Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

FDA makes it hard to identify the temporary members who voted on COVID vaccines for 5-11 year olds

By Meryl Nass, MD | November 7, 2021

I want to make it easier for others to correctly identify their conflicts of interest.

Below are the permanent members of the committee–but most were not at the meeting, which was stuffed with 11 temporary members whose votes were assured, plus 7 or 8 of the permanent members.

I have put a line through those who did not attend, and added the temporary members who replaced them at the bottom of the page.

Chair

Hana El Sahly, M.D.
Expertise: Vaccines, Infectious Diseases
Term: 06/21/2019-01/31/2022
Professor
Department of Molecular Virology and Microbiology
Department of Medicine
Section of Infectious Diseases
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, TX 77030
Paula Annunziato, M.D. ***
Expertise: Industry Representative
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2024
Vice President and Therapeutic Area Head
Vaccines Clinical Research
Merck
North Wales, PA 19454
Archana Chatterjee, M.D., Ph.D.
Expertise: Pediatrics, Infectious Diseases
Term: 06/21/2019-01/31/2023
Dean Chicago Medical School
Vice President for Medical Affairs
Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science
North Chicago, IL 60064
Geeta K. Swamy, M.D.
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 08/06/2018-01/31/2022
Senior Associate Dean
Vice Chair for Research & Faculty Development
Associate Professor, ObGyn
Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine
Duke University
Durham, NC 27710
Myron Levine, M.D., D.T.P.H., F.A.A.P
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 05/09/2018-01/31/2022
Simon & Bessie Grollman Distinguished Professor
Associate Dean for Global Health
Vaccinology and Infectious Diseases
Center for Vaccine Development
University of Maryland School of Medicine
Baltimore, MD 21201
Holly Janes, Ph.D.
Expertise: Biostatistics
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2023
Professor
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division
Division of Public Health Sciences
Seattle, WA 98109
Andrea Shane, M.D., M.P.H., M.Sc.
Expertise: Pediatric & Infectious Diseases
Term: 02/01/2018-01/31/2022
Professor of Pediatrics
Director
Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases
Emory University School of Medicine
Atlanta, GA 30322

H. Cody Meissner, M.D.
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 08/06/2018-01/31/2022
Professor of Pediatrics
Tufts University School of Medicine
Director, Pediatric Infectious Disease
Tufts Medical Center
Boston, MA 02111
CAPT Amanda Cohn, M.D.
Expertise: Pediatrics, Vaccines
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2024
Chief Medical Officer
National Center for Immunizations and Respiratory Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA 30333
Hayley Gans, M.D.
Expertise: Pediatrics, Infectious Diseases
Term: 06/21/2019-01/31/2023
Professor of Pediatrics
Department of Pediatrics
Stanford University Medical Center
Stanford, CA 94305
Michael Kurilla, M.D., Ph.D.
Expertise: Infectious Diseases, Pathology
Term: 08/06/2018-01/31/2022
Director, Division of Clinical Innovation
National Center for Advancing Translation Sciences
National Institutes of Health
Bethesda, MD 20852
Paul Offit, M.D.
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 02/01/2018-01/31/2022
Professor of Pediatrics
Division of Infectious Diseases
Abramson Research Building
The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Steven Pergam, M.D.
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2024
Medical Director
Infection Prevention
Seattle Cancer Care Alliance
Seattle, WA 98109
Paul Spearman, M.D.
Expertise: Pediatric & Infectious Diseases
Term: 05/09/2018-01/31/2022
Director, Division of Infectious Diseases
Albert B. Sabin Chair in Pediatric Infectious Diseases
Cincinnati Children’s Hospital
Medical Center
Professor, Department of Pediatrics
University of Cincinnati School of Medicine
Cincinnati, OH 45229
Gregg Sylvester, M.D., M.P.H. +
Expertise: Alternate Industry Representative
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2024
Vice President
Medical Affairs
Seqirus Inc.
Summit, NJ 07901

TEMPORARY VOTING MEMBERS:

Fuller, A. Oveta, Ph.D. African Studies Center International Institute Associate Professor of Microbiology and Immunology, Medical School University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Hildreth, Sr., James, Ph.D., M.D. Professor Department of Internal Medicine School of Medicine President and Chief Executive Officer Meharry Medical College Nashville, TN 37205
Lee, Jeannette, Ph.D. Professor Department of Biostatistics University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Little Rock, AR 72701
Levy, Ofer, M.D., Ph.D. Staff Physician & Principal Investigator Director, Precision Vaccines Program Division of Infectious Diseases Boston Children’s Hospital Professor, Harvard Medical School Associate Member Broad Institute Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA 02140
Moore, Patrick, M.D., M.P.H. Distinguished and American Cancer Society Professor Pittsburgh Foundation Chair in Innovative Cancer Research University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Nelson, Michael, M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Medicine Professor of Clinical Pediatrics Chief Division of Infectious Diseases Asthma, Allergy and Immunology Division Vice Chair for Education UVA Health & UVA School of Medicine Department of Pediatrics Charlottesville, VA 22904
Sawyer, Mark, M.D., F.A.A.P. Professor of Medicine Professor of  University of California San Diego School of Medicine Perlman, Stanley, M.D., Ph.D. Director, UC San Diego Pediatrics Professor Residency Program Departments of Microbiology and Rady Children’s Hospital San Diego Immunology La Jolla, CA 92093
Perlman, Stanley, M.D., Ph.D. University of Iowa Associate Director for Vaccine Policy Iowa City, IA 52242 National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Professor of Pediatrics Mark Stinksi Chair in Virology
Wharton, Melinda, M.D., MPH University of Iowa Associate Director for Vaccine Policy Iowa City, IA 52242 National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Portnoy, Jay, M.D. **  Acting Consumer Representative Atlanta, GA 30333 Professor of Pediatrics Medical Director of Telemedicine Section of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Children’s Mercy Hospital Kansas City, MO 64108
Rubin, Eric, M.D., Ph.D. Editor-in-Chief New England Journal of Medicine Adjunct Professor Department of Immunology and Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health Associate Physician Brigham and Women’s Hospital Boston, MA 02115 Page 4 of

November 7, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Is the Global Warming Myth Part of Advancing a Dystopian Nightmare?

By Stephen Lendman | November 7, 2021

What’s gone on since last year is an unprecedented — made-in-the-USA — plot against humanity with mass-extermination of unwanted people and transformation of global nations into ruler/serf societies in mind for survivors.

Is the global warming myth part of the diabolical scheme?

Are rising fossil fuel prices a plot to make them unaffordable for countless millions worldwide?

Is the same going on for food and other essentials of life to make them increasingly unaffordable?

Do US/Western and partnered dark forces want countless millions to perish from malnutrition, starvation, lack of healthcare, medical malpractice and other forms of neglect?

Eminent Physics Professor Denis Rancourt, an expert in his field, earlier argued the following:

“(G)lobal warming (climate change, climate chaos, etc.) will not become humankind’s greatest threat until the sun has its next hiccup in a billion years or more (in the very unlikely scenario that we are still around),” adding:

“(G)lobal warming is presently nowhere near being the planet’s most deadly environmental scourge.”

“(G)overnment action and political will cannot measurably or significantly ameliorate global climate in the present world.”

“(T)here are strong societal, institutional, and psychological motivations for having constructed and for continuing to maintain the myth of a global warming dominant threat” with diabolical aims in mind.

“(B)y far the most destructive force on the planet is power-driven financiers and profit-driven corporations and their cartels backed by military might…”

“(T)he global warming myth is a red herring that contributes to hiding this truth.”

“(T)he atmospheric greenhouse effect is a well known natural phenomenon, mostly caused by atmospheric water vapor…”

It “keeps our planet warm and habitable.”

“(T)he global greenhouse effect gives earthlings a needed and much appreciated base warming of 33 C (degrees Celsius)…”

“(T)he alleged ‘global warming’ would contribute an extra 0.5 to 1 C of warming (a 1 to 5 % increase), on a planet that has seen a dozen or so ice ages since human kind has appeared.”

From millions of years, humans and animals with similar longevity survived in climates ranging from steaming hot to frigid cold, as well as from climate-related disasters.

Humans “adapted to dramatically different regional climates occurring in every corner of the planet and the alleged future global changes are very small compared to these existing variations,” Rancourt explained.

“There are more displaced refugees from wars and from economic aggression than there will ever be displaced inhabitants from rapid climate-induced habitat transformations.”

The global warming myth shifts attention away from issues mattering most.

The same goes for bread and circus distractions, along with manipulating the public mind on virtually all major issues — suppressing what’s most important, focusing exclusively on what ruling elites want people to know.

MSM operate as press agents for powerful interests — fake news mass deception their specialty.

Notably in the US/West and partnered countries, what serves privileged interests comes at the expense of most others worldwide.

The vast majority of people are exploited, otherwise harmed, and now unwanted millions and billions are targeted for elimination.

All things flu/covid is their method of choice — especially by bioweaponized health-destroying jabs.

They work far better than endless wars — accomplishing mass-extermination with jabbing, rejabbing, booster and forever-jabbing ease.

Like lemmings to the slaughter, mind-manipulated millions rolled up their sleeves for health-destroying toxins to be jabbed into their bodies.

Brainwashed by MSM propaganda, they’re none the wiser until serious health issues take their irreversible toll.

Lincoln and others reportedly said that while everyone can’t always be fooled, some people can be fooled at all times, others some of the time.

Everyone jabbed one or more times in the US/West and elsewhere was either fooled to believe what’s harmful is beneficial or succumbed to self-inflicting harm pressure.

With minimal due diligence effort, everyone connected online can learn facts about what’s going on that dispel state-sponsored/media proliferated fake news about all things flu/covid — especially about health-destroying jabs crucial to shun.

Facts over state-approved talking points also explain that the diabolical plot aims to transform free and open societies into ruler/serf ones everywhere.

It’s what full-blown tyranny is all about.

It aims to control our lives, crush our spirit, make us subservient and accept lost freedoms that no one should relinquish voluntarily.

What’s unfolding in plain sight is a brave new world dystopian nightmare.

Deceptive equitable-sounding socioeconomic rhetoric conceals the menace posed to most people everywhere.

Pulling off the scheme requires voluntary consent from the vast majority of ordinary people.

A minority of committed others can defeat the diabolical plot.

Opposition is growing through initiatives like walk out protests in US cities, European ones and elsewhere against what no one should tolerate.

The way to defeat tyranny is for enough mad as hell people refusing to be abused anymore.

The time to fight back against diabolical dark forces is now to keep what’s vital to preserve before it’s banned and lost.

November 7, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

British Funeral Director: Dead Babies Are Piling Up in Morgues

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | November 5, 2021

A British funeral director says he’s seeing untold numbers of dead babies and newborns in cold storage and piling up in mortuaries waiting for their funerals.

The unprecedented numbers of babies that he and other morticians are dealing with are matched only by the excessive number of younger people in their 30s and 40s who have been dying since the COVID-19 vaccine rolled out, he says.

When the pandemic first began the mortuaries saw a flurry of deaths which, in a few months, calmed down, even though media continued to hype COVID deaths. There was an uptick in suicides in the summer of 2020 in mostly younger men, but when fall 2020 came, everything was rather quiet.

And then, he said, “Come January [2021] the numbers were going through the roof … and that’s since people were being vaccinated.” Now he’s having the most funerals he’s ever seen in a period of two weeks, and in younger people, he’s averaging about 12 “in one go,” when before the vaccine he would see only “four or five funerals going, not 12, and not all in that age group.”

And now, he says, what he’s seeing is a lot of newborn babies … “really high, about 30” when he’s used to seeing only three or four. In other words, about 10 times the number of newborn babies are dying than he normally would see — so many they’re having to keep them in the adult section, where there’s more room. “Obviously they’re either miscarried or full-term births, but not a lot is being said about it,” he says.

To put the causes of deaths in perspective, he says he’s only had one COVID death this year. All the rest are myocarditis, infarctions (heart attacks) and some pneumonia. He also notes that “anybody and everybody” who died when the pandemic started was marked as COVID on their death certificates, but that’s not happening since the vaccine was introduced.

Mirror source: Brighteon November 4, 2021

November 7, 2021 Posted by | Video, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

We’re Not in a ‘Pandemic of the Unvaccinated,’ Peter Doshi Explains During COVID Panel

By Jeremy Loffredo | The Defender | November 5, 2021

U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) Tuesday held a roundtable discussion on federal COVID vaccine mandates with a panel of people injured by COVID vaccines and scientists from some of the most prestigious research organizations in the world, including The BMJ and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

Peter Doshi, a senior editor at The BMJ and associate professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, and Retsef Levi, a health system and analytics professor at MIT, expressed doubts about COVID vaccine efficacy and the failures of the scientific community.

“I’m saddened we’re super-saturated as a society right now in the attitude of ‘everybody knows,’ which has shut down intellectual curiosity and led to self-censorship,” said Doshi.

Doshi said we’re not in a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.” If hospitalizations and deaths are almost exclusively occuring in the unvaccinated “why would booster shots be necessary?” Doshi asked. “And why would the statistics be so different in the UK, where most COVID hospitalizations and deaths are among the fully vaccinated?”

“There’s a disconnect there, and something to be curious about,” Doshi said. “There’s something not adding up.”

Doshi argued the public was lied to in early 2021, when health officials including Dr. Anthony Fauci, claimed COVID vaccine trial data proved the vaccine saved lives.

After presenting the trial data for the vaccines authorized for use in the U.S., Doshi pointed out “there were similar numbers in the vaccine and placebo groups.” He argued those “who claimed the trial showed the vaccine was highly effective in saving lives were wrong” and that “the trials did not demonstrate this.”

Doshi talked about anti-vaxxers and criticized the official definition of the term. He presented the panel the official Merriam-Webster definition of anti-vaxxer: “A person who opposes the use of vaccines or regulations mandating vaccination.”

“The second part [of the definition] stunned me,” said Doshi.

“There are entire countries from the United Kingdom to Japan which do not mandate childhood vaccines,” he said. “There are no mandates, and I would wager that perhaps a majority of the world’s population meet this definition of an anti-vaxxer.”

Doshi told the panel that “vaccine” is another definition “worth checking on.”

“I argue these products which everyone calls MRNA vaccines are qualitatively different from standard vaccines,” Doshi said. “So I found it fascinating to learn that Merriam Webster changed the definition of vaccine early this year.”

“mRNA products did not meet the definition of vaccine that has been in place for over 15 years, but the definition was expanded such that mRNA products are now vaccines,” Doshi said.

He then argued that just because we’re calling the COVID shot a “vaccine” doesn’t mean “these new products are just like all other childhood vaccines which get mandated.”

“Each product is a different product, and if people are OK with mandating something simply because it’s a vaccine, I believe it’s time to inject some critical thinking into the conversation,” Doshi said.

He also criticized the fact that society is vaccinating and mandating the vaccine for large portions of the public despite the raw data on the safety and efficacy of the vaccines not being available yet.

“So while we are told to keep following the science, what we are following is not a scientific process based on open data, we are following a process where the data are secret, and in my view there is something very unscientific about that,” Doshi said.

Levi told the panel “scientists in the most prestigious journals assert that the vaccine is safe, failing to report on serious side effects such as deaths.”

He explained that national emergency services calls in Israel for cardiac arrest among young individuals under 40 years old saw a dramatic increase — more than 25% — in parallel to the COVD vaccination campaign.

“We wrote an academic paper raising concerns regarding these statistics and called on the authorities to check on this … needless to say they never got back to us.”

Levi claimed the government attempted to censor the research by calling its credibility into question. “They called the research fake,” Levi said.

Levi warned the panel:

“These vaccines have serious and unknown side effects, and we need to use them with caution.”

Watch here (Doshi starts at 1:18:40 and Levi starts at 1:49:07):

Jeremy Loffredo is a freelance reporter for The Defender. His investigative reporting has been featured in The Grayzone and Unlimited Hangout. Jeremy formerly produced news programs at RT America.

© 2021 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.

November 6, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Infection Rates More than Twice as High in the Vaccinated, New UKHSA Data Shows, as Agency Dismisses Own Data as ‘Biased’.

But Why No New VE Estimate Since May?

By Will Jones • The Daily Sceptic • November 5, 2021

The latest UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance report was released Thursday, and its authors are now bending over backwards to keep their critics happy. Following a telling-off this week from the U.K. Statistics Authority, the UKHSA’s Head of Immunisation, Mary Ramsay (pictured above), published a blog post explaining what they’ve done to appease their detractors, while the report now states no fewer than four times, twice in bold typeface, that “these raw data should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness”. Ramsay grovels:

To make our data less susceptible to misinterpretation, the U.K. Health Security Agency has worked with the UK Statistics Authority to update some of the data tables and descriptions in the report, specifically around rates of infection in vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. In our commitment to transparent and clear data, we regularly review our publications to ensure they reflect the current situation within the pandemic, and we will continue to work with our partners at the statistics bodies, to ensure our reporting is as scientifically robust as possible.

As I noted last week, the UKHSA does not accept the criticism of its population estimates levelled by, among others, David Spiegelhalter, who declared that using them was “deeply untrustworthy and completely unacceptable”.

The agency instead takes the view that the problem is systemic biases in the data which mean it “should not be used” to estimate vaccine effectiveness. But as I have noted repeatedly, those biases just mean that the estimate will be of unadjusted vaccine effectiveness, which is a perfectly legitimate quantity to estimate and has its uses, particularly when looking at trends or when there is reason to think the biases may be relatively small. (For instance, a recent vaccine effectiveness study in California adjusted its raw data for 22 different factors but in almost all cases the adjustments were tiny.)

The UKHSA report itself correctly gives the definition of vaccine effectiveness: “Vaccine effectiveness is estimated by comparing rates of disease in vaccinated individuals to rates in unvaccinated individuals.” The U.S. CDC, likewise, states the definition as “the proportionate reduction in disease among the vaccinated group”. The CDC distinguishes “vaccine efficacy”, estimated from controlled studies, from “vaccine effectiveness”, which is used “when a study is carried out under typical field (that is, less than perfectly controlled) conditions”. It is therefore not appropriate for the UKHSA, a Government agency, to insist that its data “should not be used” to estimate vaccine effectiveness, which is a false statement and amounts to attempted Government censorship of scientific enquiry.

The report explains that “vaccine effectiveness is measured in other ways as detailed in the ‘Vaccine Effectiveness’ Section.” However, that section is clear that each estimate “typically applies for at least the first three to four months after vaccination”, and “there may be waning of effectiveness beyond this point”. The report discusses this waning, but only for the Alpha variant: “Data (based primarily on the Alpha variant) suggest that in most clinical risk groups, immune response to vaccination is maintained and high levels of VE are seen with both the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines.” What use is data based primarily on the Alpha variant, which went almost extinct around six months ago? There is no attempt to present adjusted estimates of vaccine effectiveness based on the most up-to-date data. Instead, we are just given repeated insistences that the data is not showing what it appears to be showing because it is subject to unquantified biases.

What are those biases? Last week the report claimed that vaccinated people “may engage in more social interactions because of their vaccination status”, which didn’t fit with the more usual idea of unvaccinated people as a less cautious sort. Neither did it fit with the other reason they gave, that the vaccinated “may be more health conscious and therefore more likely to get tested for COVID-19”. This week they kept the latter but changed the former to the entirely ambiguous: “People who are fully vaccinated and people who are unvaccinated may behave differently, particularly with regard to social interactions.”

The other two biases they suggest are that “many of those who were at the head of the queue for vaccination are those at higher risk from COVID-19” and “people who have never been vaccinated are more likely to have caught COVID-19” previously. (The latter they say gives a person “some natural immunity to the virus for a few months”, which seems a very pessimistic view of natural immunity, particularly seeing how optimistic they are about the effectiveness of the vaccines.)

The report asserts categorically that the unvaccinated have higher previous infection rates, but cites no evidence to support this. Why not? Why, almost a year into the vaccination campaign, are researchers still so often waving their hands when talking about the differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups? Where is the published data? Precisely how much more likely are the unvaccinated to have had a previous infection? This is a simple data comparison. Why hasn’t it been done? The study in California mentioned earlier found that 2% of the vaccinated had recovered from Covid against 2.3% of the unvaccinated, so not a large difference. Is England similar? Why don’t we know? Likewise, how much more likely are vaccinated people to be tested? This is just a comparison of the testing rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Why hasn’t it been done? This is not good enough. We want more data from UKHSA, not lectures on how not to use the meagre amounts of data they release.

In her blog post, Mary Ramsay points to studies PHE (UKHSA’s predecessor) has published in the past:

These factors are all accounted for in our published analyses of vaccine effectiveness which uses the test-negative case control approach. This is a recommended method of assessing vaccine effectiveness that compares the vaccination status of people who test positive for COVID-19, with those who test negative.

This method helps to control for different propensity to have a test and we are able to exclude those known to have been previously infected with COVID-19. We also control for important factors including geography, time period, ethnicity, clinical risk group, living in a care home and being a health or social care worker.

While PHE did publish such studies earlier in the year (I analyse them here and here), they have not published anything based on data more recent than May, over five months ago. This was just as Delta arrived, and before infections surged over the summer and the raw data started showing infections in the vaccinated eclipsing those in the unvaccinated.

So where is the update? It’s all very well writing pages at the behest of the U.K. Statistics Authority policing how people use your data, but where are the studies setting the picture straight? We’ve had studies from California, Sweden and Israel using data from over the summer, all showing sharp decline in vaccine effectiveness. Where is the U.K.’s contribution to this emerging understanding of the vaccines?

Yes, we had that dubious study in August from Oxford University based on the ONS Infection Survey. But there’s been no update from UKHSA to its studies based on Government testing data.

Here’s a suggestion. Why don’t Daily Sceptic readers write a (polite!) email to the UKHSA’s Mary Ramsay (address here, Twitter here) asking for an update on their very useful test-negative case control study with data from the summer and autumn. You might say you have been concerned about the data in their Vaccine Surveillance reports showing high infection rates in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated, but note they say vaccine effectiveness can only be properly estimated in a study, so would be grateful for an update on this.

Here’s this week’s table of unadjusted vaccine effectiveness and the updated graphs showing how it is changing over time. It shows infection rates currently twice as high in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated for those aged 40-79, corresponding to an unadjusted vaccine effectiveness of minus-100% or more. Vaccine effectiveness is negative for all over-30s, and almost zero for those aged 18-29 (and still declining). It remains high for under-18s, and effectiveness against hospital admission and death is holding up. This week the decline appears to have stopped, or at least paused, in most age groups.


November 6, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Government’s Own Data Proves COVID-19 Shots Are Causing Blood Clots, Heart Disease, and DEATH

Apparatchiks who should be arrested immediately for lying to the American people and causing massive deaths and injuries through the COVID-19 vaccination program
By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | November 4, 2021

There are currently two different and opposing narratives in the public regarding the safety of the COVID-19 shots.

One view claims they are safe, and the other view claims they are not.

Both views cannot be true. One view is correct, and one view is wrong.

The view of the pharmaceutical companies producing the shots and earning great profit from them is that they are safe, and this view is backed up by the U.S. Government regulatory agencies and the officials who lead them.

Here is their official statement through the CDC, as of November 1, 2021.

Source

Please note that in order for the pharmaceutical companies and the government health agencies to make a claim that COVID-19 “vaccines” are “safe,” there must be a safety monitoring system in place in order to make such a claim. Otherwise, their claims would be without basis, because nobody would know whether those claims are true or not.

The CDC admits this in this statement on their website. And they go on to explain that this safety monitoring system is called VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

Based on the VAERS reporting system, the CDC goes on to state:

Serious adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination are rare but may occur.

For public awareness and in the interest of transparency, CDC is providing timely updates on the following serious adverse events of interest:

They then list four adverse events they have noticed from VAERS, and also make a statement regarding deaths.

Here are the four adverse events they admit are recorded in VAERS:

  • Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination
  • Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen (J&J/Janssen) COVID-19 vaccination
  • CDC and FDA are monitoring reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) in people who have received the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine.
  • Myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination are rare.
  • Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare.

Notice how they frequently use the word “rare” to describe these adverse events following COVID-19 vaccinations. But how many people even know about these “rare” side effects prior to receiving a COVID-19 shot?

Two of the side effects are only linked to one of the three FDA authorized COVID-19 “vaccines,” the J&J shot, which is the one least used.

The nice thing about the Government VAERS database is that it is open to the public, and anyone can search it. I use the MedAlerts front end to search the database, and you can find that here.

So anyone around the world can do their own search of the data in the VAERS database and fact-check the CDC’s claims, which represent the view of the pharmaceutical industry and the government health agencies and their heads.

And that’s what I am going to do in the rest of this article.

Please note that I am not dealing with the issue of under-reporting in VAERS in this article. Everyone admits that the data in VAERS is vastly under-reported, which is why when the CDC states that an adverse reaction that they admit is seen in VAERS is “rare” based on how many doses of the vaccine have been distributed, we should not take their statement at face value, because they actually do not know how rare it is.

So I am only going to deal with the available data to fact-check their claims, the very same data that they are using.

What I am going to do is compare the data on adverse reactions to the COVID-19 shots to the data recorded for the past 30 years for all other vaccines, as this will be a truer “apples to apples” comparison, and it is also a simple one that anyone can search themselves.

At the end of this analysis of the available data, nobody in the pharmaceutical industry or in the government health agencies can say that the data is wrong, because it is their data. They also cannot claim ignorance, because the statements they make regarding the “safety” of these COVID-19 vaccines is based on this data in VAERS, according to their own published statements.

And what we will see when we look at the data as compared to all other data from non-COVID-19 vaccines, is that they are lying, and that the COVID-19 vaccines are most definitely causing blood clots, heart disease, and deaths.

If they are lying, then they are complicit with causing these crippling injuries and deaths, and they should all be arrested immediately for being complicit to mass murder.

CDC Claim: Deaths following COVID-19 Shots are “Rare”

Let’s begin with deaths, since this is obviously the most serious adverse event following COVID-19 vaccination.

Here is the CDC claim as of November 1, 2021:

Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 423 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through November 1, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 9,367 reports of death (0.0022%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths pdf icon[1.4 MB, 33 pages].

Notice that according to the CDC the only “plausible causal relationship” between a COVID-19 vaccine and death is with the J&J shot, which is linked to blood clots. And they claim that this is among 9,367 reports of death following COVID-19 shots for the past 10 months.

I am not even sure where they get this number of “9,367” from, because when we search the VAERS database for deaths following COVID-19 shots, it returns a value of 17,619. (Source.) If we exclude all the foreign reports, we still get a different value than what they are stating, with 8,068 deaths. (Source.)

So they are applying some other kind of filter to get this death count, it would seem.

For the purpose of this analysis in this article, I am going to use ALL the data in VAERS and not filter out anything, since we already know the data is vastly under-reported.

Now to determine if these reports of deaths are “rare,” let’s look at how many deaths there are from ALL vaccines that are NOT COVID-19 vaccines for the past 30+ years.

The easiest way to do this is to simply run a search for all deaths in the database, and then subtract the deaths from the COVID-19 vaccines, which as I stated above is 17,619.

Here is the result: 26,680 deaths from ALL vaccines in the database as of October 22, 2021, which covers a period of over 30 years.

17,619 of those deaths are following COVID-19 vaccines for the past 10 months. That means that for all other vaccines over the past 30 years, there have only been 9,061 deaths recorded, about 300 deaths per year. But into October of 2021, there have been already been 17,619 deaths following COVID shots.

Does this sound “rare,” or is this a national catastrophe where heads should roll and people should be locked up in jail and prosecuted?

And remember, this is THEIR DATA! They know this.

And now they are targeting children 5 to 11 years old.

Fetal Deaths

Also, the CDC and the FDA are recommending the COVID-19 shots for pregnant women, claiming it is safe for them.

But is it? What does their own data in VAERS report about fetal deaths following COVID-19 injections of pregnant women?

Through October 22, 2021 they have recorded 2,369 cases where the mother lost her baby after receiving a COVID-19 shot. (Source.)

How does that compare with fetal deaths in pregnant women following ALL vaccines that are NOT COVID-19 vaccines for the past 30+ years?

For the past 30+ years there have been 2,192 cases where the mom being given a vaccine lost her baby, about 73 a year. (Source.)

But this year, 2,369 unborn babies have already died following a COVID-19 shot injected into the pregnant mother.

Does this sound “safe” to you? Would pregnant women continue getting COVID-19 shots if they knew these statistics in the government’s own database?

CDC Claim: Blood Clots from COVID-19 Shots are “Rare”

The admission that the CDC makes for COVID-19 vaccines causing blood clots is:

Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen (J&J/Janssen) COVID-19 vaccination is rare. As of October 27, 2021, more than 15.5 million doses of the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine have been given in the United States. CDC and FDA identified 48 confirmed reports of people who got the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and later developed TTS. Women younger than 50 years old especially should be aware of the rare but increased risk of this adverse event. There are other COVID-19 vaccine options available for which this risk has not been seen. Learn more about J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS.

To date, two confirmed cases of TTS following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Moderna) have been reported to VAERS after more than 401 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines administered in the United States. Based on available data, there is not an increased risk for TTS after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

What the CDC is clearly doing here is only reporting one kind of blood clot, Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS). They claim that this is the only kind of blood clot they found, and it is only 48 cases with J&J, and 2 cases with Moderna.

But there are many kinds of blood clots, so we should not just limit our search for only TTS. If we just search for ALL cases involving any kind of “thrombosis” following COVID-19 shots, we get a value of 13,930 cases of blood clots. (Source.)

When we search for each of the 3 FDA authorized COVID-19 vaccines where blood clots are recorded along with deaths, we get 626 total deaths when blood clots are present: 381 deaths for Pfizer, 118 deaths for Moderna, and 127 deaths for J&J.

So this horrible side effect is not related to only one manufacturer.

How does this compare with cases of “thrombosis” from ALL vaccines that are NOT COVID-19 vaccines for the past 30 years? With the available data we find only 489 cases of any kind of thrombosis for ALL vaccines for the past 30+ years, resulting in only 18 deaths. (Source.)

This is not a “rare” event following COVID-19 shots. This is criminal.

And frontline doctors are confirming that they are seeing high rates of blood clots in patients who have been vaccinated for COVID-19.

Canadian doctors were the first ones to blow the whistle on this. This past July we published an interview with Dr. Charles Hoffe, a doctor who has been practicing medicine for 28 years in the small, rural town of Lytton in British Columbia, Canada.

He was the first one to state publicly that these blood clots were not rare, as he tested vaccinated patients in his province in Canada and found that 62% of them had evidence of small blood clots.

The blood clots we hear about which the media claim are very rare are the big blood clots which are the ones that cause strokes and show up on CT scans, MRI, etc. The clots I’m talking about are microscopic and too small to find on any scan. They can thus only be detected using the D-dimer test. (Source.)

Since then an emergency medicine doctor, Dr. Rochagné Kilian, has come forward to tell the public what she was seeing in fully vaccinated patients, and the high rate of blood clots. She lost her job in order to bring this information to the public, so it is well worth listening to.

This is on our Rumble and Bitchute channel.

CDC Claim: Heart Disease from COVID-19 Shots is Rare

Here is what the CDC admits for heart disease following COVID-19 shots:

Myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. As of October 27, 2021, VAERS has received 1,784 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis among people ages 30 and younger who received COVID-19 vaccine. Most cases have been reported after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), particularly in male adolescents and young adults. Through follow-up, including medical record reviews, CDC and FDA have confirmed 1,005 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis. CDC and its partners are investigating these reports to assess whether there is a relationship to COVID-19 vaccination. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis.

Notice that they admit to 1,784 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis in people under age 30, and yet still choose to call these events “rare.”

Again, myocarditis and pericarditis are just two kinds of heart diseases, so let’s select all cases where a “carditis” is listed as an adverse event following COVID-19 shots. When we expand the search of the available data, we find 9,859 cases of cardits, resulting in 136 deaths and 327 permanent disabilities. (Source.)

This is a lot more than what the CDC is telling us, because they only included 2 kinds of “carditis.”

How does this compare with reported cases of “carditis” following ALL vaccines for the past 30+ years that are NOT COVID-19 vaccines?

For the past 30+ years there have been only 913 cases of “carditis” following ALL vaccines, resulting in only 95 deaths, about 3 deaths per year. (Source.)

Heart disease following COVID-19 shots is most certainly not rare! Young people, especially athletes, are having heart attacks in record numbers this year, as almost every day now we are seeing news reports of young, healthy athletes having heart attacks, like this professional hockey player who was in the news yesterday. There’s a list of athletes dying, mostly from cardiac arrest, here.

America is Run by Criminals and Mass Murderers

Your government is lying to you. They have this data, because it is their data. They know all of this.

But who will bring them to justice?

Sadly, these people in government who run the “health” agencies are simply pawns and puppets in these crimes against humanity.

The real decision makers who are guilty of mass murder are in corporate America. We have already shown how each of the pharmaceutical companies that currently have a COVID-19 “vaccine” authorized by the FDA also employ a former FDA Commissioner. See:

All 3 FDA-Authorized COVID-19 Vaccine Companies Employ Former FDA Commissioners

Charles Hugh Smith published an article today highlighting just how corrupt and evil corporate America has become.

Some excerpts:

It’s becoming a routine story: a whistleblower emerges with copious documentation, revealing the ethical / managerial rot at the very top of Corporate America icons. Recently it was Facebook that was revealed as devoting far more resources to masking corporate guile than to actually improving longstanding ethical and quality issues.

Now it’s Pfizer’s fast and loose treatment of supposedly rigorous protocols that’s been heavily documented. The prestigious British Medical Journal (BMJ) stated that the whistleblower provided “The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails.” BMJ Investigation: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial.

The purpose of playing fast and loose is to maximize profits regardless of any other factors. And while corporations exist to maximize profits, the trend in Corporate America is to sacrifice everything to maximize profits and keep the putrid sewage hidden from regulators, the media and the public.

This isn’t about profit, it’s about hiding the rot that has seeped into every nook and cranny of Corporate America. The foundation of the stock market’s extreme valuations is corporate profits, and the stock market bubble is now the precarious foundation of the entire U.S. economy: should the bubble pop, everyone knows the economy and the financial system will both crash.

The usual corporate strategy–defame the whistleblower and blow smoke to cover the rot–loses traction when the rot is documented by internal memos, recordings, etc. It’s difficult for the lackeys of Corporate America to dismiss the British Medical Journal as just another tin-foil-hat outlet of “fake news,” especially with all the documentation now made public.

Lost in the obsession to profiteer and hide the rot is the notion that corporations have responsibilities to the public and their customers/users, not just to greedy managers and shareholders. These responsibilities have been tossed into the muddy ditch.

Regulations only exist in name in America. Corporate America plays by its own rules. Corporate America is no longer regulated in any consequential fashion, as the list of Pfizer’s actions reveal:

— Participants placed in a hallway after injection and not being monitored by clinical staff

— Lack of timely follow-up of patients who experienced adverse events

— Protocol deviations not being reported

— Vaccines not being stored at proper temperatures

— Mislabelled laboratory specimens, and

— Targeting of Ventavia staff for reporting these types of problems.

The last item appears in virtually every whistleblower case: the corporation doesn’t rush to fix its glaring ethical and quality issues, it rushes to silence the whistleblower and “manage the narrative” to protect its precious profits. Never mind that the public pays the price for corporations saying one thing and doing another, for hiding what they dare not let regulators, users, customers and patients learn about their practices and behind-closed-doors goals.

The Prime Directive of Corporate America is to hide the rot that’s permeated the entire corporation, starting at the top.

We shouldn’t be too surprised that Corporate America is rotten to the core–the entire status quo is rotten to the core. Ethics and regulations are annoyances to be skirted, and if some random regulator catches insiders in the act, the corporation pays an inconsequential fine and then returns to BAU–business as usual, rotten to the core.

Any citizen who desires to be well-informed would be well-served to read this report closely: BMJ Investigation: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial.

He goes on to write about an amazing database someone has put together which documents all the “Corporate fines and Settlements” over criminal cases since the 1990s. Pfizer, for example, has paid out over $8 BILLION in fines for criminal activities over the years.

As further documentation, I am honored to share a remarkable data base of Corporate Fines and Settlements from the early 1990s to the present compiled by Jon Morse. Here is Jon’s description of his project to assemble a comprehensive list of all corporate fines and settlements that can be verified by media reports:

“This spreadsheet is all the corporate fines/settlements I’ve been able to find sourced articles about, mostly in the period from the 1990s up to today (with a few 80s and 70s). This is by far the most comprehensive list of such things online. At least that I could find, because the lack of any decent list is what made me start compiling this list in the first place.”

What’s noteworthy is the sheer number of corporate violations of laws and regulations–thousands upon thousands, the vast majority of which occurred since corporate profits began their incredible ascent in the early 2000s–and the list of those paying hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and settlements, which reads like a who’s who of Corporate America and Top 100 Global Corporations.

I encourage you to open one of the three alphabetical tabs at the bottom of the spreadsheet on Google Docs and scroll down to find your favorite super-profitable corporation.

Many have a long list of fines and settlements, and many of the fines are in excess of $100 million. Many are for blatant cartel price-fixing, not disclosing the dangers of the company’s heavily promoted medications, destroying documents to thwart an investigation of wrong-doing, etc.

In other words, these were not wrist-slaps for minor oversights of complex regulations— these are blatant violations of core laws of the land.

Jon offered this commentary on Corporate America’s slide to the bottom of the moral cesspool:

“With the increases in concentration of wealth there has been a culture of idolizing wealth, one example is how prosecutors no longer find it appropriate to put bankers and CEOs in jail. I think one side-effect of the culture changing has been an increased willingness to break the law to increase profits.

The settlements with the banks along with the ongoing investigations have shown that virtually every market is being manipulated; the stocks, metals markets, LIBOR, FOREX, everything. The companies would only break so many laws if they felt they would have a reasonable chance of getting away with it; they would also need a reason to do it, which is provided by the infinite growth model our economy is based on.”

Thank you, Jon, for compiling a tremendously important and valuable database, and for connecting this staggering list of violations to the cultural worship of maximizing private gains at any cost. I am reminded of socio-economist Immanuel Wallerstein’s description of the current system of central-state/private-corporation collusion as “a particular historical configuration of markets and state structures where private economic gain by almost any means is the paramount goal and measure of success.”

Read the full article here.

It is time to STOP the killer COVID-19 vaccine campaigns, and way past time to round up all of these murderers and lock them up.

These talking heads on TV use what is called an “appeal to authority” to try and convince the public to get these shots. The data and the science is NOT on their side, and they are not nearly as intelligent as they want you to believe they are.

I know there is great risk right now in refusing the COVID-19 shots for some people, as your livelihood and means to earn income could be at stake.

But this is NOT a sustainable path we are on, and at some point those who refused the shots are going to be needed again, and chances are you will, at some point, be able to earn income again.

Just remember one indisputable FACT:

If you risk getting a COVID-19 shot, you could die or become crippled with very serious injuries. Deaths and injuries are happening at a record pace, and they are not “rare” as is being claimed, based on the data.

If you do not take a COVID-19 shot, you cannot die from that shot.

It really is that simple.

Parents who subject their children to these shots are guilty of child abuse, and attempted murder. Keep your children home, and safe, no matter what the cost, if you truly love them.

November 6, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

3 More Reports of Teen Deaths After COVID Vaccines, as Reported Injuries Exceed 850,000

By Magan Redshaw | The Defender | November 5, 2021

Data released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed that between Dec. 14, 2020, and Oct. 29, 2021, a total of 856,919 adverse events following COVID vaccines were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

The data included a total of 18,078 reports of deaths — an increase of 459 over the previous week. There were 127,457 reports of serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 3,570 compared with the previous week.

Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 634,609 adverse events, including 8,284 deaths and 52,685 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and Oct. 29, 2021.

Of the 8,284 U.S. deaths reported as of Oct. 29, 10% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 15% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 26% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

In the U.S., 418.6 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of Oct. 29. This includes: 246 million doses of Pfizer, 157 million doses of Moderna and 15 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

The data come directly from reports submitted to VAERS, the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

Every Friday, VAERS makes public all vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date, usually about a week prior to the release date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

This week’s U.S. data for 12- to 17-year-olds show:  

The most recent deaths include a 12-year-old girl from South Carolina (VAERS I.D. 1784945) who hemorrhaged 22 days after receiving Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, a 13-year-old girl from Maryland (VAERS I.D. 1815096) who died 15 days after receiving her first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine from a heart condition and a 17-year-old female from Texas (VAERS I.D. 1815295 who experienced an acute hyperglycemic crisis 33 days after being vaccinated.

Another recent death involves a 12-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 1784945) who died from a respiratory tract hemorrhage 22 days after receiving her first dose of Pfizer’s vaccine.

  • 59 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 96% of cases
    attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
  • 547 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation) with 539 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
  • 126 reports of blood clotting disorders, with all cases attributed to Pfizer.

This week’s U.S. VAERS data, from Dec. 14, 2020, to Oct. 29, 2021, for all age groups combined, show:

CDC signs off on Pfizer COVID vaccine for kids 5-11

CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky on Nov. 3, endorsed the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ (ACIP) recommendation that children 5 to 11 years old be vaccinated against COVID with Pfizer’s pediatric COVID vaccine.

The younger age group will receive one-third of the dose authorized for those 12 and older, in two shots administered at least three weeks apart. The doses will be delivered by smaller needles and stored in smaller vials to avoid a mix-up with adult doses.

The CDC was concerned that COVID cases in children can result in hospitalizations, deaths, multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) and complications, such as “long COVID,” in which symptoms can linger for months.

During the ACIP meeting, the CDC said a total of 745 children under 18 have died of COVID since the beginning of the pandemic — although the COVID team admitted 79% were confirmed to be hospitalized for COVID, while the rest were hospital admissions for other causes.

The CDC’s authorization was based mostly on a Pfizer-BioNTech study of 4,600 children worldwide, of whom approximately 3,100 got the low-dose vaccine and about 1,500 got a placebo. Of the 3,100 children in the vaccine group, only 264 children were tested for antibodies to determine the efficacy of Pfizer’s vaccine.

Vaccine-injured speak out at event hosted by Sen. Ron Johnson 

During an event hosted Tuesday by U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), people whose lives were ruined by COVID vaccines said they feel abandoned by a government that told them it was their patriotic duty to get the shot.

Johnson held a discussion with a panel of experts, including clinicians, scientists, lawyers and patient advocates, and with people injured by COVID vaccines, who gave powerful testimonies about their experiences.

Johnson and the expert panel discussed the importance of early treatment for COVID, healthcare freedom and natural immunity, the impacts of mandates on the American workforce and the economy, COVID vaccine safety concerns and the lack of transparency from federal health agencies in response to his COVID oversight requests.

‘Truth isn’t being told about these vaccines,’ says cancer survivor injured by Pfizer vaccine

In an exclusive interview with The Defender, Diane Ochoa, a 63-year-old cancer survivor from Georgia said she was diagnosed with rare autoimmune disorders Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) after getting her second dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine.

On April 16, Ochoa got her second Pfizer dose, through her employer and, within 45 minutes, felt ill. She experienced nausea, extreme diarrhea and pain throughout her entire body that progressively worsened and ravaged its way through her body.

Ochoa saw numerous doctors before she was diagnosed and has spent the past six months trying to heal from her conditions, which left her in “horrific pain,” unable to walk without assistance or provide for herself.

Ochoa said she’s concerned about the “lack of studying they’ve done on this vaccine,” and about the potential for others to suffer long-term consequences even if they didn’t suffer an immediate repercussion as she did.

“My nightmare at night is that our littles might have to endure this because the truth isn’t being spoken about these vaccines,” Ochea said.

Schools are paying kids to get COVID vaccines

Some schools are paying kids to get vaccinated against COVID. According to TIME, schools in Phoenix are giving out $100 gift cards. In Los Angeles, students can win gift cards or a free prom or homecoming ticket if they get the shots.

Louisiana is offering $100 to children who get vaccinated, and officials in San Antonio, Texas, announced parents can claim a $100 gift card for H-E-B grocery stores. In New York City, children as young as 5  are getting paid to get vaccinated.

“We really want kids to take advantage, families take advantage of that,” New York Mayor Bill de Blasio said Thursday. “Everyone could use a little more money around the holidays. But, most importantly, we want our kids and our families to be safe.”

Some critics say paying kids to get vaccinated is bribery, but school districts incentivizing kids feel it makes sense because it keeps students and staff safe.

Children’s Health Defense asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps.

Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.

© 2021 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.

November 6, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

VACCINE TRIAL PARTICIPANT SPEAKS OUT

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | November 4, 2021

Brianne Dressen thought she was doing the right thing when she signed up for the COVID-19 AstraZeneca vaccine trial in 2020. She now joins the growing number of severely vaccine-injured at a press conference in Washington D.C., and shares her heartfelt story in-studio on The HighWire.

See also:

‘DELTA’ DRIVEN BY VAXXED IN NEW STUDY

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | November 4, 2021

We were told it was a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Now, new science has revealed a shocking truth.

November 6, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , | Leave a comment

Follow the SILENCE: Paper proving COVID-19 vaccines cause myocarditis is removed from publication without explanation

By Edward Hendrie | Great Mountain Publishing | October 31, 2021

To paraphrase a commenter to the below video, this censorship would be the top story of the day if it weren’t for censorship.

Drs. Peter McCullough and Jessical Rose jointly published an article that revealed the cause and effect relationship between the COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis.

Peter McCullough, M.D., is an American cardiologist. He was vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center and a professor at Texas A&M University. He is editor-in-chief of the journals Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine and Cardiorenal Medicine. He is one of the most highly respected and published cardiologists in the U.S.

Jessica Rose, PhD is a specialist in Orthopedics and Sports Medicine at Stanford Children’s Health Specialty Services.

After the preliminary draft of their report was peer-reviewed and approved for publication, it was posted by the publisher on its NIH website. Shortly thereafter, the publisher, Elsevier, without giving a reason, suddenly withdrew the publication. There is now a notice posted that states simply:

The Publisher regrets that this article has been temporarily removed. A replacement will appear as soon as possible in which the reason for the removal of the article will be specified, or the article will be reinstated.

That “temporary” removal has turned into a permanent removal. Elsevier has notified Drs. McCullough and Rose that their article will not be republished. Oddly, Elsevier gave no reason for the removal other than explaining that it is their sole prerogative to do so.

But we are not left to guess why the report was removed. All one needs to do is read the report, and it will be clear why the publisher removed it. I tracked down the report and read it. The report revealed the following startling facts.

Within 8 weeks of the public offering of COVID-19 products to the 12-15-year-old age group, we found 19 times the expected number of myocarditis cases in the vaccination volunteers over background myocarditis rates for this age group.

The publisher decided that fact, supported by empirical evidence, cannot be allowed. The long arm of the pharmaceutical companies reached out and let their influence be known.

Another fact that the report revealed was that the incidence of myocarditis among teenagers is much worse than even the raw statistics obtained from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting Service (VAERS) indicate. The report states:

Because of the spontaneous reporting of events to VAERS, we can assume that the cases reported thus far are not rare, but rather, just the tip of the iceberg. Again, under-reporting is a known and serious disadvantage of the VAERS system.

In prior blogs, I have reported that the VAERS system only reports about 1% of the actual adverse events.

New Study Confirms the VAERS System is Only Reporting Approximately 1% of Anaphylaxis from COVID-19 Vaccines

Harvard-Vaccine-Injury-Study-Page-6-Reveals-1-Percent-Report-Rate (Download)

VAERS is a reporting system that shows correlation. Further analysis is required to prove causation. Drs. McCullough and Rose did that further analysis and opined that the VAERS data indicates a cause and effect between the vaccinations and teenage myocarditis. Their report indicates:

It is noteworthy that ‘Vaccine-induced myocarditis’ was in fact used as the descriptor by medical professionals as the reason for the myocarditis in the VAERS database.

The report concluded:

Thus, due to both the problems of under-reporting and the known lag in report processing, this analysis reveals a strong signal from the VAERS data that the risk of suffering CIRM [COVID-19-Injection-Related Myocarditis] – especially males is unacceptably high. Again, children are not a high-risk group for COVID-19 respiratory illness, and yet they are the high-risk group for CIRM.


COVID-Vaccine-Causes-Myocarditis (Download)

November 5, 2021 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Your child’s education will be safeguarded by common sense, facts, political will and a new bill.

By Laura Dodsworth | November 5, 2021

This is a rapid response to a video released on Twitter by the Department of Health and Social Care which states that “Your child’s education will be safeguarded by them being vaccinated.”

 

This video is an example of logical fallacy. Here are few facts to support alternative reasoning:

  1. Locking down schools was a political decision. The UK had the second longest school closures in Europe. In contrast, Sweden only closed upper secondary schools (16 years+).
  2. Schools did not play a significant role in driving transmission of Covid-19, but rather they reflect the level of transmission in the community.
    According to Dr Shamez Ladhani, Consultant Paediatrician at PHE, the latest results of the School Infection Survey show that infection and antibody positivity rates of school children did not exceed those of the community. Dr Ladhani commented, “This is reassuring and confirms that schools are not hubs of infection.”
    This was also indicated by the PHE study from England’s school re-opening in August 2020, which concluded that “infections in the wider community likely driving cases in schools.”
  3. The vaccines do not stop transmission or infection, although they may reduce the risk of transmission, and they reduce the severity of symptoms and the risk of hospitalisation. There are too many conflicting reports and papers to offer one definitive link, but there is broad consensus for these points.
  4. Covid is not a serious illness for children and young people and symptoms are normally very mild.
  5. The key point: Three quarters of children aged between five and 14 have already been infected with Covid, and as a result cases are now falling. Overall, Covid cases are falling.
  6. Closing schools was incredibly damaging to children and young people, and there’s now a proposed ‘triple lock’ bill, The Schools and Education Settings (Essential Infrastructure and Opening During Emergencies) Bill, to prevent such a terrible disaster befalling the younger generation again.

Vaccination should be chosen by parents and their children for the medical benefits it confers, and based on an informed consideration of the benefits and risks. Parents and children should not be subtly threatened with further school closures.

November 5, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Why I Will Not Take the Second Dose

BY MEDHET KHATTAR | BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE | NOVEMBER 4, 2021

I am a microbiologist and a scientist. I am a microbiologist because that is what I specialised in at university, and what I have worked in since, in academia. I am a scientist because I place a higher value on asking questions than on consumption of knowledge.

Never previously have I felt hesitant about vaccines. Yet I took my first dose of the Covid-19 vaccine last March with some hesitation, and have since decided not to take the second dose.

Something struck me as problematic very early on in the Covid-19 narrative when the Director-General of the World Health Organisation announced that the Coronavirus in question was ‘public enemy number one’, an ‘unprecedented threat’ and an ‘enemy against humanity.’

I knew that something was not right, for this was the kind of terminology that had been used at the end of the Second World War, not to describe an infectious agent, but to refer to nuclear weapons and the banality of evil.

I complied with the first UK-wide lockdown in March 2020 with an unresolved mixture of disbelief and concern, laced with an unavoidable shot of fear; even though, rationally, I did not believe that the air all around us was full of a new plague. I even volunteered for vaccine trials. This was the United Kingdom shutting everything down, and everyone in.

But I gradually came to the view that the lockdown was disturbingly misguided; at best disproportionate to the problem it was meant to solve. But like many, I did not want the NHS to fall apart, nor did I want to catch SARS-CoV-2 myself, or to pass it to anyone else. I even refrained robotically from hugging my mother and siblings when I visited my family late in 2020.

As it turned out, science was the casualty of a toxic narrative of extreme urgency and fear, a narrative swiftly adopted by most governments and their advisors the world over. Koch’s postulates (the demonstration of a causal link between a microbe and a disease that have served us well for over a hundred years since their articulation by the German physician Robert Koch) were summarily discarded in favour of correlation.

The presence of fragments of SARS-CoV-2, specifically targeted and detected using RT-PCR, became incontrovertible evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was the causative agent of symptoms so generic that they could easily be caused by a wide range of respiratory pathogens, and not only viral ones.

But once you extinguish the need to demonstrate causation the mind recedes into a truism of a kind, because when scientific thinking gives way anything goes if asserted enough times. And so we became, each and every one of us, a biological problem.

We were confined to one or the other group: vulnerable or infectious, a segregation that continues despite evidence of preexisting immunity and near-universal vaccination in the UK. And “test, test, test” was how this division was planted in our daily lives. If you test positive, then you are infectious. And if you test negative, you are vulnerable to infection.

As a result, a positive test result became synonymous with a clinical case. And even though (after some pressure from dissenting scientists) daily UK Covid-19 mortality figures are reported as deaths of any cause within 28 days of a positive Covid-19 test, the caveat became mere semantics. In the public consciousness, Covid-19 was the cause of these daily deaths; in mine the statistics were a daily announcement of the slow death of clear thinking.

The collapse of clear thinking seems to have led some to equate the idea of elimination of SARS-CoV-2 with, say, that of measles. The fantastical notion of a Zero Covid world could only appeal to someone who (knowingly or unknowingly) suffers from a dystopian obsession with immortality. But far worse, we are no longer merely responsible for our own well-being.

We are now burdened with saving every other life on the planet from a disease whose infection fatality rate is not unusual compared to other respiratory diseases with which human civilizations have coexisted, suffered, and recovered.

The collective blame for transmission of the smallest and most slippery of all microbes, viruses, had hitherto been implicitly and wisely shared by the community as a price worth paying for the continued process of civilization. As Professor Sunetra Gupta put it, “This chain of guilt is somehow located to the individual rather than being distributed and shared. We have to share the guilt. We have to share the responsibility. And we have to take on board certain risks ourselves in order to fulfil our obligations and to uphold the social contract.”

The advent of a vaccine to relieve the human population of the menace of a fatal disease should be a moment of global celebration. But to the Zero Covid mind, Covid-19 vaccines are a weapon in a fight against nature, not a voluntary health intervention to protect the vulnerable. And when humans with their propensity for muddled thinking position themselves against nature, they invariably end up positioning themselves against fellow humans.

I am not against vaccination, but I am against the coercive campaigns and guilt-summoning policies to promote vaccination, or any other medical intervention for that matter. The Covid-19 vaccine is no longer for me a question of health, but a deeper matter of principle, of good science, and of moral philosophy.

In particular, enlisting children to protect adults in what is effectively an ongoing clinical trial is simply unfathomable. It is enough to watch this advert to recognise the huge, unfair and misinformed burden which children have been put under. Those who argue that vaccination is required to keep schools open should only reflect a fraction deeper on their argument to recognise its disturbing motive, which is to make a political decision easier to take.

I have taken the first dose, but I do not wish to continue to be part of the narrative of irrationalism, fear and coercion that promotes the vaccination programme. I may end up having to take the second dose if that is what it takes for me to continue to be able to work or to travel to see my family; I am not an ideologue. But for now, I am quitting the global clinical trial of Covid-19 vaccines because it is morally unsettling whichever angle you examine it from.

It was the veteran columnist Simon Jenkins who saw with unmatched prescience the future towards which we were heading. Writing in The Guardian on 6 March 2020 – just over two weeks before the UK’s first lockdown – Jenkins ended his piece with the following line.  “You are being fed war talk. Let them wash your hands, but not your brain.” It seems they had us do both.

Dr Medhet Khattar is Teaching Fellow in Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases at the University of Edinburgh. He has held research and faculty positions in microbiology at a number of institutions including University of Nottingham (1989-1990), University of Edinburgh (1990-1998), Medical Research Council Virology Unit in Glasgow (1998-2000), American University of Beirut (2000-2007), University of Leeds (2009-2010) and Nottingham Trent University (2010-2015).

November 5, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

6 Studies Showing Why Children Don’t Need — and Shouldn’t Get — a COVID Vaccine

By Paul Elias Alexander, Ph.D. | The Defender | November 4, 2021

When it comes to COVID, public health officials have consistently downplayed and/or ignored natural immunity.

Yet these public health experts and many doctors and scientists know that no vaccine can confer the type of robust, full, sterilizing and life-long immunity to COVID that natural-exposure immunity confers.

Officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) know anyone exposed, infected and recovered from SARS-CoV-2 has acquired cellular immunity.

They know how natural immunity works, yet they continue to deceive the public on this issue by falsely insisting vaccines are the only answer to “ending the pandemic.”

The authors of a 2008 study on the 1918 pandemic virus showed how potent and long-lived natural immunity is, and how the immune system generates new antibodies if and when needed (re-exposed).

The researchers wrote:

“A study of the blood of older people who survived the 1918 influenza pandemic reveals that antibodies to the strain have lasted a lifetime and can perhaps be engineered to protect future generations against similar strains … the group collected blood samples from 32 pandemic survivors aged 91 to 101 … the people recruited for the study were 2 to 12 years old in 1918 and many recalled sick family members in their households, which suggests they were directly exposed to the virus … The group found that 100% of the subjects had serum-neutralizing activity against the 1918 virus and 94% showed serologic reactivity to the 1918 hemagglutinin.

“The investigators generated B lymphoblastic cell lines from the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of eight subjects. Transformed cells from the blood of 7 of the 8 donors yielded secreting antibodies that bound the 1918 hemagglutinin.

“ … here we show that of the 32 individuals tested that were born in or before 1915, each showed sero-reactivity with the 1918 virus, nearly 90 years after the pandemic. Seven of the eight donor samples tested had circulating B cells that secreted antibodies that bound the 1918 HA. We isolated B cells from subjects and generated five monoclonal antibodies that showed potent neutralizing activity against 1918 virus from three separate donors. These antibodies also cross-reacted with the genetically similar HA of a 1930 swine H1N1 influenza strain.”

The very same CDC that fights against COVID natural immunity, argues just the opposite when it comes to chickenpox.

Guidance on the CDC website, “Chickenpox Vaccination: What Everyone Should Know,” states: “People 13 years of age and older who have never had chickenpox or received chickenpox vaccine should get two doses, at least 28 days apart.”

In this reasonable guidance, the CDC says you need the chickenpox jab if you “have never had chickenpox.” If you have had it, then you do not need the vaccine.

The CDC goes even further, stating: “You do not need to get the chickenpox vaccine if you have evidence of immunity against the disease.” So if someone has had chickenpox and recovered, and can demonstrate that via a laboratory test, they don’t need the vaccine.

Again, this makes sense. All parents know this, and have for generations. You do not need a vaccine for measles, if you already had measles and cleared the rash and recovered. Natural, beautiful robust immunity, typically lasts for the rest of a person’s life.

The same goes for the CDC’s guidance for the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR). The CDC clearly states no MMR vaccine is needed if “You have laboratory confirmation of past infection or had blood tests that show you are immune to measles, mumps, and rubella.”

So, what is different for COVID-19? Is something other than science at play here?

We now have a major crisis as the race is on to vaccinate our 5- to 11-year-old children who bring no risk to the table, with a vaccine that has been shown to be sub-optimal and carrying risks.

We even have one of the FDA advisory committee members, Dr. Eric Rubin, who is also lead editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, stating: “We’re never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it.”

This is a shocking statement by someone who played a role in the decision-making, and should lead us to examine if Rubin and others on that committee were conflicted in terms of relationships to the vaccine developers.

Rubin further stated: “The data show that the vaccine works and it’s pretty safe … we’re worried about a side effect that we can’t measure yet,” he said, referring to a heart condition called myocarditis.

So then why would Rubin and others agree to expose our children to potential harm from a vaccine for an illness that poses little risk to children, if they have serious concerns and admit they have not and cannot yet measure the safety?

This depth of uncertainty should never exist in any drug or vaccine that the FDA regulates, much less a drug officials propose to administer to 28 million children. Something is very wrong here.

It is clear that children are at very low risk of spreading the infection to other children, of spreading to adults as seen in household transmission studies, or of taking it home or becoming ill, or dying — this is settled scientific global evidence (references 1, 2, 3, 4).

An April 2021 study in the Journal of Infection (April 2021) examined household transmission rates in children and adults. The authors reported there was “no transmission from an index-person < 18 years (child) to a household contact < 18 years (child) (0/7), but 26 transmissions from adult index-cases to household contacts < 18 years (child) (26/71, SAR 0=37).”

These findings add to the stable existing evidence that children are not spreading the virus to children but rather that adults are spreading it to children.

Why vaccinate our children for this mild and typically non-consequential virus when they bring protective innate immunity towards this SARS-VoV-2, other coronaviruses and other respiratory viruses?

Why push to vaccinate our children who may well be immune due to prior exposure (asymptomatic or mild illness) and cross-reactivity/cross-protection? Why not consider assessing their immune status?

Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche writes that children’s innate immunity:

“… normally/ naturally largely protects them and provides a kind of herd immunity in that it dilutes infectious CoV pressure at the level of the population, whereas mass vaccination turns them into shedders of more infectious variants. Children/ youngsters who get the disease mostly develop mild to moderate disease and as a result continue to contribute to herd immunity by developing broad and long-lived immunity.”

 Here are six studies that make the case for not vaccinating children:

1. A 2020 Yale University report indicates children and adults display very diverse and different immune system responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection which explains why they have far less illness or mortality from COVID. 

According to the study:

“Since the earliest days of the COVID-19 outbreak, scientists have observed that children infected with the virus tend to fare much better than adults … researchers reported that levels of two immune system molecules — interleukin 17A (IL-17A), which helps mobilize immune system response during early infection, and interferon gamma (INF-g), which combats viral replication — were strongly linked to the age of the patients. The younger the patient, the higher the levels of IL-17A and INF-g, the analysis showed… these two molecules are part of the innate immune system, a more primitive, non-specific type of response activated early after infection.”

2. Studies by Ankit B. Patel and Dr. Supinda Bunyavanich show the virus uses the ACE 2 receptor to gain entry to the host cell, and the ACE 2 receptor has limited (less) expression and presence in the nasal epithelium in young children (potentially in upper respiratory airways).

This partly explains why children are less likely to be infected in the first place, or spread it to other children or adults, or even get severely ill. The biological molecular apparatus is simply not there in the nasopharynx of children. By bypassing this natural protection (limited nasal ACE 2 receptors in young children) and entering the shoulder deltoid, this could release vaccine, its mRNA and LNP content (e.g. PEG), and generated spike into the circulation that could then damage the endothelial lining of the blood vessels (vasculature) and cause severe allergic reactions (e.g., here, here, here, here, here).

3. William Briggs reported on the n=542 children who died (0-17 years (crude rate of 0.00007 per 100 and under 1 year old n=132, CDC data) since January 2020 with a diagnosis of COVID linked to their death. This does not indicate whether, as Johns Hopkins’ Dr. Marty Makary has been clamoring, the death was “causal or incidental.” That said, from January 2020, 1,043 children 0-17 have died of pneumonia. 

Briggs reported:

“There is no good vaccine for pneumonia. But it could be avoided by keeping kids socially distanced from each other — permanently. If one death is “too many,” then you must not allow kids to be within contact of any human being who has a disease that may be passed to them, from which they may acquire pneumonia. They must also not be allowed in any car … in one year, just about 3,091 kids 0-17 died in car crashes (435 from 0-4, 847 from 5-14, and 30% of 6,031 from 15-24). Multiply these 3,000 deaths in cars by about 1.75, since the COVID deaths are over a 21-month period. That makes about 5,250 kids dying in car crashes in the same period — 10 times as many as Covid.”

Briggs concluded: “there exists no justification based on any available evidence for mandatory vaccines for kids.”

4. Weisberg and Farber et al. suggest (and building on research work by Kumar and Faber) that the reason children can more easily neutralize the virus is that their T cells are relatively naïve. They argue that since children’s T cells are mostly untrained, they can thus immunologically respond (optimally differentiate) more rapidly and nimbly to novel viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 for an effective robust response. 

5. Research published in August 2021 by J. Loske deepens our understanding of this natural type biological/molecular protection even further by showing that “pre-activated (primed) antiviral innate immunity in the upper airways of children work to control early SARS-CoV-2 infection … the airway immune cells in children are primed for virus sensing…resulting in a stronger early innate antiviral response to SARS-CoV-2 infection than in adults.”

6. When one is vaccinated or becomes infected naturally, this drives the formation, tissue distribution and clonal evolution of B cells, which is key to encoding humoral immune memory.

Research published in May 2021 showed that blood examined from children retrieved prior to COVID-19 pandemic have memory B cells that can bind to SARS-CoV-2, suggestive of the potent role of early childhood exposure to common cold coronaviruses (coronaviruses). This is supported by Mateus et al. who reported on T cell memory to prior coronaviruses that cause the common cold (cross-reactivity/cross-protection).

There is no data or evidence or science to justify any of the COVID-19 injections in children. Can the content of these vaccines cross the blood-brain barrier in children? We don’t know because it wasn’t studied.

There is no proper safety data. The focus rather has to be on early treatment and testing (sero antibody or T-cell) to establish who is a credible candidate for these injections, as it is dangerous to layer inoculation on top of existing COVID-recovered, naturally acquired immunity.

There is no benefit and only potential harm/adverse effects (here, here, here).

Dr. Alexander is considered a global expert on COVID-19 generally and in some areas highly expertised. Dr. Alexander holds masters level study at York University Canada, a masters in epidemiology at University of Toronto, a masters in evidence-based medicine at Oxford and a doctorate in evidence-based medicine and research methods from McMaster University in Canada.

© 2021 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.

November 5, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment