Pfizer CEO says “beauty” of mRNA will allow for annual doses
TCS WIRE | June 22, 2022
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla touted the “beauty” of mRNA vaccine technology in a recent MSNBC interview, saying he fully expects the Coronavirus to require an annual dose.
“Do you think we’re going to get updated mRNA vaccines every season that will be directed to each new variation of the Coronavirus, and will we have to take those shots every year?” asked the host.
“I’m almost certain about it, and I say almost certain because, of course, regulators have the final say on all of that, but that’s the beauty of mRNA. You can adapt your vaccine just by changing the sequencing, which is a very minor change,” said Bourla.
“For this reason, I’m very confident we will be able to respond very, very fast to every new variant.”
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently lifted travel mandates and vaccine requirements after facing widespread pushback from the public and airlines.
When lifting the mandates, the Liberals maintained they were only temporarily suspending the restrictions citing the threat of future waves.
“The reality is, as much as people would like to pretend that we’re not, we’re still in a pandemic,” said Trudeau early in June.
“There are Canadians who die every single day because of COVID-19 in our hospitals.”
Bourla has stated in the past that anyone who spreads misinformation regarding Coronavirus vaccines or potential side effects were literally criminals responsible for millions of deaths.
“Those people are criminals,” Bourla told Atlantic Council CEO, Frederick Kempe. “They’re not bad people. They’re criminals because they have literally cost millions of lives.”
“The only thing that stands between the new way of life and the current way of life is, frankly, hesitancy to vaccinations,” he added.
Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Theresa Tam echoed fearmongering about a theoretical future wave earlier this month.
“The pandemic is not over,” Tam said. “We think that it is very likely that we will get some more viral activity in the future, and we can’t predict exactly how big the next wave is, but I think we need to prepare.”
CDC Admits It Never Monitored VAERS for COVID Vaccine Safety Signals
By Josh Guetzkow, Ph.D. | The Defender | June 21, 2022
In a stunning development, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) last week admitted — despite assurances to the contrary — the agency never analyzed the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for safety signals for COVID-19 vaccines.
The admission was revealed in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted by Children’s Health Defense (CHD).
In September 2021, I published an article in The Defender in which I used the CDC’s published methodology to analyze VAERS for safety signals from COVID-19 vaccines.
The signals were loud and clear, leading me to wonder “why is nobody listening?”
Instead, I should have asked, “Is anybody even looking for them?”
After that article was published, I urged CHD’s legal team to submit a FOIA request to the CDC about its VAERS monitoring activities.
Since CDC officials stated publicly that “COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring is the most robust in U.S. history,” I had assumed that at the very least, CDC officials were monitoring VAERS using the methods they described in a briefing document posted on the CDC website in January 2021 (and updated in February 2022, with minor changes).
I was wrong.
The lynchpin of their safety monitoring was to mine VAERS data for safety signals by calculating what are known as proportional reporting ratios (PRR’s).
This is a method of comparing the proportion of different types of adverse events reported for a new vaccine to the proportion of those events reported for an older, established vaccine.
If the new vaccine shows a significantly higher reporting rate of a particular adverse event relative to the old one, it counts as a safety signal that should then trigger a more thorough investigation.
The briefing document states, “CDC will perform PRR data mining on a weekly basis or as needed.”

And yet, in the agency’s response to the FOIA request, it wrote that “no PRRs were conducted by CDC. Furthermore, data mining is outside of the agency’s purview.”
The agency suggested contacting the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which was supposed to perform a different type of data mining, according to the briefing document.

CDC officials repeatedly claimed they have not seen safety signals in VAERS.

For example, on April 27, 2021, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky stated the CDC did not see any signals related to heart inflammation.
But a PRR calculation I did using the number of myo/pericarditis reports listed in the first table produced by the CDC obtained via the FOIA request reveals clear and unambiguous safety signals relative to the comparator vaccines mentioned in the briefing document (i.e., flu vaccines, FLUAD and Shingrix).
The table is dated April 2, 2021, almost four weeks before she made those remarks.
In fact, among the 15 adverse events for adults included in that week’s tabulations, PRRs I calculated also show loud-and-clear safety signals for acute myocardial infarction, anaphylaxis, appendicitis, Bell’s palsy, coagulopathy, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A), stroke and death.
The actual monitoring the CDC did diverges from the one promised in the briefing document in other ways.
For example, the CDC never created tables of the top 25 adverse events reported in the previous week, tables comparing different vaccine manufacturers, or tables of auto-immune diseases.
And it only began monitoring in early April 2021, even though reports from COVID-19 vaccines had been flooding VAERS since mid-December of the previous year.
To be clear, VAERS is not the only database the CDC uses to monitor COVID-19 vaccine safety.
For example, the CDC sponsored several studies of COVID-19 safety using the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), which is comprised of millions of medical records from HMO’s across several states.
Those studies do not raise many safety concerns. However, they make many questionable methodological choices.
To give one example, a major safety study based on VSD data published in September 2021, in “JAMA,” compares adverse event rates that occur within 1-21 days of vaccination to the rate of occurrence from 22 to 42 days after vaccination.
It makes no comparison between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, or before vaccination versus after in the same individuals.
Moreover, the VSD is far from infallible, having failed initially to detect the increase in myocarditis rates.
In contrast, although calculating PRR’s is a blunt pharmacovigilance tool and far from perfect, it nevertheless has the advantage of being straightforward and difficult to manipulate with statistical sleight of hand.
PRRs are one of the oldest, most basic and most well-established tools of pharmacovigilance. The calculations are so straightforward that the CDC automated it several years ago, so it could have been done at the press of a button.
It simply beggars belief that the CDC failed to do this simple calculation. Even now, a paper published by CDC staff in March on the safety of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines remains purely descriptive with no PRR calculation.
Meanwhile, a study published by a researcher not affiliated with the CDC in February in “Frontiers in Public Health” analyzes VAERS and EudraVigilance data using a method similar to PRRs, revealing clear and concerning safety signals.
And while it is true that VAERS is not the only database the CDC can use to monitor COVID-19 vaccine safety, it is of critical importance because it can reveal signals much faster than any other method — if anybody cares to look for them.
It remains to be seen if the FDA was properly monitoring VAERS. That will be the subject of a future FOIA request.
But even if it was, it doesn’t change the fact that the CDC completely failed in its promise to monitor VAERS for safety signals.
© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Covid vaccines more likely to put you in hospital than keep you out: BMJ editor’s analysis of Pfizer and Moderna trial data
BY WILL JONES | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | JUNE 22, 2022
A new paper by BMJ Editor Dr. Peter Doshi and colleagues has analysed data from the Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccine trials and found that the vaccines are more likely to put you in hospital with a serious adverse event than keep you out by protecting you from Covid.
The pre-print (not yet peer-reviewed) focuses on serious adverse events highlighted in a WHO-endorsed “priority list of potential adverse events relevant to COVID-19 vaccines”. The authors evaluated these serious adverse events of special interest as they were observed in “phase III randomised trials of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines”.
A serious adverse event was defined as per the trial protocols as an adverse event that results in any of the following conditions:
- death;
- life-threatening at the time of the event;
- inpatient hospitalisation or prolongation of existing hospitalisation;
- persistent or significant disability/incapacity;
- a congenital anomaly/birth defect;
- medically important event, based on medical judgement.
Dr. Doshi and colleagues found that the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 events per 10,000 vaccinated for Pfizer and 15.1 per 10,000 for Moderna (95% CI -0.4 to 20.6 and -3.6 to 33.8, respectively). When combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with a risk increase of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated (95% CI 2.1 to 22.9).
The authors note that this level of increased risk post-vaccine is greater than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalisation in both Pfizer and Moderna trials, which was 2.3 per 10,000 participants for Pfizer and 6.4 per 10,000 for Moderna. This indicates that the Pfizer vaccine results in a net increase in serious adverse events of 7.8 per 10,000 vaccinated and the Moderna vaccine of 8.7 per 10,000 vaccinated.
Addressing the difference between their findings and those of the FDA when it approved the vaccines, the authors note that the FDA’s analysis of serious adverse events “included thousands of additional participants with very little follow-up, of which the large majority had only received one dose”. The FDA also counted people affected rather than individual events, despite there being twice as many individuals in the vaccine group than the placebo group who experienced multiple serious adverse events.
The authors wonder where the U.S. Government’s own studies of adverse events are. They note that in July 2021 the FDA reported detecting four potential adverse events of interest following Pfizer vaccination – pulmonary embolism, acute myocardial infarction, immune thrombocytopenia and disseminated intravascular coagulation – and stated it would further investigate the findings. However, no update has yet appeared.
They also note that “while CDC published a protocol in early 2021 for using proportional reporting ratios for signal detection in the VAERS database, the agency has not yet reported such a study”.
Their results are compatible, they point out, with a recent pre-print analysis of COVID-19 vaccine trials by Benn et al., which found “no evidence of a reduction in overall mortality in the mRNA vaccine trials”, with 31 deaths in the vaccine arms versus 30 deaths in the placebo arms (3% increase; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.71).
Noting that their study is limited by the fact that the raw data from COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials are not publicly available, they stress that “given the global public health implications, there is an urgency to make all COVID-19 trial data public, particularly regarding serious adverse events, without any further delay”.
They conclude that there is a need for formal harm-benefit analyses for Covid vaccines, taking into account the different levels of risk of serious Covid and adverse events that exist between demographic groups. Ideally, this would be based on individual participant data, they add, though such data remain frustratingly unavailable.
Biden predicts ‘second pandemic’

Samizdat – June 22, 2022
The US needs more money to plan for “the second pandemic,” President Joe Biden said during a press briefing on Tuesday, as he praised his government’s efforts to ensure children under five can get Covid-19 vaccines.
Biden also hailed as “a very historic milestone” that the US has become the first country in the world to offer “safe and effective” Covid-19 vaccines for children as young as six months old.
When asked about how long the administration could keep up the new vaccine campaign, Biden suggested that the current budget would be enough to “get through at least this year” but stressed that “we do need more money.”
He went on to insist that he needed even more money for an unspecified “second pandemic.” “We need more money to plan for the second pandemic. There’s going to be another pandemic,” the president warned, without going into detail about what this new wave might entail.
Biden also took the opportunity to take a swipe at his predecessor, implying that Donald Trump’s lack of preparation increased the impact of the Covid pandemic. “We have to think ahead. That’s not something the last outfit did very well and that’s something we’ve been doing fairly well. That’s why we need the money,” surmised Biden.
Some health experts and agencies such as the World Health Organization have also warned of the likelihood of future pandemics. The WHO had previously announced that it plans to confirm a global pandemic treaty at the 2024 World Health Assembly, which it hopes will help “set out the objectives and fundamental principles in order to structure the necessary collective action to fight pandemics.”
The agreement, which heavily focuses on increased surveillance, vaccinations and “restoring trust in the international health system,” would legally bind its members under international law, superseding regulations of individual countries in an effort to get all nations to act as one in the face of a future outbreak.
If you don’t want to have a Covid vaccine, get a job enforcing vaccine mandates.
The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | June 21, 2022
Last week the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) quietly sent round a memo exempting officials from vaccine mandates. Why is this so hypocritical? Well, because the officials they were exempting from the vaccine mandate were officials hired to enforce the very same vaccine mandate.
So it seems the easiest way to get around the vaccine mandate is to get a job enforcing the vaccine mandate.
I’ve probably said vaccine mandate a few too many times now, so here is the memo itself.
The Biden administration first announced the mandates back in August 2021, stating that healthcare and nursing home staff must be COVID-19 vaccinated or lose funding. After legal challenges, different deadlines were imposed with the final deadline occurring on 21 March 2022.
Vaccine mandate deadlines encouraged/forced (take your pick) employees to get vaccinated with uptake rising from 63% to 88% in a number of months. Doctors, nurses and staff who still decided that vaccination was not for them, lost their jobs.
In February, the CMS warned state survey agencies that they must enforce all federal health and safety requirements or lose federal financial support. Although it didn’t explicitly say so, this was widely recognised as a warning to Florida and other states that had said they would not enforce vaccine mandates. Furthermore, the CMS said they would bring in outside surveyors if states did not comply with their directives.
CMS surveyors were given the role of evaluating whether healthcare workers were complying with federal vaccine mandates. They stated that staff vaccination under 100% would constitute non-compliance. However, the extremely reasonable CMS (sarcasm) said that any facility with over 80% of its staff vaccinated would be given 60 days to reach 100% without further action being taken.
Brian Harrison, state representative of Texas and former chief of staff for the Department of Health and Human Services under the Trump administration, said in an interview with Newsmax “This shows that the Biden administration is truly authoritarian and these mandates never had anything to do with public health in the first place, but sadly and tragically, they had much more to do with giving the federal government more control over our lives. These mandates must end.”
Harrison thinks that after the CMS enforced the mandates on its own surveyors, they were unable to live under the same rules. “They couldn’t take it. So instead of taking down the mandate, which would have been the normal common sense solution, they just exempted their own government contractors instead of all the Americans.”
Rules for thee, not for me.
Trudeau wasted over $100 million on expired vaccines
The Counter Signal | June 21, 2022
The 13.6 million expired AstraZeneca vaccines that Trudeau donated to foreign countries is estimated to have cost Canadian taxpayers over $100 million.
As per a report from the National Post, “According to a document tabled in the House of Commons last week, the government disposed of roughly 1.2 million doses of Moderna vaccines that expired either in mid-March or mid-April this year.”
“But that wastage is just a drop in the bucket compared to the nearly 13.6 million doses of AstraZeneca vaccines that the government donated to other countries last year and that sat in the manufacturer’s warehouses until they expired, according to new data provided to the National Post by Health Canada.”
According to the Financial Times, doses of AstraZeneca were priced at roughly $3 to $4 per dose when mass-produced, and governments secured orders of the COVID vaccine.
But this is inaccurate in the case of Canada. Trudeau managed to bungle the deal and secured 20 million doses at more than double that price.
“The only cost per dose revealed so far was released by accident when the price for the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine was accidentally left in an email included in a package of documents released to the health committee. That email said Canada would pay $8.18 per dose of AstraZeneca, which would amount to $163 million for the 20 million doses ordered,” the CBC reported in June 2021, just a month before Trudeau announced he’d be donating most AstraZeneca vaccines to foreign countries.
At $8.18 per dose of AstraZeneca, that means that the Trudeau government is estimated to have spent a whopping $111,248,000 on vaccines that were never needed or even wanted, as COVAX was flooded by other countries similarly pawning off their unwanted AstraZeneca vaccines after it was found to cause blood clots.
Indeed, the original agreement was to send even more AstraZeneca vaccines to COVAX that would expire — a total of 17.7 million.
And that’s just for AstraZeneca. Both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines — for which Canada paid a premium — were even more expensive, and many of these are also either already expired or will expire soon.
However, even this is just the tip of the iceberg regarding how much Trudeau sent to COVAX.
In July 2021, the Trudeau government donated an additional $10 million to COVAX, which was on top of a $440 million in prior donations.
Overall, had the PM had better foresight or financial planning, hundreds of millions of dollars could have been saved throughout the pandemic.
Canada threatens to bring back vaccine passports

By Ken Macon | Reclaim The Net | June 21, 2022
Canada may not have seen the last of the mandatory COVID-19 vaccine passports. Proposed restrictions could even be harsher than before, likely to require three to four inoculations in order to travel.
It’s worth noting that the mandate is not set in stone, but the government is preparing for the possibility of introducing the measures in the Fall. Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos made the announcement during a press conference. The vaccine passport mandate for federal employees and other travelers might be over for now, but Duclos made it clear that it’s likely to return this fall.
In addition to officially denouncing passport mandates, Duclos took the opportunity to explain some changes in wording regarding vaccine requirements. Canada will no longer refer to people who have had all of their vaccinations as “fully vaccinated.” Instead, the language in any official documents will read “up-to-date.” This is because the government says three doses are no longer enough for many people, with some people being told to get four or even five doses.
These changes came after Dr. Theresa Tam, the chief public health officer, told reporters that several studies had just been completed.
Initially, according to the report, two doses of a vaccine would allegedly give a person 50 to 80 percent protection; however, that number falls to just 20 percent against Omicron and newer variations of the coronavirus.
Canada’s goal is now to convince people to get their third and fourth doses and restricting civil liberties has been a controversial way of forcing that over the last couple of years. Over 90 percent of Canadian adults have two doses, but less than 60% have received their booster.
The Conservative Party of Quebec has already started fighting back against the possibility of a third dose being required for a vaccine passport. For them, it’s a personal choice that shouldn’t be mandated. Many in Canada are ready to put the last few years behind them.
Punishing Dissident Physicians
CA Assembly Bill 2098 would muzzle physicians and severely punish those who challenge covid public health measures
By Aaron Kheriaty, MD | Human Flourishing | June 21, 2022
I will be heading to Sacramento next Monday to testify at a Senate committee hearing on California Assembly Bill 2098. The bill, sponsored by Senator Pan—who has been in Pharma’s back pocket for years and the source of much legislative health policy mischief in my home state—would give the medical board the authority to punish any physicians who challenge the safety and efficacy of covid vaccines. This bill is advanced even as evidence continues to emerge of safety problems with the mRNA shots, including a study this week showing the vaccines lower sperm counts in men:

But this proposed measure seeks to enshrine in law “scientific” conclusions which are highly dubious:
All three of these statements are demonstrably false: (a) The death count figures cited are grossly overestimated by hospitals failing to distinguish dying from covid vs. dying with covid and the financial incentives from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to overestimate covid deaths; (b) the efficacy of vaccines has declined with time and new variants, so the statistic cited here is no longer true of the vaccines against omicron; (c) the CDC has consistently failed to follow-up on serious safety signals, apart from myocarditis, and the post-marketing surveillance data acquired from our FOIA request showed serious safety issues in the first three months of vaccine rollout.
If this bill passes, any physician who raises these or other inconvenient scientific facts or study findings could be disciplined by the medical board, as the text of the bill explains:
It shall constitute unprofessional conduct for a physician and surgeon to disseminate misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.
The supposed scientific “facts” mentioned in the bill make it clear just what information will be considered “misinformation” under this law. This bill will spell the end of scientific integrity and medical freedom in California. I worry that if it passes, other states could follow suit. As I have said before, California is the tip of the spear:
Here is the text of a letter I submitted last week to the committee where the bill is currently being reviewed:
13 June 2022
To: California Legislators and Committee Members
RE: AB 2098: Physicians and Surgeons: Unprofessional Conduct – OPPOSE
As a licensed physician in California I strongly oppose the proposed California bill AB 2098 and urge you to vote no and oppose as well.
Advances in science and medicine typically occur when doctors and scientists challenge conventional thinking or settled opinion. This is the very nature of scientific progress. Fixating any current medical consensus as “unchallengeable” by physicians will stifle medical and scientific advances and give undue authority to a few gatekeepers who act as guardians of the consensus. As I testified in January at a U.S. Senate panel on Covid policy: “The scientific method suffered [during the pandemic] from a repressive academic and social climate of censorship and silencing of competing perspectives. This projected the false appearance of a scientific consensus—a ‘consensus’ often strongly influenced by economic and political interests.”
One need only look at the last two years to see how frequently public health recommendations and consensus thinking about Covid changed from one month to the next with the advent of new information. It was frontline ICU physicians who discovered and spoke out about bad outcomes when patients were prematurely placed on ventilators. This shifted the consensus in the direction of avoiding ventilation as much as possible. Likewise, it was frontline physicians who discovered that placing covid patients face-down in the prone position while they were ventilated could improve outcomes, challenging another consensus. Both of these advances came by way of challenging the way things were currently being done. Other physicians challenged the early consensus, which did not recommend the use of steroids to treat Covid. Eventually, this dissenting opinion gained ground and now represents conventional thinking: corticosteroids for critically ill covid patients are now standard care. Many other examples regarding guidelines on masks, social distancing, and other Covid policies could be cited here.
Allowing the free interchange among competing perspectives is absolutely necessary for scientific and medical progress. Good science is characterized by conjecture and refutation, lively deliberation, often fierce debate, and always openness to new data. The censorship of free speech in AB 2098 spells not only the demise of civil liberties and constitutional rights, but the end of the scientific enterprise when it comes to dealing with Covid in CA.
Patients will not trust physicians if they believe their physician has been muzzled by the law and cannot speak his or her mind honestly. Patients want to know that if they ask their physician a question, including a question about Covid, they will get their doctor’s honest opinion—regardless of whether they follow that opinion, seek a second opinion, or whatever. Patients will not trust physicians if they know their doctor is simply parroting a consensus judgment that he may or may not agree with or endorse.
This bill will not help us to deal with Covid more effectively. Doctors will be punished for practicing medicine according to their best judgment. Informed consent, the foundation of good medical ethics, will be seriously compromised, and the trust necessary for the doctor-patient relationship will be shattered. I strongly urge you and your fellow lawmakers must oppose AB 2098. It will harm not only physicians and medical institutions in California, but even more concerningly, it will harm patients.
Sincerely,
Aaron Kheriaty, MD
Here is a link to information from The Unity Project on what you can do to oppose this bill—especially important if you happen to live in California. Please spread the word.
Dr. Clare Craig from the HART group explains the clinical trial used to justify vaccinating kids
Steve Kirsch | June 19, 2022
The HART group is a group of highly respected independent doctors and scientists. My friend, Professor Norman Fenton, is a member of this group.
In this 4 minute video, Dr. Clare Craig, co-chair of the HART group, explains the clinical trial that was used to justify vaccinating our kids. She was appalled.
The only conclusion you can draw after watching this video is that the people running the FDA, CDC and the members of the outside committees approving these vaccines are either completely incompetent or totally bought off.
Everyone should watch this video. It should be required viewing for any parent who is considering vaccinating their child.
Here is the report Pfizer submitted to the FDA referenced in her video. You can see the numbers on page 39 (look in the column headings for the N= numbers).
The Latest Tragedy: Sudden Adult Death Syndrome

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | June 20, 2022
In recent weeks, media outlets around the world have started highlighting a medical phenomenon called “sudden adult death syndrome,” or SADS, in what appears to be a clear effort to obscure the reality of COVID jab deaths.
SADS is also short for “sudden arrhythmic death syndrome,”1 which was first identified in 1977. Underlying factors for SADS (both the sudden adult death and sudden arrhythmic versions) include undiagnosed myocarditis, inflammatory conditions and other conditions that cause irregularities in the electrical system of the heart, thereby triggering cardiac arrest.2,3,4 While SADS has been known to occur before, what’s new is the prevalence of this previously rare event.
Historical Prevalence of SADS
According to the British Heart Association, there are about 500 cases of SADS in the U.K. each year.5 The British Office for National Statistics, on the other hand, show far fewer cases.6 The ONS lists a total of 128 cases of SADS (all age groups, whether listed as cardiac-related or unknown) in 2016, 77 cases in 2017, 70 in 2018, 107 in 2019 and 139 cases in 2020.
While data on SADS incidence for 2021 and 2022 are hard to come by, incidence has apparently risen sufficiently enough to cause concern in some countries. Before the pandemic, SADS was the acronym for sudden arrhythmia death syndrome, which was rare and with scant research on it except to mention that it accounted for about 30% of unexpected cardiac deaths among young people.7
But today, it’s no longer rare and SADS is virtually on steroids as the numbers of sudden deaths in young adults pile up around the world. The numbers are so concerning that in Australia, for example, the Melbourne Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute is setting up a new SADS registry “to gain more information” about the phenomenon.8,9
According to a spokesperson, there are approximately 750 SADS cases per year in Australia. In the U.S., the average annual death toll from SADS is said to be around 4,000.10
Since the rollout of the COVID jabs, the news has been chockful of reports of young, healthy and often athletic people dying “for no reason” and doctors claim to be “baffled” by it. Doctors and scientists in Australia are even urging everyone under the age of 40 to get their hearts checked, even if they’re healthy and fit.11
Any thinking person, on the other hand, can clearly see the correlation between the shots, which are now well-known for their ability to cause heart inflammation, and the rise in sudden death among young and healthy people.
Hundreds of Athletes Have Collapsed and Died Post-Jab
Among athletes, sudden death incidence has historically ranged between 1 in 40,000 and 1 in 80,000.12 An analysis13 of deaths among competitive athletes between 1980 and 2006 in the U.S. identified a total of 1,866 cases where an athlete either collapsed from cardiac arrest and/or died suddenly. That’s 1,866 cases occurring over a span of 27 years, giving us an annual average of 69 in the U.S.
Data14 compiled by the International Olympic Committee show 1,101 sudden deaths in athletes under age 35 between 1966 and 2004, giving us an average annual rate of 29 sudden deaths, across all sports. Meanwhile, between March 2021 and March 2022 alone — a single year — at least 769 athletes have suffered cardiac arrest, collapse, and/or have died on the field, worldwide.15
Good Sciencing, which is keeping a running total of athletic deaths post-jab puts the current number of cardiac arrests at 1,090 and total deaths at 715.16 Several dozen more are pending confirmation that the athlete had in fact received the shot.
Among EU FIFA (football/soccer ball) athletes, sudden death increased by 420% in 2021.17 Historically, about five soccer players have died while playing the game each year. Between January and mid-November 2021, 21 FIFA players died from sudden death.
COVID Jab Clearly Associated With Heart Injury
An opinion piece in Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, published in April 2022, highlights the correlation between COVID jab-induced heart inflammation and sudden cardiac death in athletes:18
“Increased COVID-related SCD [sudden cardiac death] appears to be due, at least in part, to a recent history of infection and/or vaccination that induces inflammatory and immune impairment that injures the heart.
An unhealthy lifestyle that may include poor diet or overtraining may likely be a contributing factor. The seeming increased incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis during COVID-19 and in the post-vaccination period, and SCD, poses a serious risk to not only athletes but all others and is a cause for alarm.
As the population ages and the popularity of running, cycling, and other endurance sports increases, the burden of SCD risk can potentially grow as well. A strong focus on both health and fitness should be a loud and clear public health message.”
The Signal That Cannot Be Silenced
In a June 13, 2022, Substack article, Dr. Pierre Kory also commented on this latest effort to explain away COVID jab deaths:19
“I recently posted a deeply referenced compilation20 of evidence detailing the historic humanitarian catastrophe that has slowly unfolded within most advanced health economies across the world. Caused by a global mass vaccination campaign led by the Pharma masters of BMGF/WHO/CDC that illogically (but profitably) targeted a rapidly mutating coronavirus.
They did it with what turned out to be the most toxic protein used therapeutically in the history of medicine. In vials mixed with lipid nano-particles, polyethylene glycol and who knows what else.
I cited studies and reports showing massive increases in cardiovascular deaths and neurologic (and other) disabilities amongst working age adults, beginning in 2021 only.
A disturbing signal screaming from the original clinical trials data,21 VAERS data,22 life insurance data,23 disability data,24 reports of cardiac arrests of professional athletes,25 rises in ambulance calls for cardiac arrests in pre-heart attack age young people,26 and the massive increases in illnesses and data manipulations27 in Department of Defense databases.
As these events become more and more recognized by the average citizen (and occasional journalist), a new pathetic ‘Disinformation Campaign’ was launched in response trying to blame all the young people dying as simply a need for increased awareness of the rare condition called Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (SADS), rather than examples of the legions dying from the vaccines.
The fact checkers also came out in support of this narrative, branding anyone who thinks the vaccines are the cause of SADS as a conspiracy theorist …
What is nauseating is the tone of purported good intention within these articles, informing folks that if you are related to someone young who died suddenly you should go see a cardiologist to make sure you don’t have an abnormal EKG.
After it turns out normal, they will assuredly tell you to get vaccinated, an absurdity atop a mountain of absurdities caused by our bio-medical-media industrial complex over the past 2+ years.”
Diseases ‘Suppressed by COVID’ Make Comebacks
Media are also trying to write off increases of other diseases as something other than COVID jab-related. “Diseases Suppressed During COVID Are Coming Back in New and Peculiar Ways,” CNBC reported June 10, 2022.28
The article goes on to discuss how viruses other than SARS-CoV-2 are now “rearing their heads in new and unusual ways.” Influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), adenovirus, tuberculosis and monkeypox have all “spiked and exhibited strange behaviors in recent months,” CNBC notes.
No mention is made, however, of the fact that the COVID jab has been linked to vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency (lowered immune function), rendering you more susceptible to infections and chronic diseases of all kinds, including autoimmune diseases.29 MIT research scientist Stephanie Seneff explains the mechanisms for this in “COVID Vaccines and Neurodegenerative Disease.”
The COVID jab has also been shown to activate latent viruses, including hepatitis C,30 cytomegalovirus,31 varicella-zoster32 and herpes viruses.33 Not surprisingly, Moderna is now working on a new vaccine for “latent cytomegalovirus prevention.”34
This is yet another case of a drug company creating a “remedy” against a health problem their own product was responsible for creating in the first place. CNBC, meanwhile, cites “health experts” who attribute lowered immunity to COVID lockdowns, mask wearing and missed childhood vaccinations.35
Amputations of arms, legs, fingers and toes — consequences of post-jab blood clots — are also being written off as something else.36 In this case, media are blaming it on high cholesterol,37 totally ignoring the fact that high cholesterol has been prevalent for decades, and only now are people losing their extremities in shocking numbers.
Spikes in blood clots and strokes, meanwhile, are being blamed on smoking, pregnancy and contraceptives,38 even though blood clots and strokes are among the most common side effects of the COVID jab. Most ridiculous of all, however, is the claim that a “newly-discovered, highly reactive” chemical in the earth’s atmosphere is suspected of triggering heart disease.39
To anyone with half a brain, it’s clear that government authorities and media are doing everything they can to shift blame away from what is the most obvious culprit, namely the COVID shots.
All the diseases and conditions they’re now blaming on everything from cholesterol to mysterious atmospheric chemicals are known side effects of the jab. The elephant in the room is so gigantic, you can’t even get around it anymore. It’s pressing us against the walls.
Nursing Reports From the Frontlines
In his June 13, 2022, Substack article,40 Kory also shares insider information from a senior ICU and ER nurse who suffered blood clotting injuries, spontaneous unstoppable bleeding and cervical lymph node enlargement following her second Pfizer dose.
She filed a report with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which has since vanished. The batch numbers for the shots she received were associated with bad neurological responses and clotting. She also lost her hematologist-oncologist to vaccine injury.
While only in his early 40s, he’s now too injured to practice. “He was a ‘true believer’ and in denial until it was him who was the injured patient,” she told Kory.
The major cancer hospital where she works now have caseloads “in the thousands,” she says, whereas before the average caseload was between 250 and 400 in any given quarter. They don’t even have enough beds or infusion space to treat them all, and radiation treatments are backlogged.
All kinds of cancers are showing up — brain, lymph, stomach, pancreas, blood and even EYE cancers, “especially in younger people recently vaxxed.” Strokes are also “way up” in people with no risk factors or comorbidities. In an email to Kory, she wrote:41
“Ask me anything. I’ll tell you inside scoop from the floors and suites. This has to stop. They need to admit the fraud and crime and STOP. The liability must be lifted, mandates ended. They KNOW NOW and many KNEW THEN.
Don’t know if you’ll even read this, but I follow all of you on substack and Twitter — those not banned yet! — and read ALL the data. I’ve been a lab rat myself from an issue from a car accident years back — I know the process. So much fraud.”
In a follow-up email, the unnamed nurse continued:
“Lost 4 practitioners to serious side effects of ‘strongly encouraged’ boosters. 2 hospitalized, one in MICU … All in early 30s to mid-40s. They had no need for boosters … All had COVID previous, N antibodies fully measurable.”
Cardiac Anomalies Abound
Her colleagues in the cardiac unit also report “many anomalies … that never existed before,” including massive thrombi that fill the entire artery. Some embalmers have documented this never-before-seen phenomenon.42 They also can barely keep up with the unprecedented number of cardiac arrests. Kory writes:43
“She told me … that on some night shifts, nurse teams are seeing more cardiac arrests in a single shift than ever before and in unprecedented younger age patients.
On some shifts, they have had so many that the ‘crash carts’ are rolled straight from one arrest to another because pharmacy, especially on night shifts, are not able to re-stock fast enough. This situation has happened maybe once in my whole career, when two arrests happened on the same floor or unit within a short time period.”
And, while medical staff still are not speaking out publicly, the reality of the situation appears to be dawning inside the hospital walls, in private conversations between staff. Even there, however, nurses speak in code for fear of reprisal, referring to COVID jab injuries only as “that issue.”
The nurse pointed out that, now, the vaccination status is clearly marked at the top of the first screen of the patient’s medical record when the shot is suspected or known to be related to the patient’s “mysterious” or “complex” problem. Perhaps this is a sign that the dissociation from reality may be slowly breaking. I sure hope so.
Sources and References
- 1, 5 BHF.org.uk SADS
- 2 Cleveland Clinic Sudden Cardiac Arrest
- 3 BMJ Heart 2006;92:316-320
- 4 Heart May 2007; 93(5): 547-548
- 6 ONS.gov.uk SADS 2016-2020
- 7 Hong Kong Medical Journal 2019
- 8, 10 Euro News Weekly June 8, 2022
- 9, 11 Daily Mail Australia June 8, 2022
- 12 Methodist Debakey Cardiovasclar Journal April-June 2016; 12(2): 76-80
- 13 Circulation February 16, 2009; 119: 1085-1092
- 14 European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation December 2006; 13(6): 859-875
- 15 OAN April 10, 2022
- 16, 25 Good Sciencing Athlete Deaths
- 17 Americas Frontline Doctors November 18, 2021
- 18 Frontiers in Sports and Active Living April 12, 2022
- 19, 40, 41, 43 Pierre Kory’s Medical Musings Substack June 13, 2022
- 20 Pierre Kory’s Medical Musings Substack June 6, 2022
- 21 Trends in Internal Medicine 2021; 1(1): 1-6
- 22 Science, Public Health Policy and the Law October 2021; 3: 100-129
- 23 Center Square January 1, 2022
- 24 FRED Population with Disability
- 26 Scientific Reports 2022; 12 Article Number 6978
- 27 The Blaze January 26, 2022
- 28, 35 CNBC June 10, 2022
- 29 Clinical Immunology May 2021; 226: 108721
- 30 Int Med Case Rep J. 2021; 14: 573-576
- 31 Front. Immunol. January 18, 2022
- 32 SAGE Open Medical Case Reports February 26, 2022
- 33 J Med Virol September 2021; 93(9): 5231-5232
- 34 Contagion Live May 12, 2022
- 36 The COVID Blog June 10, 2022
- 37 The US Sun May 22, 2022
- 38 New York Post May 31, 2022
- 39 Daily Mail May 27, 2022
- 42 Steve Kirsch Substack February 12, 2022





