Over 400 doctors, scientists and professionals from more than 34 countries this morning declared an international medical crisis due to “diseases and death associated with the ‘COVID-19 vaccines’”.
Launched at a press conference on Saturday, September 10th, the declaration states: “We are currently witnessing an excess in mortality in those countries where the majority of the population has received the so-called ‘COVID-19 vaccines’. To date, this excess mortality has neither been sufficiently investigated nor studied by national and international health institutions.”
It continues:
The large number of sudden deaths in previously healthy young people who were inoculated with these ‘vaccines’ is particularly worrying, as is the high incidence of miscarriages and perinatal deaths which have not been investigated.
A large number of adverse side effects, including hospitalisations, permanent disabilities and deaths related to the so-called ‘COVID-19 vaccines’, have been reported officially.
The registered number has no precedent in world vaccination history.
The declaration, which originates among concerned medics and professionals in India, makes eight “urgent” demands, including an immediate stop to the vaccinations and investigation of all deaths in previously healthy people.
Read the full text below, and if you are a doctor, scientist or other professional, do consider signing.
DECLARATION OF INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CRISIS DUE TO THE DISEASES AND DEATHS CO-RELATED TO THE ‘COVID-19 VACCINES’
We, the medical doctors and scientists from all over the world, declare that there is an international medical crisis due to the diseases and deaths co-related to the administration of products known as ‘COVID-19 vaccines’.
We are currently witnessing an excess in mortality in those countries where the majority of the population has received the so-called ‘COVID-19 vaccines’. To date, this excess mortality has neither been sufficiently investigated nor studied by national and international health institutions.
The large number of sudden deaths in previously healthy young people who were inoculated with these ‘vaccines’, is particularly worrying, as is the high incidence of miscarriages and perinatal deaths which have not been investigated.
A large number of adverse side effects, including hospitalisations, permanent disabilities and deaths related to the so-called ‘COVID-19 vaccines’, have been reported officially.
The registered number has no precedent in world vaccination history.
Examining the reports on CDC’s VAERS, the U.K.’s Yellow Card System, the Australian Adverse Event Monitoring System, Europe’s EudraVigilance System and the WHO’s VigiAccess Database, to date there have been more than 11 million reports of adverse effects and more than 70,000 deaths co-related to the inoculation of the products known as ‘Covid vaccines’.
We know that these numbers just about represent between 1% and 10% of all real events.
Therefore, we consider that we are facing a serious international medical crisis, which must be accepted and treated as critical by all states, health institutions and medical personnel worldwide.
Therefore, the following measures must be undertaken on an urgent basis:
A worldwide ‘stop’ to the national inoculation campaigns with the products known as ‘COVID-19 vaccines’.
Investigation of all sudden deaths of people who were healthy previous to the inoculation.
Implementation of early detection programmes of cardiovascular events which could lead to sudden deaths with analysis such as D-dimer and Troponin, in all those that were inoculated with the products known as ‘COVID-19 vaccines’, as well as the early detection of serious tumours.
Implementation of research and treatment programmes for victims of adverse effects after receiving the so-called ‘COVID-19 vaccine’.
Undertaking analyses of the composition of vials of Pfizer, Moderna, Astra Zeneca, Janssen, Sinovac, Sputnik V and any other product known as ‘COVID-19 vaccines’,
by independent research groups with no affiliation to pharmaceutical companies, nor any conflict of interest.
Studies to be conducted on the interactions between the different components of the so-called ‘COVID-19 vaccines’ and their molecular, cellular and biological effects.
Implementation of psychological help and compensation programmes for any person that has developed a disease or disability as a consequence of the so-called ‘COVID-19 vaccines’.
Implementation and promotion of psychological help and compensation programmes for the family members of any person who died as a result of having been inoculated with the product known as ‘COVID-19 vaccines’.
Consequently we declare that we find ourselves in an unprecedented international medical crisis in the history of medicine, due to the large number of diseases and deaths associated with the ‘vaccines against COVID-19’. Therefore, we demand that the regulatory agencies that oversee drug safety as well as the health institutions in all countries, together with the international institutions such as the WHO, PHO, EMA, FDA, UK-MHRA and NIH respond to this declaration and act in accordance with the eight measures demanded in this manifesto.
This Declaration is a joint initiative of several professionals who have been fighting for this cause. We call on all doctors, scientists and professionals to endorse this statement in order to put pressure on the entities involved and promote a more transparent health policy.
This week, a number of international and Russian journalists convened in Moscow – with more joining by video link – to discuss the now-infamous Ukrainian Mirotvorets “kill list.” Many of them are included themselves.
While some don’t take it seriously, the horrific car-bombing murder of Darya Dugina on August 20 and the subsequent marking on her Mirotvorets entry as “liquidated” makes it fairly clear the people behind the list do, in fact, want people dead.
The same thing happened to the entry of Russian photojournalist Andrei Stenin and many others listed and subsequently killed, including the Italian Andrea Rocchelli.
What it feels like to be on the list
The head of the Foundation to Battle Injustice, Mira Terada, who convened the panel, noted that of the thousands of names entered on the site, 341 are journalists and, shockingly, 327 are minors.
“Publishing personal data on minors is a crime. It’s like a menu for pedophiles or people doing human trafficking.”
While her concern is for the children, journalists, activists, political figures and even ordinary Ukrainians who have somehow angered the Kiev regime and those behind the list, Terada now needs to exercise some caution after she herself was added to the database.
An hour and a half after a July 21 press conference about children being placed on Mirotvorets, Mira found herself listed. “This changed my life. I have to be vigilant 24/7,” she said.
Christelle Néant, a French war correspondent reporting from Donbass for the past six and a half years, mentioned to me before the panel began that some of the information on the site is not disclosed to the general public, and is password-locked.
Néant, who said she’s been receiving death threats for years, spoke of how it impacts her: “Every time I use my car, I check underneath it for any unpleasant surprise,” referring to a potential car bomb. “I don’t publish any photos with people I live with or love. I have to be vigilant at all times.”
“I’m not a terrorist, not a criminal, I’m just a correspondent. This list must be closed and all of those involved must be held accountable.”
German journalist Thomas Röper rightly noted that Western media outlets prefer to look the other way. “They could have reported on this, but they’re saying nothing.”
He also pointed out the silence of the German government, even when asked at press conferences.
“A state has a duty to protect its citizens, but I haven’t seen anything from my government to condemn the fact that Germans are on this list and one German national has been killed.”
And, in fact, rather than protect German journalists, the government is persecuting them, as is the case with Alina Lipp, whose bank account, and that of her mother, was closed after the German government launched a criminal case against her for her reporting from Donbass.
Russian journalist Veronika Naydenova, originally from Crimea but living in Germany, was added to the list in January, also after raising the inclusion of children, including 13-year-old Faina Savenkova, from the Lugansk People’s Republic.
“The same day my article was published, I was added to the list. But this hasn’t stopped me, I’ve written many articles since.”
She highlighted an additional, very real, threat: that of the refugees who’ve come to Germany from Ukraine, it isn’t possible to know who is merely a refugee and who holds Ukrainian nationalist extremist views. This is a very real fear for Naydenova, whose address is listed on Mirotvorets.
Dutch journalist Sonya van den Ende likewise fears returning home. “I’m labeled an ‘enemy of the state’ now in the Netherlands. I cannot go back, it’s very dangerous for me to do so.”
Janus Putkonen, a Finnish journalist who has been living in Donbass since 2015, pointed out how the risk extends globally.
“Because the Mirotvorets kill list has not been stopped, people around the world are now in danger of falling victim to the state terrorism of Ukrainian Nazism, comparable to ISIS terrorism.”
But, most of all, it threatens Ukrainians within Ukraine, something British journalist Johnny Miller emphasized.
“If you’re a journalist, blogger, political figure, or a citizen in Ukraine who wants to criticize extremism in Ukraine, which there is a lot of, or if you want to criticize Ukrainian government policies, most likely you’re going to be put on that list. And be under serious threat of death.”
Miller, who has reported from areas of western Ukraine, raised another important point:
“There are so many people in Ukraine who want to push for peaceful negotiations with Russia. But if anybody in Ukrainian society wants to stand up and push this line, they’re most likely going to be put on that list. Mirotvorets is very much a symbol of the extremist elements in Ukraine at the moment.”
For myself, I’ve been on the list since 2019, after going to Crimea and reporting from areas of the DPR where civilians were being terrorized by Ukrainian shelling, houses destroyed “street by street” as a local told me.
Complicit media
For various reasons, I haven’t been in my native Canada since February 2020, and at this point, don’t know what fate I would face were I to go back.
Ottawa unconditionally supports the Kiev regime, including its war against the civilians of Donbass, which the country has abetted by sending money and weapons to Ukraine for years before Russia’s military operation began in February.
Canada has spent nearly a billion dollars to train Ukrainian forces since 2014, including Neo-Nazi Azov fighters.
But in addition to that, the Canadian government knows about Mirotvorets. The state-run Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) in July ran a smear piece on me, using information apparently gleaned from my Mirotvorets entry, though it doesn’t mention the kill list by name.
How do I think I know CBC was aware of the kill list entry on me? Their producer emailed me for an interview (which I did not concede to), mentioning my April participation in a Moscow-based panel on Ukraine’s war crimes. Except it wasn’t April, it was on March 11. The only other source for my participation being in April was, you guessed it, Mirotvorets.
Of course, there was no condemnation or call to shut down Mirotvorets (which independent Canadian media outlets previously interviewed me about and subsequently contacted the CBC about). Instead, they tried to spin my multiple reports on Ukraine’s war crimes in Donbass as a way to smear me as a Russian propagandist.
And now, the CBC has flagged my name to Ukrainian Nationalists in Canada who might otherwise not have known of me, and to Canadians who went to fight in Ukraine, became radicalized and indoctrinated, and could commit Azov-style crimes against journalists like me who have been reporting from the other side.
Journalists already have enough reasons to fear being targeted – one example is the August 4 bombing by Kiev’s forces of a Donetsk hotel that multiple journalists, including myself, were in. There is no conclusive proof that the hotel and the journalists were the intended targets, but given everything mentioned above, it’s certainly within the realm of possibility
A terrorist database
After the panel, I chatted again with Néant, who said she’d been appealing to international organizations about Mirotvorets for years.
“I’ve written to organizations like the OSCE, Amnesty, etc. None reacted, even when I discovered that children are on this list.” All she got was an automated confirmation of receipt.
During a Q&A after the panel, an American man in the audience suggested that Russia should have its own “hit force” going out and doing the same thing to the Ukrainian side.
In reply, Johnny Miller noted:
“When I tell people here in the UK about this kill list, one of the first things that people reply to me is,
‘Well, I’m sure Russia has a similar list.’ And I have to explain to them that, no, Russia does not have a list published on the internet with the names and home addresses of journalists and children and promote their killing. That’s the distinction between a civilized government and extremism and barbarism.”
According to Mira Terada, her foundation transferred documents and the evidence it collected to Russia’s Federal Security Service and is asking the service to recognize Mirotvorets as a terrorist organization.
Former US Marine and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter likewise described Mirotvorets as “an instrument of terror” that “should be taken down at the insistence of the US Government.”
Note the irony: We are listed as terrorists for the work we do to highlight the suffering of civilians under the Kiev regime’s actual terrorism.
Eva Bartlett is a Canadian independent journalist. She has spent years on the ground covering conflict zones in the Middle East, especially in Syria and Palestine (where she lived for nearly four years).
Evidence points to SARS-CoV-2 being the product of gain-of-function (GoF) research. Indeed, attorney Tom Renz will soon release the results of a major legal investigation, which he claims will demonstrate — beyond a reasonable doubt — that SARS-CoV-2 was created as part of a GoF project.1
Whether the outbreak was accidental, intentional or the result of negligence, the end result is the same — devastation of health, commerce, finance and civil life worldwide for years on end.
Now imagine what might happen if something like the Spanish flu got out — or worse, a turbo-charged, genetically engineered version of it. Incomprehensible as it may seem to the average person, scientists in the U.S. and Canada have resurrected this devastatingly lethal virus and, not surprisingly, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) are involved.
Mad Scientists Are Testing Recreated Spanish Flu on Monkeys
As reported by Tom Renz, August 19, 2022:2
“… this is so absurd that I am just starting with the reference document because I am concerned no one will believe it. Here it is: ‘Spanish Flu GoF.’3 Yes, that is right, Fauci and crew are now actively performing gain-of-function (GoF) work and infecting primates with the Spanish Flu … Here is a quote from the document:
‘… Influenza virus A/South Carolina/1918 (H1N1) was generated by reverse genetics and handled in biosafety level 4 (BSL-4) containment at the National Microbiology Laboratory (NML).
Sequences of the 1918 influenza viral segments were based on data reported under GenBank accession numbers DQ208309, DQ208310, DQ208311, AF117241, AY744935, AF250356, AY130766, and AF333238.
1918 influenza virus was cultured using Madin-Darby canine kidney … cells. MDCK cells were grown in minimum essential medium … supplemented with 5% fetal bovine serum … and 1 L-glutamine …
A passage 2 (P2) virus stock was prepared using MEM supplemented with 0.1% bovine serum albumin (BSA) … 1 L-glutamine, and 1 mg/mL N-tosyl-L-phenylalanine chloromethyl ketone (TPCK)-treated trypsin …
This stock was used for animal inoculation. The mouse 50% lethal dose (MLD50) for this stock was determined previously to be 103.2 PFU; this value was confirmed prior to the use of the stock for macaque infection.’
I frankly do not care to debate the nuance of whether the recreation of generally extinct virus ‘generated by reverse genetics’ using pieces and parts of other animals qualifies as GoF; what I care about is that we have recreated the Spanish Flu and are experimenting with it on other animals.”
Spanish Flu ‘Not Lethal Enough’
As noted by Renz, the scientists appear frustrated by the fact that their reverse engineered Spanish flu virus — even at the highest doses tested — was not lethal enough to kill the two macaque species selected for the experiment.
Macaques were therefore deemed “not ideal for the development and testing of novel pandemic influenza-specific vaccines and therapies,” necessitating “other physiologically relevant nonhuman primate models.” Renz continues:4
“… given the result of the previous coronavirus GoF, can ANYONE possibly argue GoF work on the Spanish Flu is a good idea? Even the simple recreation of the disease demonstrates an incredible lack of respect for the disaster created by the coronavirus GoF.
So you may be asking, what moron could possibly be oblivious enough to support GoF work on the Spanish Flu while the world is still dealing with the nightmare that is COVID? The answer should not be surprising … NIH and NIAID are involved.
Apparently Fauci does not mind what he did with funding the creation of COVID and is at it again. You might also note the vaccine development crew’s involvement. A foundational point in this article is that the newly recreated Spanish Flu is not dangerous enough. Here is a pull-quote:
‘However, 1918 influenza was uniformly nonlethal in these two species, demonstrating that this isolate is insufficiently pathogenic in rhesus and Mauritian cynomolgus macaques to support testing novel prophylactic influenza approaches where protection from severe disease combined with a lethal outcome is desired as a highly stringent indication of vaccine efficacy.’
This means that these people are arguing that we need to make a more dangerous version of the Spanish Flu so they can make ‘better’ vaccines for it … despite the fact that until they recreated it, it likely no longer existed in nature.”
As noted by Renz, elected officials really need to answer the question, “Why is this kind of research allowed to continue on your watch?” Why are we reverse engineering the most lethal viruses the world has ever seen — after they’ve already been eradicated?
The argument that we need to create dangerous viruses “just in case” Nature comes up with something similar, so we can create vaccines for said viruses in advance, simply doesn’t hold water. Stop creating these monstrosities, and we won’t need the vaccines! This is science gone mad, and it must be stopped.
Besides, what are the chances that a virus would emerge naturally that just so happens to perfectly match the virus we now have a vaccine against? The entire premise is irrational from start to finish. It’s biowarfare research and nothing else.
The Intentional Cover-Up of SARS-CoV-2’s Origin
Fauci, former NIH chief Dr. Francis Collins, EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak and other members of the scientific community have spent the last two and a half years actively stifling debate about the genesis of SARS-CoV-2.
And, coincidentally, most of them have clear-cut connections to bat coronavirus GoF research and/or the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which appears to be the lab from which the virus somehow escaped.
So, it appears those who insist SARS-CoV-2 is of natural origin, despite all the evidence to the contrary, are doing so because they don’t want risky virological research to be blamed for the COVID pandemic. That would “blow their cover” and raise questions about the sanity of funding such research.
Some may be so enamored with their chosen careers, they cannot imagine doing anything other than tinkering with pathogens. For them, pulled funding is a threat to their livelihood. But for others, the underlying incentive may be more nefarious. Like I already said, there’s really no reason for this kind of research other than the creation of weapons of mass destruction.
Whatever incentive any given player may have had, what’s clear is that Fauci, Collins, Daszak and many others intentionally undermined efforts to get to the bottom of where SARS-CoV-2 came from.
Attesting to this corruption of science is Jeffrey Sachs, Ph.D., professor of economy at Columbia University, a senior United Nations adviser and chair of The Lancet COVID-19 Commission, convened in June 2020.
Sachs originally assigned Daszak to lead and organize the COVID-19 Commission’s task force to investigate the virus’s genesis (one of 11 task forces under the COVID Commission). Sachs ended up dismissing Daszak from the task force in June 2021, after he realized just how serious Daszak’s conflicts of interest were,5 and that Daszak was lying to him.6
Eventually, he realized Daszak wasn’t the only rotten apple in the bunch. Other members of The Lancet Commission’s COVID Origins task force were also working against their mandate to investigate the pandemic’s origin. The final straw came when Sachs sacked Daszak and several task force members suddenly attacked him for being “antiscience.”
Shortly thereafter, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request brought previously hidden NIH documents to light, and Sachs realized that those who were attacking him also had undisclosed ties that made their ability to get to the truth doubtful at best. At that point, in September 2021, he disbanded the whole task force.
Lack of Transparency Breeds Mistrust
In mid-May 2022, Sachs published a frank opinion piece in the journal PNAS,7 together with Neil Harrison, calling for a truly independent inquiry into the origin of SARS-CoV-2.
In their article, Sachs and Harrison argued that while transparency on the part of Chinese authorities would be “enormously helpful,” much may be gleaned from information found in U.S.-based research institutions that were working with Wuhan-based institutions, including the WIV. Yet such material has not been disclosed for independent analysis. Here’s an excerpt:8
“This lack of an independent and transparent US-based scientific investigation has had four highly adverse consequences. First, public trust in the ability of US scientific institutions to govern the activities of US science in a responsible manner has been shaken.
Second, the investigation of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 has become politicized within the US Congress; as a result, the inception of an independent and transparent investigation has been obstructed and delayed.
Third, US researchers with deep knowledge of the possibilities of a laboratory-associated incident have not been enabled to share their expertise effectively. Fourth, the failure of NIH, one of the main funders of the US–China collaborative work, to facilitate the investigation into the origins of SARS-CoV-2 has fostered distrust regarding US biodefense research activities.
Much of the work on SARS-like CoVs performed in Wuhan was part of an active and highly collaborative US–China scientific research program funded by the US Government (NIH, Defense Threat Reduction Agency [DTRA], and US Agency for International Development [USAID]), coordinated by researchers at EcoHealth Alliance (EHA), but involving researchers at several other US institutions.
For this reason, it is important that US institutions be transparent about any knowledge of the detailed activities that were underway in Wuhan and in the United States. The evidence may also suggest that research institutions in other countries were involved, and those too should be asked to submit relevant information …”
Sachs and Harrison go on to name a number of U.S. institutions that need to come clean about their work, including the EcoHealth Alliance (EHA), the University of North Carolina (UNC), the University of California at Davis (UCD), the NIH, NIAID and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
All of these agencies and institutions have conducted and/or collaborated on research that may be able to solve the mystery, but instead of transparently sharing their data, they’ve merely declared that they’ve “not been involved in any experiments that could have resulted in the emergence of SARS-CoV-2.”
Blanket Denials Are Not Good Enough
As noted by Sachs, before we can believe such claims, we need to be able to confirm their veracity, and that requires independent analysis of all the data.
“Blanket denials from the NIH are no longer good enough. Although the NIH and USAID have strenuously resisted full disclosure of the details of the EHA-WIV-UNC work program, several documents leaked to the public or released through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) have raised concerns,” Sachs and Harrison wrote.9
“These research proposals make clear that the EHA-WIV-UNC collaboration was involved in the collection of a large number of so-far undocumented SARS-like viruses and was engaged in their manipulation within biological safety level (BSL)-2 and BSL-3 laboratory facilities, raising concerns that an airborne virus might have infected a laboratory worker.
A variety of scenarios have been discussed by others, including an infection that involved a natural virus collected from the field or perhaps an engineered virus manipulated in one of the laboratories.”
Suspicious ‘Coincidences’ Abound
Sachs and Harrison go on to discuss the problem of an unusual furin cleavage site (FCS) in SARS-CoV-2 that makes it more transmissible and pathogenic than related viruses.
While it’s not yet known how this feature came to be within SARS-CoV-2, whether by natural evolution or intentional insertion, “We do know that the insertion of such FCS sequences into SARS-like viruses was a specific goal of work proposed by the EHA-WIV-UNC partnership within a 2018 grant proposal (‘DEFUSE’) that was submitted to the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA),” Sachs wrote.
That particular DARPA proposal was never funded, but as noted by Sachs, “we do not know whether some of the proposed work was subsequently carried out in 2018 or 2019, perhaps using another source of funding.”
“Information now held by the research team headed by EHA, as well as the communications of that research team with US research funding agencies, including NIH, USAID, DARPA, DTRA, and the Department of Homeland Security, could shed considerable light on the experiments undertaken by the US-funded research team and on the possible relationship, if any, between those experiments and the emergence of SARS-CoV-2,” Sachs and Harrison wrote.10
“We do not assert that laboratory manipulation was involved in the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, although it is apparent that it could have been. However, we do assert that there has been no independent and transparent scientific scrutiny to date of the full scope of the US-based evidence.”
In an August 2, 2022, Current Affairs interview,11 Sachs again reiterated that he believes the NIH and allied scientists colluded to impede The Lancet Commission’s investigation, for the simple reason that the virus was the result of U.S. research.
Sachs also opened up about his concerns and misgivings in an August 20, 2022, interview with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (video above). He admits believing in the zoonotic spillover theory early on, only to, over time, come to change his mind as he realized he was being lied to, over and over again.
Today, he believes the lab-leak theory is the most likely explanation for the pandemic — and that the U.S. government, the NIH, the NIAID and the rest are suppressing the truth for the simple reason that they’re responsible for its creation, even if only in part.
Final Thoughts
To circle back to where we started, is it really prudent to reverse engineer the Spanish flu virus, and further tinker with it to make it even more lethal — all in the name of vaccine development?
Think back over the past few years. Mull over the deaths — an estimated 18 million from COVID-19 alone12 — the suicides (deaths of despair), the lost businesses, lost education years, the loss of freedoms and Constitutional rights, the COVID jab injuries, and the massive wealth transfer that has occurred.
All of that may have been because of this kind of mad science. Do we really want to repeat it in the future, but with a far more lethal pathogen? Most sane persons would say no. It’s time for legislators to take definitive steps to ensure mankind is not wiped out by scientific hubris.
Last week, a day after the FDA authorized the new “Omicron booster” targeting the dominant Omicron BA.5 subvariant, the CDC’s vaccine committee formally recommended the shots for Americans as young as 12. Pfizer’s Omicron boosters will be available for people ages 12 and older, while Moderna’s new shots are for adults ages 18 and older. The new mRNA composition contains two half components of the spike protein: the ancestral virus strain and BA.1 or BA.4/BA.5, which have identical spikes.
The totality of public evidence for this new magical inoculation is detailed by CNBC:
For the BA.4/BA.5 boosters, the companies have submitted animal data. They have not released those data publicly, although at the June FDA meeting, Pfizer presented preliminary findings in eight mice given BA.4/BA.5 vaccines as their third dose. Compared with the mice that received the original vaccine as a booster, the animals showed an increased response to all Omicron variants tested: BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5.
Yes, on the basis of “increased response” to Omicron in eight mice, the Biden administration has ordered 171 million doses of the new Pfizer and Moderna boosters. Even had this vaccine been tested in humans and shown some efficacy against infection – like the primary series – there would be more than enough reason for caution and hesitation. The European Medicines Agency has warned against the potential adverse immunological effects of repeated boosting every four months. As Dr. Marty Makary from Johns Hopkins has noted, recent research shows a “reduced immune response against the Omicron strain among people previously infected who then received three Covid vaccine doses compared to a control group that previously had Covid and did not have multiple shots.”
It is just impossible to overstate the unconditional absurdity of the FDA and CDC decision. Not only is the booster merely available to the public (or most rationally, the greatest at-risk in nursing homes) but it is recommended by the state for everyone, including children and teenagers – those with least to gain and most to lose. The regulatory framework that allows them to approve and universally promote the booster is that of the Emergency Use Authorization:
The FDA may authorize unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by CBRN [chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear] threat agents when certain criteria are met, including there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.
What these serious “diseases or conditions” might be, which pose such a risk to a healthy 20-year-old that they warrant the use of these criminally under-tested inoculations, is nowhere mentioned. Moreover, rather than observing any kind of remotely defensible dosing schedule, the FDA has recommended the new booster as early as two months after the prior dose. Short vaccination intervals are known to elevate the risk of vaccine myocarditis – another towering and studiously ignored concern.
The most robust research for vaccine-induced myocarditis in young men, who are most at-risk for this adverse reaction, puts the probability at around 1 in 1,800 per second dose. As I’ve previously written, myocarditis is not “mild” and if left undetected, can easily be lethal (read about law enforcement member Dev’s near-death vaccine experience here).
What reassurance can CDC officials give to those concerned with the most documented serious adverse event associated with mRNA vaccination?
CDC official Dr. Sara Oliver: “We know that the myocarditis risk is unknown but anticipate a similar risk to that seen after the monovalent vaccines.”
Sigh.
Anyone who has followed the corruption of the FDA and CDC over the past two years could hardly find these developments surprising. Recall that 12 months ago, two top officials (Dr. Marion Gruber and Dr. Philip Krause) at the FDA’s office of vaccine products resigned over political pressure from the White House to universally authorize the original booster shot to the public. Previously, the Trump administration pressured the FDA to “bend” vaccine emergency use authorization standards and allegedly prevented the collection of safety data prior to the 2020 election.
It’s more than rational to have subzero faith in institutions which are continually rotting on the inside and prone to outside influence from the most powerful political actors in the world. Those still working inside these banana-laboratories attest to their deterioration. On Bari Weiss’s Substack, Dr. Marty Makary and Dr. Tracy Beth Høeg reported stunning, privately obtained quotes from top FDA officials. Here’s a sampling:
“It’s like a horror movie I’m being forced to watch and I can’t close my eyes… people are getting bad advice and we can’t say anything.”
“I can’t tell you how many people at the FDA have told me, ‘I don’t like any of this, but I just need to make it to my retirement.’”
For those who have previously complied with the authoritarian dictates of the government, this may be a great awakening. Do you trust a state-recommended medical intervention based on a 10th grade science experiment on eight mice (all of which got Omicron anyway)? Do you trust an agency which has been under tremendous political pressure, forcing their top vaccine experts to resign and other employees to witness an abject mockery of the scientific method? Do you trust a vaccine that hasn’t even been tested in humans, and will probably never be studied for effectiveness against infection or severe disease because “such trials are very expensive”?
Don’t take my word for it. Listen to Dr. Paul Offit, the most prominent vaccine expert in the U.S and member of the FDA’s vaccine advisory committee (VRBPAC):
“I’m uncomfortable that we would move forward—that we would give millions or tens of millions of doses to people—based on mouse data.”
Rav Arora is a 21-year-old writer from Vancouver, British Columbia. His work has appeared in such places as the NY Post and The Globe and Mail. Yet his heretical writing on vaccine injuries and mandates has forced him to go independent. Please consider supporting him by becoming a paid subscriber at his Substack, Noble Truths.
A leaked video recording reveals researchers in June shared data with the Israeli Ministry of Health (MOH) showing serious and long-term side effects associated with Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
However, the MOH did not disclose the researchers’ findings to the expert committee that met later that month to decide on recommending the vaccine for children under age 5, or with leaders of Israel’s COVID-19 vaccine booster program.
Additionally, the MOH on Aug. 2 issued a report — on adverse events following the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine from Dec. 9, 2021, to May 31, 2022 — that contradicted the data presented during the early-June meeting.
Yaffa Shir-Raz, Ph.D., health communication and pharmaceutical companies public relations strategy researcher at Reichman University in Herzliya, Israel, translated the June meeting from Hebrew into English.
The English translation shows the research team warned MOH officials they should think carefully about how to present the researchers’ findings to the public because they posed a potential legal risk, as the findings contradicted MOH’s claims that serious side effects are rare and short-term.
Shir-Raz tweeted on Sept. 1 an excerpt from the recorded meeting in which the research team warned MOH seniors they would have to think of the legal ramifications of the team’s findings.
According to the video recording, the researchers informed MOH officials about the many reports of serious and long-term side effects of the Pfizer vaccine, including side effects Pfizer didn’t list on the patient information leaflet, such as digestive side effects — especially abdominal pain in children — and back pain.
Additionally, Levi told GB News:
“On the free text part of the form, where patients were allowed to report whatever they wanted to, they [the researchers] observed and got many, many reports of neurological side effects — some not currently listed by Pfizer as side effects of the vaccine.”
The researchers also noted many cases of what Levi called the “re-challenge phenomenon” — or the recurrence or worsening of a side effect following repeated doses of the vaccine — which the researchers said indicated there was most likely a causal link between the vaccine and many side effects.
“The research team repeatedly stressed during the discussion,” Shir-Raz said in her translation and summary in English, “that their findings indicate that — contrary to what we were told so far — in many cases, serious adverse events are long-term, that last weeks, months, a year, or even more, and in some cases — ongoing, so that the side effect still lasted when the study was over.”
The side effects included menstrual irregularities and various neurological side effects, muscle-skeletal injuries, GI problems and kidney and urinary system adverse events, Shir-Raz said.
According to Levi’s review of the meeting footage, the researchers expressed a sentiment of “concern” and felt their “conscience” bothered them by the reality of their findings.
The researchers told the MOH officials their findings contradicted the MOH’s prior messaging that the vaccine was safe and side effects were both rare and short-lasting.
In 50% of the reports in which a duration was specified by the individual, the researchers said, the duration was over six months, according to the video’s English subtitles.
Moreover, in 65% of the neurological cases that mentioned a duration, the individuals reported their symptoms were ongoing, Levi said.
“Now it turns out that the reality is not what the narrative was promoting,” Levi said. “The side effects are long-term and serious.”
The research team told the MOH officials:
“You have to think very very carefully about how you communicate this to the public because you may open yourself to legal lawsuits and liability issues because what you promoted is, in fact, not the reality in what we see in the reports.”
Despite the importance of this discussion, Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis, head of public health services at MOH — and the person who signed the contract with Pfizer — was not present during the meeting. The researchers repeatedly asked MOH officials to make sure Dr. Alroy-Preis saw their findings
The MOH commissioned the Shamir Medical Center team of researchers with experience in pharmacovigilance to analyze the data from the adverse effects reporting system launched in Dec. 2021.
Although Israel began its COVID-19 vaccination campaign in 2020, it did not have an adverse effect reporting system until the end of 2021.
Steve Kirsch, executive director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, commented on the news in a Sept. 2 Substack post, asking, “Why didn’t they release the original presentation made by the safety team?”
“There needs to be an investigation ASAP into what happened, but the head of the MoH, Nitzan Horowitz, isn’t calling for one,” he said.
“The precautionary principle of medicine now demands an immediate halt to the COVID vaccination program,” Kirsch said.
Kirsch also commented on the lack of media coverage of the Israeli researchers’ findings:
“Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis, the Health Ministry’s head of public services and a top COVID adviser to the Israeli government, issued no public statement.
“Leaders of our ‘trusted institutions’ all over the world said absolutely nothing after the news broke on August 20, 2022.
“This suggests that there is widespread corruption in the medical community, government agencies, among public health officials, the mainstream media, and social media companies worldwide: they will not acknowledge any event that goes against the mainstream narrative.
“This is a level of corruption that is unprecedented. The atrocities here are clear-cut.
“Everyone should be speaking out and calling for a full investigation and fully evaluating the safety data collected by the Israel government.”
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication. She has taught at various academic institutions in the United States and is fluent in Spanish.
An Iranian envoy to the United Nations says unilateral promises by countries about stopping nuclear tests cannot replace the nuclear disarmament, unless they turn into legally binding obligations.
Iran’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Zahra Ershadi made the remarks on Wednesday while addressing a meeting of the UN General Assembly on the occasion of the International Day against Nuclear Tests.
“Pending the achievement of this goal [stopping nuclear tests], besides the implementation of these moratoriums by the NWSs (nuclear weapons states), consequently, should be replaced by a legally binding instrument to effectively prevent such tests,” she said.
She stressed the importance of the immediate implementation of Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as a “meaningful” step toward ridding the world from any threat of nuclear weapons, reaffirming it as the sole responsibility of the NWSs.
“The international community must hold the NWSs responsible and accountable by implementing this legal obligation and refrain from any activity inconsistent with that obligation,” she added.
The Iranian diplomat stressed the need to apply the approach to the Middle East “where the Israeli regime, as the sole possessor of all types of WMDs, poses the most serious threat to regional peace, security and stability.”
She criticized lack of implementation of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) in the world 26 years after its signature.
Ershadi said the international community has been and continues to be adamant about ending nuclear tests, adding that achieving this noble goal relies on the political will of the nuclear weapon states.
She noted that Iran regrets the delay in halting nuclear tests and considers it a major reason for the failure of the 10th NPT review conference.
“Should these calls be effective, these ominous tests would not have been utilized for the production, proliferation and even use of nuclear weapons. After all, the world, including the NWSs, should have taken note of the devastating consequences of nuclear tests that are nearly identical to the actual use of nuclear weapons,” the Iranian envoy said.
She highlighted the importance and necessity of “putting an end to all nuclear tests for not only the sake of humanity and its future generations but also mother Earth.”
She said the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) was a “right step in the right direction” and the only guarantee against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.
A US Senator has dismissed an Israeli military investigation that claims there is a “high possibility” that veteran Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh was “accidentally hit” by an Israeli soldier in the occupied West Bank four months ago.
Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen for Maryland posted a tweet on Wednesday, saying the existing evidence did not support the claim that a soldier accidentally killed Abu Akleh in the midst of a gun battle in Jenin.
Van Hollen said the United Nations and reconstructions by major news outlets had found the female journalist was not in the immediate vicinity of fighting with the Palestinian resistance fighters and could not have been caught in the crossfire.
“The crux of the ‘defense’ in this military report is that a soldier was ‘returning fire’ from armed Palestinians” when Abu Akleh was struck, Van Hollen said. “But investigations … found no such firing at the time. This underscores need for independent US inquiry into this American journalist’s death.”
The Committee to Protect Journalists has labeled the Israeli report “late and incomplete.”
“They provided no name for Shireen Abu [Akleh’s] killer and no other information than his or her own testimony that the killing was a mistake.”
Palestinian officials, rights advocates, and family of the slain journalist have already denounced the findings of the Israeli inquiry.
The journalist’s niece, Lina Abu Akleh, said the family had no confidence in the report. “We could never expect any type of accountability or legitimate investigation from the very entity responsible for gunning down an unarmed and clearly identifiable journalist.”
The family said an independent American investigation was “the bare minimum the US government should do for one of their own citizens.” The family also said Abu Akleh’s killing was a “war crime.”
On Monday, the Israeli military admitted that the journalist was “accidentally” killed by the regime’s gunfire on May 11, saying, however, that it will open no criminal investigation into the assassination.
The acknowledgement came after a final Israeli investigation concluded there was a “high possibility” the journalist had been shot dead by an Israeli soldier who mistook her for an armed Palestinian.
The report claimed she could have been shot by Palestinian gunfire even though all independent investigations on the shooting have totally dispelled the allegation.
Wearing press attire, the 51-year-old journalist was murdered in cold blood while covering an Israeli military raid. Later, her funeral was also attacked by the regime forces.
Israel’s account shifted several times over the four months. However, eyewitness accounts and videos of Abu Akleh and the area around her at the time of her killing do not show a gun battle.
A United Nations investigation earlier found Israeli soldiers fired “several single, seemingly well-aimed bullets” at Abu Akleh and other journalists.
Investigations by the New York Times, Washington Post, and CNN have questioned the official Israeli version of the episode.
Abu Akleh’s tragic death sent shock waves across the region, drawing global condemnation. Critics say the Israeli military has a long history of dissembling and making false claims over the killings of civilians.
The recent attack on the Russian embassy in Kabul was another shocking episode in the current wave of assaults against Russian civilians around the world. Daesh claimed responsibility for the crime, which raises a number of suspicions about possible cooperation between anti-Russian groups abroad, considering the links between Islamic terrorists, Western intelligence and Ukrainian neo-Nazis.
On August 5, the Russian Embassy in Afghanistan was the target of a terrorist attack. A suicide bomber approached the entrance to the Embassy facility and operated the explosion, killing two Russian diplomatic staff’s employees, as well as at least six Afghan citizens who were nearby. The Embassy’s guards even shot down the terrorist, but the action was not fast enough to prevent self-detonation, which culminated in the tragedy. Several people remain hospitalized, and the number of deaths could increase in the coming days.
Although several hostilities against Russians have already taken place in Afghanistan in the past, this is the first time that such an attack has taken place since the Taliban took Kabul, after the American defeat in 2021. According to local sources, Daesh, which is an enemy of the Taliban and has acted intensively in the country to harm the new government, claimed responsibility for the attack. In fact, the incident was characterized by a number of similarities with Daesh’s praxis in other assaults, which would raise suspicions about the group’s involvement even if responsibility had not been assumed.
Russia is one of the few countries to maintain an embassy in Kabul after the Taliban took over the country. Although Moscow still does not officially recognize the Taliban government, Russian diplomats are talking to local authorities in order to advance bilateral negotiations, currently having plans to improve the supply of fuel and other commodities. The Russian government is working to overcome old rivalries with the Taliban and reach a positive agreement for all sides, as the Afghan situation currently appears to be between a stable government with the Taliban or the absolute chaos of the civil war operated by terrorist organizations, such as Daesh. The mere fact of maintaining bilateral dialogue with the de facto government of the Taliban seems to be reason enough for terrorists to target Russian citizens.
However, it would be naive to think that the reasons for this attack are limited to pragmatic Moscow-Kabul relations. If this were the only reason, certainly other episodes of terrorism would have already occurred at the Embassy at other times. There is undoubtedly something specific motivating this violence at this time. The main suspicion is that the attack is related to the publication by the Russian Embassy of a list of names of Afghan citizens who had applied to receive student visas in Russia. But it is possible that there are even more issues involved in this case.
One of the most neglected topics about the Ukrainian conflict is that since 2014 there has been vast cooperation between Kiev’s neo-Nazis and foreign terrorists, including members of Daesh. Many Daesh leaders and fighters migrated to Ukraine, especially after the defeat of terrorists in Syria with the Russian military intervention in 2015. More than that, saboteurs affiliated with the Islamic State and Ukrainian neo-Nazi militias allegedly had already conspired together to carry out terrorist attacks within Russian territory itself, according to FSB data published in 2017.
With the start of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine, the situation may have become more serious. In June, the Syrian government provided Russia with intelligence data proving the collaboration of Western powers and Turkey to send Daesh fighters to Ukraine. There is no precise information on the number of fighters and their identities, but it seems quite evident that Daesh members have been in Ukraine over the last eight years and that they are now continuing there, fighting Russian forces. And that brings up a series of suspicions about what may have happened in Kabul.
Apparently, the attack on the Embassy was just another typical episode of the criminal cowardice that has been seen in the praxis of anti-Russian forces. Saboteurs have operated to kill Russian civilians in various parts of the world. The murder of Daria Dugina in the middle of the Moscow oblast was a clear example of this. In the same vein, what happened in Kabul, whether or not there was foreign participation, seems to be related to this wave of violence against Russian civilian targets.
Deeper investigations are needed to conclude what actually motivated the attack and whether there was participation or sponsorship by Western or Ukrainian groups. However, the main fact is that who attacked the Embassy was Daesh – and Daesh fights Russia in Ukraine.
Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.
Regular use of ivermectin led to a 100% reduction in hospitalisation rate, a 92% reduction in mortality rate and an 86% reduction in the risk of dying from a COVID-19 infection when compared to non-users, a major new study has found.
The study, published in the medical journal Cureus, analysed data from 223,128 people from the city of Itajaí in Brazil, making it the largest study of its kind and giving its findings a high degree of certainty. Senior author Dr. Flavio A. Cadegiani wrote on Twitter: “An observational study with the size and level of analysis as ours is hardly achieved and infeasible to be conducted as a randomised clinical trial. Conclusions are hard to be refuted. Data is data, regardless of your beliefs.”
The study compared those who took ivermectin regularly, irregularly and not at all prior to being infected with COVID-19 (i.e., as prophylaxis), and found a dose-dependent relationship, confirming that the difference in outcomes is very likely to be due to the drug and not other factors, such as differences between the groups.
The authors used a technique called ‘propensity score matching’ to control for confounding factors that may otherwise have biased the study in one direction or another. For example, those taking ivermectin tended to be older than those not taking it (average age 47 years vs 40 years), but by matching people of similar age in each group and comparing outcomes this confounding factor was controlled for.
Here is the abstract of the study, which summarises the methods and results.
Background
We have previously demonstrated that ivermectin used as prophylaxis for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), irrespective of the regularity, in a strictly controlled citywide program in Southern Brazil (Itajaí, Brazil), was associated with reductions in COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, and mortality rates. In this study, our objective was to determine if the regular use of ivermectin impacted the level of protection from COVID-19 and related outcomes, reinforcing the efficacy of ivermectin through the demonstration of a dose-response effect.
Methods
This exploratory analysis of a prospective observational study involved a program that used ivermectin at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/day for two consecutive days, every 15 days, for 150 days. Regularity definitions were as follows: regular users had 180 mg or more of ivermectin and irregular users had up to 60 mg, in total, throughout the program. Comparisons were made between non-users (subjects who did not use ivermectin), and regular and irregular users after multivariate adjustments. The full city database was used to calculate and compare COVID-19 infection and the risk of dying from COVID-19. The COVID-19 database was used and propensity score matching (PSM) was employed for hospitalisation and mortality rates.
Results
Among 223,128 subjects from the city of Itajaí, 159,560 were 18 years old or up and were not infected by COVID-19 until July 7th 2020, from which 45,716 (28.7%) did not use and 113,844 (71.3%) used ivermectin. Among ivermectin users, 33,971 (29.8%) used irregularly (up to 60 mg) and 8,325 (7.3%) used regularly (more than 180 mg). The remaining 71,548 participants were not included in the analysis. COVID-19 infection rate was 49% lower for regular users (3.40%) than non-users (6.64%) (risk rate (RR): 0.51; 95% CI: 0.45-0.58; p < 0.0001), and 25% lower than irregular users (4.54%) (RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.66-0.85; p < 0.0001). The infection rate was 32% lower for irregular users than non-users (RR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.64-0.73; p < 0.0001).
Among COVID-19 [infected] participants, regularusers were older and had a higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes and hypertension than irregular and non-users. After PSM, the matched analysis contained 283 subjects in each group of non-users and regular users, [283] between regular users and irregular users, and 1,542 subjects between non-users and irregular users. The hospitalisation rate was reduced by 100% in regular users compared to both irregular users and non-users (p < 0.0001), and by 29% among irregular users compared to non-users (RR: 0.781; 95% CI: 0.49-1.05; p = 0.099). Mortality rate was 92% lower in regular users than non-users (RR: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.02-0.35; p = 0.0008) and 84% lower than irregular users (RR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.04-0.71; p = 0.016), while irregular users had a 37% lower mortality rate reduction than non-users (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.40-0.99; p = 0.049). Risk of dying from COVID-19 [once infected] was 86% lower among regular users than non-users (RR: 0.14; 95% CI: 0.03-0.57; p = 0.006), and 72% lower than irregular users (RR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.07-1.18; p = 0.083), while irregular users had a 51% reduction compared to non-users (RR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.32-0.76; p = 0.001).
Conclusion
Non-use of ivermectin was associated with a 12.5-fold increase in mortality rate and a seven-fold increased risk of dying from COVID-19 compared to the regular use of ivermectin. This dose-response efficacy reinforces the prophylactic effects of ivermectin against COVID-19.
The authors draw particular attention to the dose-dependent relationship as confirming the efficacy of the treatment:
The response pattern of ivermectin use and level of protection from COVID-19-related outcomes was identified and consistent across dose-related levels. The reduction in COVID-19 infection rate occurred in a consistent and significant dose-dependent manner, with reductions of 49% and 32% in regular and irregular users, when compared to non-users. The most striking evidence of ivermectin’s effectiveness was the 100% reduction in mortality for female regular users.
The data in the study come from official government databases and, according to the authors, “conclusively show that the risk of dying from COVID-19 was lower for all regular and irregular users of ivermectin, compared to non-users, considering the whole population”.
The study, while not a randomised controlled trial (RCT), used a “strictly controlled population with a great level of control for confounding factors” and was larger than would be feasible in an RCT.
The authors highlight a “notable reduction in risk of death in the over 50-year-old population and those with comorbidities”.
They conclude that the evidence provided by the study is “among the strongest and most conclusive data regarding ivermectin efficacy”.
Many governments have suppressed the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19, claiming there is a lack of evidence of efficacy. However, this purported lack of evidence often relies on poorly designed trials and biased conclusions. For example, a recent widely-reported RCT concluded the study “did not show adequate support for the effectiveness of this drug” – yet its own results showed statistically significant benefits for speed of recovery as well as large (though not, in that study, statistically significant) benefits for mechanical ventilation and death. Participants also were not given the treatment until over a week into having symptoms and the study may have been confounded by people in the placebo arm also taking the drug.
One of the new study’s authors and a seasoned proponent of repurposed treatments like ivermectin, Dr. Pierre Kory, made clear his thoughts on Twitter in April as he responded to an FDA tweet reminding the public that ivermectin is not approved: “Messaging BS with one corrupt study while ignoring 82 trials (33 RCTs) from 27 countries, 129K patients – sum showing massive benefits. Stop lying man, people are dying. #earlytreatmentworks.”
Social media companies have censored information about ivermectin, often considering any suggestion that it is an effective treatment for COVID-19 to be misinformation. Yet ivermectin is a cheap, safe drug that many studies have shown brings considerable benefit in treating and preventing COVID-19. The latest study impressively confirms this efficacy as a prophylactic, with a reduction in mortality of up to 92%.
Shockingly, most governments still do not have a protocol for early treatment or prevention of COVID-19. The NHS says treatment is only available for those at high risk of serious disease who have a positive test and symptoms that are not getting better. Its guidance on self-care for people ill at home only recommends paracetamol and ibuprofen. Yet here is a highly controlled study of over 200,000 people that shows huge benefit – 92% reduction in mortality, 100% reduction in hospitalisation – for the prophylactic use of a cheap, widely available drug, and which confirms the results of multiple earlier studies. What are our governments waiting for? What more do they need to approve drugs that have been shown to save lives?
The Israeli health authority knew the vaccines were harming people: the side effects of the vaccine are neither mild nor short term. In fact, in 65% of the neurological cases that mentioned duration, the symptoms are all on-going.
They also established causality: the side effects were caused by the vaccine. This is something no one else had been able to establish before.
They don’t know how serious the harm is because they only looked at the data for the top five categories. Cardiovascular was #6. So they have only looked at a fraction of the data.
The researchers do not know the prevalence of these serious side effects because they were just provided with the numerator, not the denominator (similar to VAERS).
The Israeli authorities deliberately covered up the safety issues and hid it from the world, issuing a false report essentially saying “there is nothing new to see here folks, move along.”
As of September 4, 2022 no one is being held accountable and everyone is ignoring this bombshell story:
There is a press blackout on coverage in Israel of this. The Israel media refuses to even look at the evidence.
Nobody in Israel is being held accountable for this corruption. There isn’t even an investigation.
Nobody in the worldwide medical community is speaking out about the corruption either despite the fact that it affects people everywhere in the world.
There is no coverage of this in any worldwide mainstream media.
No public official, public health official, or mainstream media anywhere in the world is even calling for an investigation, nobody wants to see the original expert report, and nobody wants to see the safety data they gathered.
We have the full video and we have the slides that were presented; use the Contact Me link if you are a health authority and want to see it before it is released to the public.
Just to be sure the CDC knows about this, I just emailed hundreds of people at the CDC who are involved in the COVID vaccines (including Rochelle Walensky) to let them know that the report and video are available. All they have to do is hit reply. I bet not a single person at the CDC wants to see it. We are about to find out just how deep the corruption runs at the CDC.
This isn’t surprising that they ignore this. All negative data on the vaccine is ignored. For example, when I discovered that young Canadian doctors were dying at a more than 12X normal after the second booster, the Canadian Medical Association, whose job it is to to be an advocate for the health of doctors, refused to comment. I sent five requests and they ignored all requests. They should change their website to say that they are an advocate for the drug companies, not the health of doctors.
Specifically:
The Israel Ministry of Health (MoH) took 18 months from the launch date of the vaccine before they looked at the COVID vaccine safety data to see what it said.
They only started collecting safety data in December 2021, one year after rolling out the vaccines to the public. Few people knew this.
In December 2021, they tasked an outside expert panel led by Prof. Mati Berkowitz, a leading Israeli expert on pharmacology and toxicology from Asaf Harofe hospital, to examine the safety data they collected over the next 6 months (from early December to the end of May, 2022).
The panel presented their findings to MoH personnel on or about Jun 6, 2022 in a Zoom call that was secretly recorded. They found that the COVID vaccines were much more dangerous to people than the world authorities admitted. They found serious adverse events that were never disclosed by Pfizer or any world government. These adverse events were also not found to be short term as the public was told.
They also determined causality, something no other world health authority has ever been willing to do (because other governments never looked at the data either). Causality was both obvious and easy to prove using the re-challenge data that was collected (you can’t do this using the US VAERS data, for example).
In short, the panel determined that the government was misleading the people of Israel.
We still don’t know the whole extent of how dangerous the vaccines are because the outside team only looked at the top 5 most frequently cited events.
Both the Israeli authorities and scientists analyzing the Ministry of Health (MoH) data acted to cover up the harms by releasing a fabricated report to the public to make the vaccine look perfectly safe and claim that there was nothing wrong..
It is only thanks to the efforts of one courageous individual who released the recording of the full Zoom meeting between the MoH and their expert panel that we now know what was said at that meeting and what the data actually showed. Otherwise the world would still be in the dark.
Leaders of our “trusted institutions” all over the world said absolutely nothing after the news broke on August 20, 2022. This suggests that there is widespread corruption in the medical community, government agencies, among public health officials, the mainstream media, and social media companies worldwide: they will not acknowledge any event that goes against the mainstream narrative.
This is a level of corruption that is unprecedented. The atrocities here are clear cut. Everyone should be speaking out and calling for a full investigation and fully evaluating the safety data collected by the Israel government.
And it has very bad news. Live births dropped in England by 14% as of May 2022, and the decline seems to be worsening and not recovering.
I highlighted the relevant data that we will look at:
This simple table shows year-on-year declines in births (comparing, for example, May 2022 to May 2021):
The chart is here:
Before I go further, I have to remind my readers: birth rates are always seasonal! Most parents prefer to make a “spring baby”, which often ends up with them making a “summer baby” because conception takes more time than expected. So, never compare adjacent months as they are guaranteed to have dramatic changes that are simply seasonality-driven, with differences very repeatable over the years. Only compare months of one year with same months of another year, please. I did just that, comparing May to May, etc.
The usual year-to-year variation in fertility is 1-2%. Here’s the ONS page about 2021 births (also noting ominous 10% increases in stillbirths in 2021):
So, you can see that in the prior years, nothing super exciting was happening. The year of 2022 is, therefore, a big and a very disturbing aberration.
Missing Women
A very important statement from that report need to be addressed. The report is missing 2,637 women.
2,637 women could not be matched with a NIMS record. Their vaccine status is therefore unknown and they are excluded from these coverage figures.
I am not sure which year — 2021 or 2022 — is missing those women and how many of those were missing in each of those respective years. However, please understand that 2,637 women is a small number compared to the 189,450 births reported in 2022. At most — if all missing women were related to only 2022 — that could change the outcome by 1.39% per every month. My guess is that they were actually missing in 2021, as the “vaccine tracking system” was being set up, although I have no proof of that.
If most missing women were related to 2021 instead, then the drop in births in 2022 would be even more pronounced. These missing women represent an unknown that muddies the waters, but does not change the fact that 2022 has a dramatic and unexplainable drop in births.
Let’s Call it What it is — Infertility
A couple that desires to have a child, and is unable to conceive or have a successful pregnancy, is called infertile. While infertility is complicated, the most basic fact that we see is that despite life going on as always in the UK, couples in 2021 could NOT conceive and complete in the first months of 2022, approximately 24 thousand pregnancies — due to infertility. That led to up to 14% declines in births this year. Whether this infertility is temporary, or permanent — is an open question. I hope that it is temporary.
The Cause is the Covid Vaccine
We all know what was going on 9 months prior to January-May of 2022. The UK was busy vaccinating its fertile and pregnant women, claiming that “Covid vaccine is safe for pregnancy”.
And now, we know how that turned out, with the 14% decline in the birth rate.
Beirut – During his visit with US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, Lebanese President Michael Aoun reportedly received a US-Israeli document detailing plans for creating a civil war in Lebanon with covert false flag operations and possible Israeli invasion.
Although the source of the document is Israeli and created in partnership with Washington, no one knows who presented it to Aoun. The Lebanese TV station, Al-Jadeed, initially reported the document on Lebanese TV and a video on its website. Geopolitics Alert translated the report for this article. … continue
An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
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.
Aletho News
