer society, sustainability and harnessing technology for the ‘fourth industrial revolution’, all themes of Schwab’s The Great Reset. Almost three years after Covid-19 was unleashed on an unsuspecting world, we can assess how far the globalist project has advanced.

By ‘fairer society’, the WEF means collectivisation, removing people’s rights, property and privacy, as depicted by the slogan ‘you will own nothing, and you will be happy’. A basic universal income will ensure dependence on the state. Despite globalists’ concerns about overpopulation, the WEF is keen on mass migration from poorer regions to the West, thus abandoning border controls when it suits (contrast the strict Covid regime for citizens with the unimpeded crossings of the English Channel and the Mexican border). So-called refugees are not only cheap labour, they are less likely to resist radical policies.

The UK population rose significantly in the ‘plague’ year of 2020, when police stopped Nigel Farage from reporting the dinghies arriving in Dover. The relentless influx may seem contradictory to the second theme of sustainability, until it is understood that the globalists are most interested in sustaining not the harmony of nature but their own power. They want to reduce the masses to neo-feudalist subsistence, under total control of resources. Food or fuel shortages are used for sequential power grabs, through a problem-reaction-solution mechanism. As seen in Sri Lanka, depriving the people of petrol (problem) caused riots (reaction), leading to acceptance of rationing by digital identity system (solution). Arguably, the war in Ukraine is causing economic strife in Europe for a similar purpose. Meanwhile the elite continue to fly around the world in private jets.

Thirdly, technological progress is accelerating the application of constant surveillance systems. Central digital currency will require every citizen to hold a virtual wallet linked to their national (or international, at least in the EU) identification. Total control of the population will ensue. Citizens will be monitored via checking in and out of buildings, face recognition cameras in public places, and all purchases. It goes much further than that. Potentially, through mandatory vaccination the authorities could exert control over hormones and fertility. Transmittable microchips embedded in hands are already in use in Sweden. Homo sapiens is being led along the path of transhumanism.

The erection of a digital cage shows that Covid-19 has worked wonders for the globalists. Yuval Noah Harari, historian and philosopher turned globalist ideologue, recently admitted that the virus was unremarkable, while lauding the unprecedented progress enabled by lockdown. Imagine how much could be done with a really serious crisis, he mused, such as climate change.

The Covid regime has not yet been relinquished, but millions have realised that the primary motive was not saving lives but control through fear.

Even the most gullible ‘normies’ must be asking themselves, belatedly, whether public health is really the priority. Farcically, Australian female cricketer Tahlia McGrath played in the Commonwealth Games despite testing positive for Covid-19, while the world’s top tennis player Novak Djokovic cannot go to Australia because he is unvaccinated.

Court cases are swinging in favour of freedom. An Ohio federal judge blocked the vaccine mandate for US Army, Air Force and Navy personnel with religious exemption.

A US healthcare company was ordered to pay $10.3million compensation to doctors and nurses whose claimed exemption was denied by hospital management. Pastor Artur Pawlowski, persecuted by the authorities in the Canadian province of Alberta for opening his church during lockdown, spending months in jail for his sins, won reimbursement of unlawful fines.

Is this all too late? Covid-19 has done its job, dramatically changing our lives on the road to a global technocracy. ‘If you want a picture of the future,’ George Orwell wrote in 1984, ‘imagine a boot stamping on a human face – for ever.’ Yet the viral coup has not been overwhelmingly successful. Some of us are more awake than ever; once we see we can’t un-see.

August 16, 2022 Posted by aletho | Civil Liberties, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Covid-19, Human rights | Leave a comment

Government employee offered euthanasia to veteran struggling with PTSD

By Thomas Lambert | The Counter Signal | August 16, 2022

Sources at Veterans Affairs Canada said one employee casually offered euthanasia to a CAF veteran struggling with a brain injury and PTSD.

Speaking to Global News, several sources from VAC say that the offer to provide “medical assistance in dying” (MAID), which is effectively euthanasia, was entirely unprovoked.

The veteran never brought up MAID, and he and his family “were disgusted by the conversation and feel betrayed by the agency mandated to assist veterans,” reports Global News.

Sources say that the veteran had been improving both physically and mentally following a traumatic brain injury received while serving in the line of duty and that the casual offer to be euthanized has impeded his progress.

Veterans Affairs Canada has since issued an apology for the employee’s behaviour.

“VAC deeply regrets what transpired,” VAC wrote in a statement, adding that MAID was discussed “inappropriately,” and the organization plans to take “appropriate administrative action.”

The most recent report from Health Canada on MAID has revealed that death from MAID has skyrocketed since being made legal in 2016 and constituted 3.3% of all deaths (10,064) in Canada in 2021.

As noted by University of Toronto Law professor Trudo Lemmens, the incidents of MAID “is rising remarkably fast.”

He also noted several times when those dealing with issues relating to poverty and non-terminal were offered MAID as a solution to their ailments, which should never happen under the current guidelines for offering and approving MAID.

Veterans now say they’re concerned about VAC members offering MAID to struggling veterans, especially considering that veterans are already at higher risk of suicide. Thus, an offer of MAID may be seized upon when other care could be provided.

August 16, 2022 Posted by aletho | Timeless or most popular | Canada | Leave a comment

Is the Latest Polio Scare Actually Caused by the Vaccine?

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | August 16, 2022

As if the ongoing pandemics of COVID-19 and monkeypox aren’t enough, the New York health department is now urging residents to get vaccinated against polio, as the virus has been found in wastewater samples from two different counties.

Just two weeks prior to this, a 20-year-old in Rockland County was also diagnosed with polio.¹ The case is reportedly the first in nearly a decade. The patient, identified as a “healthy young adult,” had not been vaccinated against polio as a child, and according to the New York health department, the positive water samples were genetically linked to this case. As reported by CBS News, August 5, 2022:²

“‘Based on earlier polio outbreaks, New Yorkers should know that for every one case of paralytic polio observed, there may be hundreds of other people infected,’ State Health Commissioner Dr. Mary T. Bassett said.

‘Coupled with the latest wastewater findings, the Department is treating the single case of polio as just the tip of the iceberg of much greater potential spread. As we learn more, what we do know is clear: the danger of polio is present in New York today’ …

Unvaccinated New Yorkers are encouraged to get immunized right away, the health department said. Unvaccinated people who live, work or spend time in Rockland County, Orange County and the greater New York metropolitan area are at the greatest risk …

According to the CDC’s most recent childhood vaccination data, about 93% of 2-year-olds in the U.S. had received at least three doses of polio vaccine. Meanwhile, adults who are not vaccinated would receive a three-dose immunization, and those who are vaccinated but at high risk can receive a lifetime booster shot, according to the health department.”

Orange County Health Commissioner Dr. Irina Gelman added:

“It is concerning that polio, a disease that has been largely eradicated through vaccination, is now circulating in our community, especially given the low rates of vaccination for this debilitating disease in certain areas of our County. I urge all unvaccinated Orange County residents to get vaccinated as soon as medically feasible.”

What They’re Not Telling You

In the U.S., polio was officially declared “eradicated” in 1979, and its eradication was attributed to a successful mass vaccination campaign. What the New York health department is not telling you, though, is that when polio strikes these days, it’s almost always caused by a vaccine strain. In contrast to CBS, the CNBC actually mentions this in its report:³

“The polio strain the adult in Rockland County caught suggests the chain of transmission did not begin in the United States. The strain the individual contracted is used in the oral polio vaccine, which contains a mild version of the virus that can still replicate. This means people who receive the oral vaccine can spread the virus to others.

But the U.S. hasn’t used the oral polio vaccine in more than 20 years. The U.S. uses an inactivated polio vaccine that is administered as [a] shot in the leg or arm …

The polio case in New York is genetically linked to the Rockland County wastewater sample as well as samples from the greater Jerusalem area in Israel and London in the United Kingdom.”

This is what’s called a delayed lede. Hard-news ledes give you the what, where, when, why and how in the first sentence or two. Here, the key point of the article — the fact that reemergence of polio is caused by the oral polio vaccine — is hidden further down the article than most people bother to read.

Wild Polio Has Been Replaced by Vaccine-Induced Polio

The fact that an oral vaccine strain is responsible for the New York polio case is an important detail. As explained by Vox:⁴

“Genetic sequencing shows that the recent case was a vaccine-derived poliovirus strain. This means the circulating virus isn’t from one of the few remaining pockets of endemic wild poliovirus, but rather from one of the many more countries with polio outbreaks that mutated from an oral, live-attenuated vaccine …

Although the live-attenuated poliovirus vaccine almost never causes polio itself … the fact that it contains a live virus inevitably carries some risk, unlike inactivated vaccines.

When live-attenuated polio vaccines are given in a community that contains a high fraction of unvaccinated people, the modified virus can infect others, and with enough generations of spread, it can … mutate back into a new virulent strain.”

The fact is, vaccine-derived polio has been the main circulating polio in most developing countries for years. And always, the response to vaccine-induced polio is — more polio vaccine.

Oral Live Polio Vaccines Shed

Cases of vaccine-derived polio have surged in recent years after global health authorities in 2016 decided to remove Type 2 poliovirus from the oral vaccine, leaving only Type 1 and Type 3.

The wild Type 2 poliovirus had been declared globally eradicated in 2015, and many felt it was unethical to expose children to a live poliovirus that no longer posed a threat.⁵ Moreover, the Type 2 portion of the vaccines was the source of most of the vaccine-derived strains that were by then causing paralysis.⁶

The change didn’t fix that problem, however. The live polio vaccine is still responsible for the vast majority of outbreaks.⁷ As explained by STAT News :⁸

“To understand the problem, you need to know some basics about polio vaccines — and, specifically, the oral vaccine, known as OPV. OPV contains the live but weakened viruses that Albert Sabin engineered in the late 1950s. This is the vaccine that is used in most of the developing world, unlike the United States, which uses IPV, or inactivated polio vaccine.

The strengths of Sabin’s vaccine … include: its pennies-a-dose price; its ease of administration; and the fact that the vaccine viruses spread from vaccinated children to others around them, which means vaccination campaigns protect many more children than just those the vaccination teams find.

Back in the day in the developing world, if you vaccinated some kids in a neighborhood, you pretty much vaccinated the neighborhood. But that last benefit, which was helpful when there were hundreds of thousands of polio cases a year, is a decidedly mixed blessing now.

The Sabin vaccine viruses, once released in a community, continue to spread if they encounter children who are not immune to polio … As they cycle from child to child, the vaccine viruses can regain the virulence traits that Sabin engineered out of them. If the vaccine viruses circulate long enough, they regain the power to paralyze.

The part of the oral vaccine that protected against type 2 viruses was removed in spring 2016 in a move synchronized around the world. Since then, the number of children with zero immunity to type 2 polio (and type 2 vaccine viruses) has grown daily. This cohort numbers in the tens of millions.

In parts of the world where type 2 vaccine viruses aren’t spreading, that lack of immunity doesn’t matter. But in countries in Central Africa, where the vaccine viruses are spreading over greater and greater territory, those unprotected children are at risk. Children without any type 2 polio protection give the vaccine viruses the chance to circulate enough to regain paralytic powers.”

Most Polio Today Is Caused by the Live Polio Vaccine

Importantly, while the inactivated polio vaccine prevents paralysis, it does not prevent infection. So, even those who have received the inactivated version can be infected by a vaccine-derived poliovirus, and can spread it to others. In Africa, the response to polio outbreaks has been to go in and broadly vaccinate as many children as possible with the original Type 2-containing polio vaccine.

But while this seems to work regionally, unvaccinated children in neighboring regions suddenly become targets as the vaccine viruses start to spread. So, essentially, these efforts merely reseed the transmission chain. For example, India’s polio eradication campaign in 2011 caused 47,500 cases of vaccine-induced polio paralysis — a condition that is twice as deadly as wild polio.⁹ And, as noted by the Global Polio Eradication Initiative:¹⁰

“[C]irculating vaccine-derived poliovirus, or cVDPV … have been increasing in recent years due to low immunization rates within communities. cVDPV type 2 (cVDPV2) are the most prevalent, with 959 cases occurring globally in 2020.

Notably, since the African Region was declared to have interrupted transmission of the wild poliovirus in August 2020, cVDPV are now the only form of the poliovirus that affects the African Region.”

Some believe the ultimate answer is a brand-new polio vaccine, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has spearheaded this development effort. Not surprisingly, upon hearing the news of a polio case in New York, Gates reminded his Twitter followers that “until we #EndPolio for good, it remains a threat to us all. The global eradication strategy must be fully supported to protect people everywhere.”¹¹

Disturbingly, STAT News ¹² points out that “The plan is to use the vaccine under the WHO’s emergency use protocol, even before it is licensed.” Do children really need yet another experimental injection foisted into them? This seems like reckless folly at best. Be that as it may, this next-gen polio vaccine is predicted to be made available sometime in 2023.

Is the Official Polio Story True?

In “The Curios Case of Polio, DDT and Vaccines,” a guest-post posted to my Substack in February 2022, investigative journalist Tessa Lena takes a deeper look at the official history of polio. While polio is attributed to a viral infection, polio-like symptoms can also be caused by a number of toxic substances, including lead, arsenic and pesticides such as DDT.¹³

Indeed, DDT exposure may have been a major contributing factor to the polio epidemics of the 1950s. Lena cites a 1951 article¹⁴ by Dr. Ralph R. Scobey in the Archives of Pediatrics, titled “Is the Public Health Law Responsible for the Poliomyelitis Mystery?” in which he stressed that poliomyelitis “could be produced both by organic and inorganic poisons as well as by bacterial toxins.”

However, once polio was classified as a communicable viral disease, research into these other potential mechanisms ceased, as all funding for poliomyelitis research was “designated for the investigation of the infectious theory only.”

Interestingly, Scobey points out that the polio contagion theory was almost entirely based on work done at the Rockefeller Institute. Afflicted children were kept in the general hospital ward, and not a single case of transmission occurred between patients. This detail contradicts the viral theory of polio, but it was ignored and the declaration that polio is a viral infection was quickly accepted and never successfully challenged again.

Earlier this year I reviewed a book called “Turtles All the Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth.”¹⁵ Almost half of the book, though, was the fraud of the oral polio vaccine. I convinced the author to allow you to download the material on oral polio for free. It is a fascinating story that greatly expands on what Lena wrote and I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

The case of the polio vaccine is in some ways reminiscent of what we’re now seeing with the mRNA COVID shots. Over time, the shots make you more prone to COVID. At the same time, they pressure the virus to mutate at a rapid clip, triggering outbreak after outbreak of increasingly resistant SARS-CoV-2 strains.

Today, the original SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan strain has been mutated out of existence, and all infections are caused by variants created in response to mass injection. On the one hand, these variants have mutated into far milder and less lethal forms, but on the other, they’ve developed resistance against both natural and jab-based antibodies, resulting in seemingly never-ending rounds of infection.

A silver lining of the COVID jab debacle is that more and more people are taking a second look at the theory of vaccination altogether, and are coming to the realization that many vaccines don’t work, and that none have been properly tested for safety using inert placebo controls.

Sources and References

^1, ⁴ Vox August 3, 2022
² CBS News August 5, 2022
³ CNBC August 4, 2022
^5, ^8, ¹² STAT September 13, 2019
⁶ NPR October 30, 2020
^7, ¹⁰ Global Polio Eradication Initiative
⁹ Indian Journal of Medical Ethics April-June 2012
¹¹ Twitter Bill Gates August 8, 2022
¹³ Archives of Pediatrics April 1952; 69(4)L 172-193
¹⁴ Archive of Pediatrics May 1951
¹⁵ Amazon

August 16, 2022 Posted by aletho | Book Review, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Gates Foundation, United States | Leave a comment

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT SANDY HOOK

Sandy Hook Exposed

August 16, 2022 Posted by aletho | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Video | United States | Leave a comment

THE “COST OF LIVING CRISIS” = THE GREAT RESET

BY DAVE CULLEN | AUGUST 13, 2022

Sources:

Prime time https://www.facebook.com/RTEPrimeTime/videos/an-indulgence-we-cannot-afford-george-monbiot/1461409290948934/

August 15, 2022 Posted by aletho | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment

I just now notified hundreds of people at the CDC why they aren’t able to find any vaccine-related deaths

By Steve Kirsch | August 14, 2022

I just sent the email below to nearly 300 people at the CDC who are known to be involved in the COVID vaccine program.

I pointed out that existing autopsy protocols cannot find vaccine deaths and asked why isn’t the CDC notifying medical examiner and pathologists how to find COVID vaccine-related deaths?

Do you think I’ll hear back? Do you think they will do anything differently?

Here is the full text of the email:

I wanted to make sure everyone who is involved in the COVID vaccination program understands exactly why the CDC isn’t finding any vaccine associated deaths.

The short answer is because they aren’t looking for them properly even though the methodology to do so is in plain sight. That methodology is ignored. This is why the pathologists find nothing.

A simple analogy: if the PCR test were run with just 5 cycles, we’d never find any COVID virus. We’re basically doing the same thing with the tests we do post-vaccine: we didn’t change the tests to FIND the vaccine.

This is unethical.

I wanted to make sure everyone who works at the CDC is aware of this.

At the very least, the CDC needs to publicly acknowledge this clear failing.

As I said recently on Fox News, hundreds of thousands of Americans have been killed by the COVID vaccines.

I’ve posted the summary of the backup data here.

People who were skeptical of my numbers found that document very convincing.

Fox News REFUSED to look at my data or discuss it. Why not? Because they are paid not to challenge the narrative. Over $1B is being paid out to promote the vaccines and ignore anything that goes against the narrative.

Even worse, nobody will go on camera to try to refute any of this. Why not?

The reason the CDC finds no deaths is because they aren’t looking for them with tools that will find the deaths.

How can Burkhardt and Bhakdi find 93% vaccine-caused deaths when the coroners found nothing IN THE EXACT SAME TISSUE SAMPLES?

You need to run specialized tests to determine an association with the vaccine. The standard tests run by medical examiners are NEVER going to find an association. That was clear in their paper and it was independently validated by Dr. Ryan Cole who is a very experienced board certified pathologist.

The question you all should be asking is:

Why isn’t the CDC requiring that for anyone who dies 30 days after getting a vaccine an autopsy protocol that can find an association with the vaccine using the necessary specialized tests?

Such a protocol already exists and it is proven it works. See this article.

Dr. Cole points out that YOU NEED SPECIALIZED TESTS to find the association.

How many pathologists are doing these tests in America? Just one as far as he knows.

I am absolutely baffled as to why the CDC has never done any of these tests and why nobody has talked to Dr. Cole.

Do you know why? Can you tell me?

While there may be a better protocol, this protocol is proven to detect vaccine involvement in 93% of the cases studied. These are all tissue samples from people dying shortly after vaccination where the medical examiners were unable to find any association.

If this protocol is insufficient, where is the CDC document explaining why and proposing a better one that finds more association?

If the CDC has been doing adequate tests, where is the documentation of that?

It seems pretty clear to me that the CDC isn’t finding vaccine-caused deaths because they refuse to look.

They can even go back to the autopsy tissue samples they already have and re-stain them to see how many were missed in the initial analysis as documented in the Rosenblum paper in Lancet.

The Rosenblum paper should have reported that none of the autopsies used stains that were necessary to show an association. But this was never mentioned. Shouldn’t that paper be corrected?

I tried to talk to the authors, but Martha Sharan at the CDC ignored every email and phone call I left for her.

Is this how science is done? By not allowing anyone to challenge your work?

My article also explains very clearly why doctors are not finding vaccine-related deaths. The interview with Gina Doane makes it clear her dad died from the vaccine yet the doctor in charge refused to even consider this as a possibility even though NONE of his other explanations fit, and the vaccine hypothesis fit perfectly. That’s not how science works. This is corruption. You don’t need a medical degree to figure it out. It’s all in the video.

But that second video shows you first hand how doctors are looking the other way.

I hope you will find the two videos and the content of the post eye opening. One commenter wrote: ” One of the best and most revealing pieces of research on the net….very telling. Thank you.”

It’s well worth your time. I’ve written over 700 articles on the COVID vaccines and the content presented in these two interviews are the most important interviews for everyone at the CDC to watch because it shows you how 1) the tests are inadequate and 2) even with overwhelming evidence, the doctors are deliberately NOT acknowledging vaccine death.

If you want to chat, I can be reached at <redacted>.

-steve

Am I flogging a dead horse?

No. I’m just putting hundreds of people at the CDC on the record as having been notified of what is going on.

And who knows. Maybe ONE person is honest.

The CDC has backed off their earlier “guidance” and have removed things from their website that were untrue.

August 14, 2022 Posted by aletho | Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | CDC, COVID-19 Vaccine, United States | Leave a comment

Keira Bell: My Story

After a landmark court ruling in December, the name “Keira Bell” was cited worldwide, admiringly by some, with hostility by others. (Photo: Paul Cooper/Shutterstock)

By Keira Bell | April 7, 2021

From the earliest days, my home life was unhappy. My parents—a white Englishwoman and a black American who got together while he was in Britain with the U.S. Air Force—divorced when I was about 5. My mother, who was on welfare, descended into alcoholism and mental illness. Although my father remained in England, he was emotionally distant to me and my younger sister.

I was a classic tomboy, which was one of the healthier parts of my early life in Letchworth, a town of about 30,000 people, an hour outside London. Early in childhood, I was accepted by the boys—I dressed in typically boy clothing and was athletic. I never had an issue with my gender; it wasn’t on my mind.

(Courtesy: Keira Bell)

Then puberty hit, and everything changed for the worse. A lot of teenagers, especially girls, have a hard time with puberty, but I didn’t know this. I thought I was the only one who hated how my hips and breasts were growing. Then my periods started, and they were disabling. I was often in pain and drained of energy.

Also, I could no longer pass as “one of the boys,” so lost my community of male friends. But I didn’t feel I really belonged with the girls either. My mother’s alcoholism had gotten so bad that I didn’t want to bring friends home. Eventually, I had no friends to invite. I became more alienated and solitary. I had been moving a lot too, and I had to start over at different schools, which compounded my problems.

By the time I was 14, I was severely depressed and had given up: I stopped going to school; I stopped going outside. I just stayed in my room, avoiding my mother, playing video games, getting lost in my favorite music, and surfing the internet.

Something else was happening: I became attracted to girls. I had never had a positive association with the term “lesbian” or the idea that two girls could be in a relationship. This made me wonder if there was something inherently wrong with me. Around this time, out of the blue, my mother asked if I wanted to be a boy, something that hadn’t even crossed my mind. I then found some websites about females transitioning to male. Shortly after, I moved in with my father and his then-partner. She asked me the same question my mother had. I told her that I thought I was a boy and that I wanted to become one.

As I look back, I see how everything led me to conclude it would be best if I stopped becoming a woman. My thinking was that, if I took hormones, I’d grow taller and wouldn’t look much different from biological men.

I began seeing a psychologist through the National Health Service, or NHS. When I was 15—because I kept insisting that I wanted to be a boy—I was referred to the Gender Identity Development Service, at the Tavistock and Portman clinic in London. There, I was diagnosed with gender dysphoria, which is psychological distress because of a mismatch between your biological sex and your perceived gender identity.

By the time I got to the Tavistock, I was adamant that I needed to transition. It was the kind of brash assertion that’s typical of teenagers. What was really going on was that I was a girl insecure in my body who had experienced parental abandonment, felt alienated from my peers, suffered from anxiety and depression, and struggled with my sexual orientation.

After a series of superficial conversations with social workers, I was put on puberty blockers at age 16. A year later, I was receiving testosterone shots. When 20, I had a double mastectomy. By then, I appeared to have a more masculine build, as well as a man’s voice, a man’s beard, and a man’s name: Quincy, after Quincy Jones.

(Courtesy: Keira Bell)

But the further my transition went, the more I realized that I wasn’t a man, and never would be. We are told these days that when someone presents with gender dysphoria, this reflects a person’s “real” or “true” self, that the desire to change genders is set. But this was not the case for me. As I matured, I recognized that gender dysphoria was a symptom of my overall misery, not its cause.

Five years after beginning my medical transition to becoming male, I began the process of detransitioning. A lot of trans men talk about how you can’t cry with a high dose of testosterone in your body, and this affected me too: I couldn’t release my emotions. One of the first signs that I was becoming Keira again was that—thankfully, at last—I was able to cry. And I had a lot to cry about.

The consequences of what happened to me have been profound: possible infertility, loss of my breasts and inability to breastfeed, atrophied genitals, a permanently changed voice, facial hair. When I was seen at the Tavistock clinic, I had so many issues that it was comforting to think I really had only one that needed solving: I was a male in a female body. But it was the job of the professionals to consider all my co-morbidities, not just to affirm my naïve hope that everything could be solved with hormones and surgery.

Last year, I became a claimant against the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust in a judicial-review case, which allows petitioners in Britain to bring action against a public body they deem to have violated its legal duties. Few judicial reviews get anywhere; only a fraction obtain a full hearing. But ours did, with a panel of three High Court judges considering whether youths under treatment at the clinic could meaningfully consent to such medical interventions.

Bell in January 2020, after she brought legal action against the clinic. (Photo: Sam Tobin/PA Wire)

My team argued that the Tavistock had failed to protect young patients who sought its services, and that—instead of careful, individualized treatment—the clinic had conducted what amounted to uncontrolled experiments on us. Last December, we won a unanimous verdict. The judges expressed serious doubts that the clinic’s youngest patients could understand the implications of what amounted to experimental treatment with life-altering outcomes.

In their ruling, the judges repeatedly expressed surprise at what had been going on at the Tavistock, particularly its failure to gather basic data on its patients. They noted the lack of evidence for putting children as young as 10 years old on drugs to block puberty, a treatment that is almost universally followed by cross-sex hormones, which must be taken for life to maintain the transition. They also had concerns about the lack of follow-up data, given “the experimental nature of the treatment and the profound impact that it has.”

Notably, a growing wave of girls has been seeking treatment for gender dysphoria. In 2009-10, 77 children were referred to the Gender Identity Development Service, 52% of whom were boys. That ratio started to reverse a few years later as the overall number of referrals soared. In England in 2018-19, 624 boys were referred and 1,740 girls, or 74% of the total. Over half of referrals were for those aged 14 or under; some were as young as 3 years old. The court noted the practitioners at the Tavistock did not put forward “any clinical explanation” for the dramatic rise in girls, and expressed surprise at its failure to collate data on the age of patients when they began puberty blockers.

The ruling does not completely prevent a minor from beginning a medical transition. But the judges recommended that doctors consider getting court permission before starting such treatment for those 16 to 17; they concluded it was “very doubtful” that patients aged 14 and 15 could have sufficient understanding of the consequences of the treatment to give consent; and that it was “highly unlikely” for those aged 13 and under.

In response, the NHS said that the Tavistock had “immediately suspended new referrals for puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for the under-16s, which in future will only be permitted where a court specifically authorizes it.” The Tavistock appealed the ruling, and the court will hear its appeal in June.

The puberty blockers that I received at 16 were designed to stop my sexual maturation: The idea was that this would give me a “pause” to think about whether I wanted to continue to a further gender transition. This so-called “pause” put me into what felt like menopause, with hot flushes, night sweats, and brain fog. All this made it more difficult to think clearly about what I should do.

By the end of a year of this treatment, when I was presented with the option of moving on to testosterone, I jumped at it—I wanted to feel like a young man, not an old woman. I was eager for the shots to start, and the changes this would bring. At first, the testosterone gave me a big boost in confidence. One of the earliest effects was that my voice dropped, which made me feel more commanding.

Over the next couple of years, my voice deepened further, my beard came in, and my fat redistributed. I continued to wear my breast binder every day, especially now that I was completely passing as male, but it was painful and obstructed my breathing. By the time I was 20, I was being treated at the adult clinic. The testosterone and the binder affected the appearance of my breasts, and I hated them even more. I also wanted to align my face and my body, so got a referral for a double mastectomy.

My relationship with my parents continued to be difficult. I was no longer speaking to my mother. My father had kicked me out of his apartment shortly after I turned 17, and I went to live in a youth hostel. He and I were still in touch, though he was adamantly opposed to my transition. Reluctantly, he took me for the surgery. I was a legal adult when it took place, and I don’t relieve myself of responsibility. But I had been put on a pathway—puberty blockers to testosterone to surgery—when I was a troubled teen. As a result of the surgery, there’s nerve damage to my chest, and I don’t have sensation the way I used to. If I am able to have children, I will never breastfeed them.

Around the end of that first year post-surgery, something started happening: My brain was maturing. I thought about how I’d gotten where I was, and gave myself questions to contemplate. A big one was: “What makes me a man?”

I started realizing how many flaws there had been in my thought process, and how they had interacted with claims about gender that are increasingly found in the larger culture and that have been adopted at the Tavistock. I remembered my idea as a 14-year-old, that hormones and surgery would turn me into someone who appeared to be a man. Now, I was that person. But I recognized that I was very physically different from men. Living as a trans man helped me acknowledge that I was still a woman.

I also started to see what I was living out was based on stereotypes, that I was trying to assume the narrow identity of “masculine guy.” It was all making less and less sense. I was also concerned about the effect my transition would have on my ability to find a sexual partner.

Then there was the fact that no one really knew the long-term effects of the treatment. For instance, the puberty blockers and testosterone caused me to have to deal with vaginal atrophy, a thinning and fragility of the vaginal walls that normally occurs after menopause. I started feeling really bad about myself again.

I decided to stop, cold turkey. When I was due for my next testosterone shot, I canceled the appointment.

After I came to this decision, I found a subreddit for detransitioners. The number of people on it started rising, as if all these young women had come to a collective realization of the medical scandal we had been a part of. It was a place we could talk about our experiences and support each other. I felt liberated.

What happened to me is happening across the Western world. Little of my case was a surprise to those paying attention to the Tavistock whistle-blowers who in recent years have spoken out in alarm to the media, sometimes anonymously. Some have left the service because of these concerns. But the transgender issue is now highly political and wrapped up in questions of identity politics. It can be perilous to raise questions or doubts about young people’s medical gender transitions. Some who have done so have been vilified and had their careers threatened.

At the Tavistock, practitioners provide “gender affirmative care”—in practice, this means that when children and teens declare a desire to transition, their assertions are typically accepted as conclusive. Affirmative care is being adopted as a model in many places. In 2018, the American Academy of Pediatrics released a policy statement on the treatment of young people who identify as transgender and gender diverse that advocated for “gender-affirmative care.”

But former Tavistock practitioners have cited varied problems suffered by the kids who sought help, such as sexual abuse, trauma, parental abandonment, homophobia in the family or at school, depression, anxiety, being on the autism spectrum, having ADHD. These profound issues, and how they might be tied up with feelings of dysphoria, have often been ignored in favor of making transition the all-purpose solution.

As the High Court found, much of the clinic’s treatment is not even based on solid evidence. At the time our case was accepted, the NHS was asserting that the effects of puberty blockers are “fully reversible.” But recently, the NHS reversed itself, acknowledging “that ‘little is known about the long-term side-effects’ on a teenager’s body or brain.” That didn’t stop them from prescribing these drugs to people like me.

Dr. Christopher Gillberg, a professor of child and adolescent psychiatry at Gothenburg University in Sweden and a specialist in autism, was an expert witness for our case. Gillberg said in his court statement that over his 45 years of treating children with autism, it was rare to have patients with gender dysphoria—but their numbers started exploding in 2013, and most were biological girls. Gillberg told the court that what was happening at the Tavistock was a “live experiment” on children and adolescents.

Parents who are reluctant or even alarmed about starting their children on a medical transition may be warned, “Would you rather have a dead daughter or a live son?” (Or vice versa.) I had suicidal thoughts as a teen. Suicidal thoughts indicate serious mental health problems that need assessment and proper care. When I told them at the Tavistock about these thoughts, that became another reason to put me on hormones quickly to improve my well-being. But after the court ruling, the Tavistock released an internal study of a group of 44 patients who had started taking puberty blockers at ages 12 to 15. It said that this treatment had failed to improve the mental state of patients, having “no significant effect on their psychological function, thoughts of self-harm, or body image.” Additionally, of those 44 patients, 43 went on to cross-sex hormones. This suggests blocking puberty isn’t providing a pause. It is giving a push.

Before beginning on testosterone, I was asked if I wanted children, or if I wanted to consider freezing my eggs because of the possibility that transition would make me infertile. As a teenager, I couldn’t imagine having kids, and the procedure wouldn’t have been covered by the NHS. I said I was fine if I couldn’t, and I didn’t need to freeze my eggs. But now as a young adult, I see that I didn’t truly understand back then the implications of infertility. Having children is a basic right, and I don’t know if that has been taken from me.

As part of its defense, the Tavistock put forth statements from a few young trans people who are happy with their care. One is S, a 13-year-old trans boy who got puberty blockers from a private provider because the waiting list at the Gender Identity Development Service was so long. S told the court that he had “no idea what me in the future is going to think” about being able to have children and that since he has never been in “a romantic relationship,” the idea of one is not “on my radar at the moment.”

Lots of teenagers, when contemplating future sexual relationships, feel baffled and even disturbed at the thought. Those same people, when adults, often feel very differently. I know, because this happened to me. I’d never been in a sexual relationship at the time of my transition, so I didn’t truly understand what the transition would mean sexually.

S’s statement demonstrates how difficult it is for minors to give consent for procedures they can’t yet understand. As the judges wrote, “There is no age-appropriate way to explain to many of these children what losing their fertility or full sexual function may mean to them in later years.”

Bell speaking to the media after the court ruling last December. (Photo: Sam Tobin/PA Wire)

Today, at 24, I’m in my first serious relationship. My partner is very supportive of everything I do, and I am the same for her. She has a large group of female friends who accept me; it’s been very healing. For now, I don’t speak to either of my parents or have a relationship with them.

I still get taken for male sometimes. I expect that, and I’m not angry about it. I know that I will live with that for the rest of my life. What I am angry about is how my body was changed at such a young age. People want to know if I’m going to have reconstructive surgery of my breasts or do other things to make me look more female. But I haven’t fully processed the surgery I had to remove my breasts. For now, I want to avoid more such surgical procedures.

When I joined the case, I didn’t realize how big it would become. What has happened since the ruling has been a rollercoaster. Many people have thanked me. I have also been attacked online. If you’re someone who regrets transitioning and decides to speak out about your experiences, you’re considered a bigot. You may be told that you’re trying to take away trans rights, that children know what’s best for themselves and their bodies, and that you’re ruining kids’ lives.

But I am focused on what is best for distressed young people. A lot of girls are transitioning because they’re in pain, whether it’s from mental-health disorders, or life trauma, or other reasons. I know what it’s like to get caught up in dreaming that transitioning will fix all of this.

Although sharing my story has been cathartic, I still struggle, and have yet to receive appropriate therapy. As I go on with my life, I plan to continue to be an activist on behalf of this cause. I want the message of cases like mine to help protect other kids from taking a mistaken path. This year, I helped create the first Detrans Awareness Day, on March 12. I hope that, in years to come, this day can be a beacon to empower others.

I do not believe in rigid gender expression. People should be comfortable and feel accepted if they explore different ways of presenting themselves. As I said in my statement after the ruling, this means stopping the homophobia, the misogyny, and the bullying of those who are different.

I also call on professionals and clinicians to create better mental health services and models to help those dealing with gender dysphoria. I do not want any other young person who is distressed, confused, and lonely as I was to be driven to conclude transition is the only possible answer.

I was an unhappy girl who needed help. Instead, I was treated like an experiment.

August 14, 2022 Posted by aletho | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Israel furious at Trump over Turkey, Syria to invade Lebanon

Aletho News Videos

or go to

Aletho News Archives – Video-Images

From the Archives

Bum Rap for the Rapa Nui

By Thomas Riggins | Dissident Voice | February 5, 2014

A new report in Science News Magazine (1-25-2014) by Bruce Bower details a reevaluation of the view that the Rapa Nuians, the native inhabitants of Easter Island (Rapa Nui), were responsible for the collapse of their population and society due to over exploitation of natural resources and the destruction of the rain forest on their island, a view recently popularized by Jared Diamond in his book Collapse (2005).

As Bower reports, the anthropologist Maria Mulrooney has published the results of her studies of the Rapa Nui culture (Journal of Archeological Science, December 2013) based on new radiocarbon dates from archeological sites on the island. She has concluded that after the clear cutting of the forest in the 1500s, to make room for agricultural production, the population of Rapa Nui remained sufficiently vibrant to carry on food production and continue their cultural development.

Exactly when the Rapa Nui arrived on Easter Island is unknown but it was on or before 1200 A.D. or so. Mulrooney maintains they had a thriving culture which was still going strong even after their “discovery” by the Dutch explorer Jacob Roggeveen on Easter Sunday 1722. This would indicate that they had not suffered “collapse” as a result of forest clearance. … continue

Blog Roll

Subscribe to Aletho News

Enter your email address to receive new posts by email.

Email Address:

Join 2,449 other subscribers
Visits Since December 2009
- 7,568,093 hits
Looking for something?

Search for:
Archives
Archives
Calendar

June 2026

M T W T F S S

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22 23 24 25 26 27 28

29 30

« May
Categories

Aletho News Civil Liberties Corruption Deception Economics Environmentalism Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism Fake News False Flag Terrorism Full Spectrum Dominance Illegal Occupation Mainstream Media, Warmongering Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity Militarism Progressive Hypocrite Russophobia Science and Pseudo-Science Solidarity and Activism Subjugation - Torture Supremacism, Social Darwinism Timeless or most popular Video War Crimes Wars for Israel
Tags
Afghanistan Africa AIPAC al-Qaeda Australia BBC Benjamin Netanyahu Brazil Canada CDC Central Intelligence Agency China CIA CNN Covid-19 COVID-19 Vaccine Donald Trump Egypt European Union Facebook FBI FDA France Gaza Germany Google Hamas Hebron Hezbollah Hillary Clinton Human rights Hungary India Iran Iraq ISIS Israel Israeli settlement Japan Jerusalem Joe Biden Korea Latin America Lebanon Libya Middle East National Security Agency NATO New York Times North Korea NSA Obama Pakistan Palestine Poland Qatar Russia Sanctions against Iran Saudi Arabia Syria The Guardian Turkey Twitter UAE UK Ukraine United Nations United States USA Venezuela Washington Post West Bank WHO Yemen Zionism

June 2026
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

Aletho News
If Americans Knew
No Tricks Zone
Contact:

atheonews (at) gmail.com
Disclaimer

This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.

This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.

Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.

Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.

The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.

Fair Use

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

DMCA Contact

This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.

If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.

We will respond and take necessary action immediately.

If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.

All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel, Source: ClockworkOrange

Resilience CEO Rahul Singhvi, Source: Resilience

Bob Nelsen of ARCH Venture Partners, Source: ARCH Venture Partners

Resilience Board Member Drew Oetting, Source: 8VC

After a landmark court ruling in December, the name “Keira Bell” was cited worldwide, admiringly by some, with hostility by others. (Photo: Paul Cooper/​Shutterstock)

(Courtesy: Keira Bell)

(Courtesy: Keira Bell)

Bell in January 2020, after she brought legal action against the clinic. (Photo: Sam Tobin/PA Wire)

Bell speaking to the media after the court ruling last December. (Photo: Sam Tobin/PA Wire)

Featured Video

From the Archives

By Thomas Riggins | Dissident Voice | February 5, 2014

Blog Roll

Subscribe to Aletho News

Visits Since December 2009

Looking for something?

Archives

Calendar

Categories

Tags

Contact:

Disclaimer

Site info

After a landmark court ruling in December, the name “Keira Bell” was cited worldwide, admiringly by some, with hostility by others. (Photo: Paul Cooper/Shutterstock)