COVID-19 Vaccine « Aletho News

Moderna “Vaccine” Wreaks Havoc in BC and Local Doctor Blows Whistle

Sixth Sense | April 17, 2021

@DRutter: INVITE https://odysee.com/$/invite/@DRutter:9

https://odysee.com/@DRutter:9/moderna-vaccine-wreaks-havoc-on-lytton:7

Please listen to and share this powerful front-line testimony. Dr. Charles Hoffe of Lytton, British Columbia tells how the Moderna “vaccine” has decimated the health of his small town, after they had no trouble naturally fending off Covid last year. Now, many residents can’t sleep, their nerves burn with pain, their muscles won’t move properly, and their condition is worsening by the week. He lists his many concerns with these experimental products, and talks about how government officials have already sought to silence him. The interview was uploaded by Laura-Lynn Thompson.

Frontline Workers Testimonies & VAERs Reports 26 MAR 2021 – [PDF DOC]
https://odysee.com/@SixthSense-Truth-Search-Labs:0/informed-consent-matters:7

Polyethylene glycol as a cause of anaphylaxis [ingredient in COVID injections!] – PDF DOC
https://odysee.com/@SixthSense-Truth-Search-Labs:0/s13223-016-0172-7:f

Evidence for a Connection between COVID-19 and Exposure to Radiofrequency Radiation from Wireless Telecommunications [PDF DOC]
https://odysee.com/@SixthSense-Truth-Search-Labs:0/Rubik-Brown-COVID-19-and-RFR-SUBMITTED:f

COVID-19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Disease – PDF DOC
https://odysee.com/@SixthSense-Truth-Search-Labs:0/covid19-rna-based-vaccines-and-the-risk-of-prion-disease-1503(2):b

Dr. Charles D. Hoffe, BSc, MB, BCh, LMCC
Lytton Medical Clinic
Lytton BC V0K 1Z0

5 April, 2021

OPEN LETTER

Dr. Bonnie Henry,
British Columbia Provincial Health Officer
Ministry of Health
1515 Blanchard Street
Victoria, BC, V8W 3C9

Dear Dr. Henry,

The first dose of the Moderna vaccine has now been administered to some of my patients in the community of Lytton, BC. This began with the First Nations members of our community in mid-January, 2021. 900 doses have now been administered.

I have been quite alarmed at the high rate of serious side-effects from this novel treatment.
From this relatively small number of people vaccinated so far, we have had:

Numerous allergic reactions, with two cases of anaphylaxis.
One (presumed) vaccine induced sudden death, (in a 72 year old patient with COPD. This patient complained of being more short of breath continually after receiving the vaccine, and died very suddenly and unexpectedly on day 24, after the vaccine. He had no history of cardiovascular disease).
Three people with ongoing and disabling neurological deficits, with associated chronic pain, persisting for more than 10 weeks after their first vaccine. These neurological deficits include: continual and disabling dizziness, generalised or localized neuromuscular weakness, with or without sensory loss. The chronic pain in these patients is either generalised or regional, with or without headaches.

So in short, in our small community of Lytton, BC, we have one person dead, and three people who look as though they will be permanently disabled, following their first dose of the Moderna vaccine. The age of those affected ranges from 38 to 82 years of age.

So I have a couple of questions and comments:

Are these considered normal and acceptable long term side-effects for gene modification therapy? Judging by medical reports from around the world, our Lytton experience is not unusual.
Do you have any idea what disease processes may have been initiated, to be producing these ongoing neurological symptoms?
Do you have any suggestions as to how I should treat the vaccine induced neurological weakness, the dizziness, the sensory loss, and the chronic pain syndromes in these people, or should they be all simply referred to a neurologist? I anticipate that many more will follow, as the vaccine is rolled out. This was only phase one, and the first dose.
In stark contrast to the deleterious effects of this vaccine in our community, we have not had to give any medical care what-so-ever, to anyone with Covid-19. So in our limited experience, this vaccine is quite clearly more dangerous than Covid-19.
I realize that every medical therapy has a risk-benefit ratio, and that serious disease calls for serious medicine. But we now know that the recovery rate of Covid-19, is similar to the seasonal flu, in every age category. Furthermore, it is well known that the side effects following a second shot, are significantly worse than the first. So the worst is still to come.
It must be emphasised, that these people were not sick people, being treated for some devastating disease. These were previously healthy people, who were offered an experimental therapy, with unknown long-term side-effects, to protect them against an illness that has the same mortality rate as the flu. Sadly, their lives have now been ruined.
It is normally considered a fundamental principal of medical ethics, to discontinue a clinical trial if significant harm is demonstrated from the treatment under investigation.
So my last question is this: Is it medically ethical to continue this vaccine rollout, in view of the severity of these life altering side-effects, after just the first shot? In Lytton, BC, we have an incidence of 1 in 225 of severe life altering side-effects, from this experimental gene modification therapy.

I have also noticed that these vaccine induced side effects are going almost entirely unreported, by those responsible for the vaccine rollout. I am aware that this is often a problem, with vaccines in general, and that delayed side-effects after vaccines, are sometimes labelled as being “coincidences”, as causality is often hard to prove. However, in view of the fact that this is an experimental treatment, with no long-term safety data, I think that perhaps this issue should be addressed too.

Furthermore I have noticed, that the provincial vaccine injury reporting form, which was clearly designed for conventional vaccines, does not even have any place to report vaccine injuries of the nature and severity that we are seeing from this new mRNA therapy.

It is now clearly apparent with medical evidence from around the world, that the side-effect profiles of the various gene modification therapies against Covid-19, have been vastly understated by their manufacturers, who were eager to prove their safety.

Thank you for attention to this critically urgent public health matter.

Yours sincerely,

Dr. Charles Hoffe

April 20, 2021 Posted by aletho | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | Canada, COVID-19 Vaccine, Human rights | Leave a comment

NHS Whistleblower Exposes Vaccine Policy

UK Column News | April 14, 2021

Full program:

See also:

A Deceptive Construction – Why We Must Question The COVID 19 Mortality Statistics

April 19, 2021 Posted by aletho | Video | COVID-19 Vaccine, Human rights, NHS, UK | Leave a comment

Is a Coronavirus Vaccine a Ticking Time Bomb?

Science with Dr. Doug | August 1, 2020

Will a vaccine to SARS-CoV-2 actually make the problem worse? Although not a certainty, all of the current data says that this prospect is a real possibility that needs to be paid careful attention to. If you stay with me, I’ll explain why.

First, let’s set aside the debate surrounding the topic of whether vaccines work and the negative health consequences due to the components of the vaccine. No matter where you stand on the vaccine issue, I’m not asking anyone to capitulate on this point. I’m just asking that this issue be set aside, because in this instance this argument is completely irrelevant. Even without bringing any other issue into the vaccine debate, a coronavirus vaccine is a highly dangerous undertaking due to a peculiar trojan horse mechanism known as Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE). Regardless of someone’s conviction about vaccines, this point needs to be acknowledged. In the remaining portion of this article, I’m going to explain how ADE works and the future perils it may bring.

For a vaccine to work, our immune system needs to be stimulated to produce a neutralizing antibody, as opposed to a non-neutralizing antibody. A neutralizing antibody is one that can recognize and bind to some region (‘epitope’) of the virus, and that subsequently results in the virus either not entering or replicating in your cells.

A non-neutralizing antibody is one that can bind to the virus, but for some reason, the antibody fails to neutralize the infectivity of the virus. This can occur, for example, if the antibody doesn’t bind tightly enough to the virus, or the percentage of the surface area of the virus covered by the antibody is too low, or the concentration of the antibody is not high enough. Basically, there is some type of generic binding of the antibody to the virus, but it fails to neutralize the virus.

In some viruses, if a person harbors a non-neutralizing antibody to the virus, a subsequent infection by the virus can cause that person to elicit a more severe reaction to the virus due to the presence of the non-neutralizing antibody. This is not true for all viruses, only particular ones. This is called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE), and is a common problem with Dengue Virus, Ebola Virus, HIV, RSV, and the family of coronaviruses. In fact, this problem of ADE is a major reason why many previous vaccine trials for other coronaviruses failed. Major safety concerns were observed in animal models. If ADE occurs in an individual, their response to the virus can be worse than their response if they had never developed an antibody in the first place.

An antibody can be rendered a non-neutralizing antibody simply because it doesn’t bind to the right portion of the virus to neutralize it, or the antibody binds too weakly to the virus. This can also occur if a neutralizing antibody’s concentration falls over time and is now no longer of sufficient concentration to cause neutralization of the virus. In addition, a neutralizing antibody can subsequently transition to non-neutralizing antibody when encountering a different strain of the virus.

What does ADE entail? The exact mechanism of ADE in SARS is not known, but the leading theory is described as follows: In certain viruses, the binding of a non-neutralizing antibody to the virus can direct the virus to enter and infect your immune cells. This occurs through a receptor called FcγRII. FcγRII is expressed on the outside of many tissues of our body, and in particular, in monocyte derived macrophages, which are a type of white blood cell. In other words, the presence of the non-neutralizing antibody now directs the virus to infect cells of your immune system, and these viruses are then able to replicate in these cells and wreak havoc on your immune response. One end of the antibody grabs onto the virus, and the other end of the antibody grabs onto an immune cell. Essentially, the non-neutralizing antibody enables the virus to hitch a ride to infect immune cells. You can see this in the picture above.

This can cause a hyperinflammatory response, a cytokine storm, and a general dysregulation of the immune system that allows the virus to cause more damage to our lungs and other organs of our body. In addition, new cell types throughout our body are now susceptible to viral infection due to the additional viral entry pathway facilitated by the FcγRII receptor, which is expressed on many different cell types.

What this means is that you can be given a vaccine, which causes your immune system to produce an antibody to the vaccine, and then when your body is actually challenged with the real pathogen, the infection is much worse than if you had not been vaccinated.

Again, this is not seen in all viruses, or even in all strains of a given virus, and there is a great deal that scientists don’t understand about the complete set of factors that dictate when and if ADE may occur. It’s quite likely that genetic factors as well as the health status of the individual may play a role on modulating this response. That being said, there are many studies (in the reference section below) that demonstrate that ADE is a persistent problem with coronaviruses in general, and in particular, with SARS-related viruses. Less is known, of course, with respect to SARS-CoV-2, but the genetic and structural similarities between the SARS-CoV-2 and the other coronaviruses strongly suggests that this risk is real.

ADE has proven to be a serious challenge with coronavirus vaccines, and this is the primary reason many have failed in early in-vitro or animal trials. For example, rhesus macaques who were vaccinated with the Spike protein of the SARS-CoV virus demonstrated severe acute lung injury when challenged with SARS-CoV, while monkeys who were not vaccinated did not. Similarly, mice who were immunized with one of four different SARS-CoV vaccines showed histopathological changes in the lungs with eosinophil infiltration after being challenged with SARS-CoV virus. This did not occur in the controls that had not been vaccinated. A similar problem occurred in the development of a vaccine for FIPV, which is a feline coronavirus.

For a vaccine to work, vaccine developers will need to find a way to circumvent the ADE problem. This will require a very novel solution, and it may not be achievable, or at the very least, predictable. In addition, the vaccine must not induce ADE in subsequent strains of SARS-CoV-2 that emerge over time, or to other endemic coronaviruses that circulate every year and cause the common cold.

A major trigger for ADE is viral mutation. Changes to the amino acid sequence of the Spike Protein (which is the protein on the virus that facilitates entry into our cells via the ACE2 receptor) can cause antigenic drift. What this means is that an antibody that was once neutralizing can become a non-neutralizing antibody because the antigen has slightly changed. Therefore, mutations in the Spike protein that naturally occur with coronaviruses could presumably result in ADE. Since these future strains are not predictable, it is impossible to predict if ADE will become a problem at a future date.

This inherent unpredictability problem is highlighted in the following scenario: A coronavirus vaccine may not be dangerous initially. If the initial testing looks positive, mass vaccination efforts would presumably be administered to a large portion of the population. In the first year or two, it may appear that there is no real safety issue, and over time, a greater percentage of the world population will be vaccinated due to this perceived “safety”. During this interim period, the virus is busy mutating. Eventually, the antibodies that vaccinated individuals have floating around in their bloodstream are now rendered non-neutralizing because they fail to bind to the virus with the same affinity due to the structural change resulting from the mutation. Declining concentrations of the antibody over time would also contribute to this shift towards non-neutralization. When these previously vaccinated people are infected with this different strain of SARS-CoV-2, they could experience a much more severe reaction to the virus.

Ironically, in this scenario, this vaccine made the virus more pathogenic rather than less pathogenic. This is not something that vaccine producers would be able predict or test for with any level of real confidence at the outset, and it would only become evident at a later time.

If and when this does occur, who will be liable?

Does this vaccine industry know about this problem? The answer is yes, they do.

Quoting a Nature Biotechnology news article published on June 5^th, 2020:

““It’s important to talk about it [ADE],” says Gregory Glenn, president of R&D at Novavax, which launched its COVID-19 vaccine trial in May. But “we can’t be overly cautious. People are dying. So we need to be aggressive here.””

And from the same article:

“ADE “is a genuine concern,” says virologist Kevin Gilligan, a senior consultant with Biologics Consulting, who advises thorough safety studies. “Because if the gun is jumped, and a vaccine is widely distributed that is disease enhancing, that would be worse than actually not doing any vaccination at all.””

The vaccine industry is aware of this problem. The degree to which they are taking it seriously, is another question.

While many vaccine developers are aware of the problem, some of them are approaching the problem with more Laissez-faire attitude. They see this problem as “theoretical,” and not guaranteed, with the idea that animal trials should rule out the potential of ADE in humans.

As a side note, it is not ethical to conduct “challenge” studies in humans. However, challenge studies are conducted in animals. In other words, a clinical trial for a vaccine does not include administering the vaccine to a person, and then exposing this person to the virus post-vaccination to monitor their reaction. In clinical trials, humans are only given the vaccine, they are not “challenged” with the virus afterward. In animal studies, they do conduct a challenge test to observe how the animals respond to being infected with the actual virus after being vaccinated.

Will conducting animal studies solve the issue and remove the risk?

Not at all.

Anne De Groot, CEO of EpiVax argues that testing for vaccine safety in primates does not guarantee safety in humans, mainly because primates express different major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules, which alters epitope presentation and the immune response. Animals and humans are similar, but they are also very different. In addition, as pointed out above, the development of different viral strains in subsequent years could present a major problem not noticeable during the initial safety trials in either humans or animals.

What about unvaccinated people who are naturally infected with the virus and develop antibodies? Could these people experience ADE to a future strain of SARS-CoV-2?

The ADE response is actually much more complicated than the picture I outlined above. There are other competing and non-competing factors in our immune system that contribute to the ADE response, many of which are not fully understood. Part of that equation is a variety of different types of T-cells that modulate this response, and these T-Cells respond to other portions (epitopes) of the virus. In a vaccine, our body is normally presented with a small part of the virus (like the Spike protein), or a modified (attenuated or dead) virus which is more benign. A vaccine does not expose the entirety of our immune system to the actual virus.

These types of vaccines will only elicit antibodies that recognize the portion of the virus which is present in the vaccine. The other portions of the virus are not represented in the antibody pool. In this scenario, it is much more likely that the vaccine-induced antibodies can be rendered as non-neutralizing antibodies, because the entire virus is not coated in antibodies, only the portion that was used to develop the vaccine.

In a real infection, our immune system is exposed to every nook and cranny of the entire virus, and as such, our immune system develops a panacea of antibodies that recognize different portions of the virus and, therefore, coat more of the virus and neutralize it. In addition, our immune system develops T-Cell responses to hundreds of different peptide epitopes across the virus; whereas in the vaccine the plethora of these T-Cell responses are absent. Researchers are already aware that the T-Cell response plays a cooperative role in either the development of, or absence of, the ADE response.

Based on these differences and the skewed immunological response which is inherent with vaccines, I believe that the risk of ADE is an order of magnitude greater in a vaccine-primed immune system rather than a virus-primed immune system. This will certainly become more apparent as COVID-19 progresses over the years, but the burden of proof rests on the shoulders of the vaccine industry to demonstrate that ADE will not rear its ugly head in the near term or the far term. Once a vaccine is administered and people develop antibodies to some misrepresentation of the virus, it cannot be reversed. Again, this is a problem that could manifest itself at a later date.

Although this article focused on the problem of ADE, it is not the only pathway or mechanism that could present a problem for people being infected after vaccination. Another pathway is governed by Th2 immunopathology, in which a defective T-cell response initiates an allergic inflammation reaction. A second pathway is based on the development of faulty antibodies that form immune complexes, which then activate the complement system a consequently damage the airways. These pathways are also potential risks for SARS-CoV-2.

Right now, the fatality rate of the virus is estimated to be approximately 0.26%, and this number seems to be dropping as the virus is naturally attenuating itself through the population. It would be a great shame to vaccinate the entire population against a virus with this low of a fatality rate, especially considering the considerable risk presented by ADE. I believe this risk of developing ADE in a vaccinated individual will be much greater than 0.26%, and, therefore, the vaccine stands to make the problem worse, not better. It would be the biggest blunder of the century to see the fatality rate of this virus increase in the years to come because of our sloppy, haphazard, rushed efforts to develop a vaccine with such a low threshold of safety testing and the prospect of ADE lurking in the shadows. I would hope (and this is a big hope), that this vaccine WILL NOT BE MANDATORY.

Hopefully, you now know a little more about the topic of Antibody Dependent Enhancement, and the real, unpredictable dangers of a coronavirus vaccine. In the end, your health should be your decision, not some bureaucrat’s that doesn’t know the first thing about molecular biology.

REFERENCES

Garber K. Coronavirus vaccine developers wary of errant antibodies. Nature Biotechnology. 2020 Jun 5.

Wan, Yushun, et al. “Molecular mechanism for antibody-dependent enhancement of coronavirus entry.” Journal of virology 94.5 (2020)

Yang, Zhi-yong, et al. “Evasion of antibody neutralization in emerging severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102.3 (2005): 797-801.

Ulrich, Henning, Micheli M. Pillat, and Attila Tárnok. “Dengue Fever, COVID‐19 (SARS‐CoV‐2), and Antibody‐Dependent Enhancement (ADE): A Perspective.” Cytometry Part A (2020).

Wang, Sheng-Fan, et al. “Antibody-dependent SARS coronavirus infection is mediated by antibodies against spike proteins.” Biochemical and biophysical research communications 451.2 (2014): 208-214.

Tseng C Te, Sbrana E, Iwata-Yoshikawa N, Newman PC, Garron T, Atmar RL, et al. Immunization with SARS coronavirus vaccines leads to pulmonary immunopathology on challenge with the SARS virus. PLoS ONE. (2012) 7:35421.

Tetro, Jason A. “Is COVID-19 receiving ADE from other coronaviruses?.” Microbes and infection 22.2 (2020): 72-73

Hohdatsu, Tsutomu, et al. “Antibody-dependent enhancement of feline infectious peritonitis virus infection in feline alveolar macrophages and human monocyte cell line U937 by serum of cats experimentally or naturally infected with feline coronavirus.” Journal of veterinary medical science 60.1 (1998): 49-55.

Leung, Hiu-lan, Nancy. Mechanism of antibody-dependent enhancement in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection (Thesis). The University of Hong Kong Libraries.

Yip, M. S., et al. “Antibody-dependent enhancement of SARS coronavirus infection and its role in the pathogenesis of SARS.” Hong Kong Med J 22.3 Suppl 4 (2016): 25-31.

Yip, Ming Shum, et al. “Antibody-dependent infection of human macrophages by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus.” Virology journal 11.1 (2014): 1-11.

Corapi, WAYNE V., C. W. Olsen, and FREDRIC W. Scott. “Monoclonal antibody analysis of neutralization and antibody-dependent enhancement of feline infectious peritonitis virus.” Journal of virology 66.11 (1992): 6695-6705.

Takano, Tomomi, et al. “Antibody-dependent enhancement of serotype II feline enteric coronavirus infection in primary feline monocytes.” Archives of virology 162.11 (2017): 3339-3345.

Yip, Ming S., et al. “Investigation of Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) of SARS coronavirus infection and its role in pathogenesis of SARS.” BMC Proceedings. Vol. 5. No. S1. BioMed Central, 2011.

Fierz, Walter, and Brigitte Walz. “Antibody dependent enhancement due to original antigenic sin and the development of SARS.” Frontiers in immunology 11 (2020).

Ricke, Darrell, and Robert W. Malone. “Medical countermeasures analysis of 2019-nCoV and vaccine risks for antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE).” Available at SSRN 3546070 (2020).

Jaume, Martial, et al. “Anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus spike antibodies trigger infection of human immune cells via a pH-and cysteine protease-independent FcγR pathway.” Journal of virology 85.20 (2011): 10582-10597.

Peron, Jean Pierre Schatzmann, and Helder Nakaya. “Susceptibility of the Elderly to SARS-CoV-2 Infection: ACE-2 Overexpression, Shedding, and Antibody-dependent Enhancement (ADE).” Clinics 75 (2020).

Yong, Chean Yeah, et al. “Recent advances in the vaccine development against Middle East respiratory syndrome-coronavirus.” Frontiers in microbiology 10 (2019): 1781.

Wang, Qidi, et al. “Immunodominant SARS coronavirus epitopes in humans elicited both enhancing and neutralizing effects on infection in non-human primates.” ACS infectious diseases 2.5 (2016): 361-376.

Olsen, CHRISTOPHER W., et al. “Monoclonal antibodies to the spike protein of feline infectious peritonitis virus mediate antibody-dependent enhancement of infection of feline macrophages.” Journal of virology 66.2 (1992): 956-965.

Hotez, Peter J., Maria Elena Bottazzi, and David B. Corry. “The potential role of TH17 immune responses in coronavirus immunopathology and vaccine-induced immune enhancement.” (2020).

Morens DM. Antibody-dependent enhancement of infection and the pathogenesis of viral disease. Clin Infect Dis. (1994) 19:500–12

Liu L, Wei Q, Lin Q, Fang J, Wang H, Kwok H, Tang H, Nishiura K, Peng J, Tan Z, et al. Anti‐spike IgG causes severe acute lung injury by skewing macrophage responses during acute SARS‐CoV infection. JCI Insight.2019;4(4):e123158.

de Alwis R, Chen S, Gan ES, Ooi EE. Impact of immune enhancement on Covid‐19 polyclonal hyperimmune globulin therapy and vaccine development. EBioMedicine2020;55:102768.

April 18, 2021 Posted by aletho | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | COVID-19 Vaccine | Leave a comment

If J&J Coronavirus Vaccine Shots Are Halted Because of Blood Clots, Why Not Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech Also?

By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | April 17, 2021

When the United States government’s Food and Drug Administration earlier this week called for temporarily halting the giving of Johnson & Johnson’s experimental coronavirus vaccine shots because of the developing of blood clots in people who have received the shots, I asked if we were seeing an example of regulatory favoritism for the new mRNA technology shots over more traditional vaccine shots such as the Johnson & Johnson shots. The question arises because the US government is still encouraging everyone to take experimental mRNA “vaccines” from Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech regarding which there are also many reports of injury and death.

While a variety or injuries and deaths have been reported after people have taken experimental coronavirus vaccine shots developed respectively by the three companies, if you focus in on just blood clot problems, those problems appear to arise after Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech experimental coronavirus shots as well as after Johnson & Johnson shots.

Megan Redshaw wrote Friday at the Children’s Health Defense website regarding adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) related to the blood clots in people who had taken any one of the three companies’ experimental vaccines:

Children’s Health Defense queried the VAERS data for a series of adverse events associated with the formation of clotting disorders and other related conditions. VAERS yielded a total of 795 reports for all three vaccines from Dec. 14, 2020, through April 8.Of the 795 cases reported, there were 400 reports attributed to Pfizer, 337 reports with Moderna and 56 reports with J&J — far more than the eight J&J cases under investigation, including the two additional cases added Wednesday.

As The Defender reported today, although the J&J and AstraZeneca COVID vaccines have been under the microscope for their potential to cause blood clots, mounting evidence suggests the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines also cause clots and related blood disorders. U.S. regulatory officials were alerted to the problem as far back as December 2020.

So why the different treatment for the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech shots?

April 17, 2021 Posted by aletho | Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, United States | Leave a comment

Is the Astra-Zeneca vaccine killing people?

By Sebastian Rushworth, M.D. | April 17, 2021

Poor Astra-Zeneca. The covid-19 vaccine that they had hoped would generate an endless tide of goodwill is instead turning in to one long public relations disaster. First it was the case of transverse myelitis that caused them to have to halt their vaccine trial temporarily. Then it turned out that they had given the wrong dose of vaccine to a bunch of participants in the trial. Then, when the preliminary trial data was published, the vaccine only appeared to be 70% effective at preventing covid-19, while vaccines by competitors Pfizer and Moderna were more than 90% effective. And now, perhaps worst of all, it appears that their vaccine has killed several previously healthy young healthcare workers. Poor poor Astra-Zeneca.

I am, of course, being facetious.

Let’s get in to the weeds of what’s actually happened with the Astra-Zeneca vaccine. But first, we need to discuss two rare diseases.

Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis is a condition in which a blood clot has formed in one of the veins that drain blood from the brain. Since the blood is not able to move forward through the vein, it gets stuck. This often results in a stroke (the death of part of the brain due to a lack of oxygen). Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis is very rare, occuring in roughly one in 300,000 people per year.

Heparin induced thrombocytopenia is an auto-immune disorder that sometimes occurs in people who are being treated with an anti-coagulant drug called heparin. Thrombocytopenia literally means “lack of platelets” (platelets are cells in the blood that form blood clots, in order to prevent bleeding, when a blood vessel is damaged). What happens is that the body starts to produce antibodies against platelets, which causes the platelets to bind to each other, forming blood clots. Since most of the platelets end up bound to each other, you no longer see very many free floating platelets in the blood stream, which is the cause of the thrombocytopenia.

And having lots of blood clots in the circulation is a very bad thing. If they get stuck and block off the flow of blood somewhere, then some part of the body starts to die. If they block off flow to part of the brain, the person has a stroke. If they block off flow to the heart, the person has a heart attack.

Thankfully, heparin induced thrombocytopenia is rare, which is why the drug is still used in clinical practice. And the condition doesn’t occur spontaneously in people who haven’t recently received heparin. You need to receive heparin in order to develop it.

Although people with heparin induced thrombocytopenia often develop clots in their blood stream, it is unusual for those clots to form in the cerebral venous sinus. So it is extremely uncommon for a patient to develop heparin induced thrombocytopenia in combination with a cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. In fact, it’s so uncommon that only a handful of cases have been reported in the entire medical literature. Up to now, that is.

And like I said, heparin induced thrombocytopenia only develops in people who have received heparin. In people who haven’t received the drug, the odds of developing the condition are precisely zero.

Two case series were published in the New England Journal of Medicine this week. A case series is basically just a collection of case reports, that have been gathered together in to one article because they are similar in some important way. The first case series comes from Norway. It concerns five patients who became acutely ill between seven and ten days after receiving the Astra-Zeneca vaccine. The patients were health care workers aged from 32 to 54 years old. All were fundamentally healthy before receiving the vaccine. One had mild asthma, and another had high blood pressure.

All five developed thrombocytopenia. Four out of the five developed cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (the fifth had clotting in veins at the base of the skull and in the abdomen instead). Three out of the five died. By the time these cases reached the Norwegian authorities and the dots were put together that this might have something to do with the Astra-Zeneca vaccine, 132,000 people in Norway had received the Astra-Zeneca vaccine.

So four people out of 132,000 who received the Astra-Zeneca vaccine developed the normally exceedingly rare combination of thrombocytopenia with cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. All had received the Astra-Zeneca vaccine seven to ten days earlier.

Yes, I agree, that is quite suspicious.

The second case series comes from Germany. It concerns eleven patients, aged from 22 to 49 years, who became ill between five and 16 days after receiving the Astra-Zeneca vaccine. Like in the Norwegian case series, all of the patients had thrombocytopenia, and at least nine of the eleven had cerebral venous thrombosis. Six of the patients died.

Blood from both the Norwegian patients and the German patients was subsequently tested for the type of antibodies that are typically seen in heparin induced thrombocytopenia. Every single test came back positive. Note that none of these people had been treated with heparin before the onset of symptoms, and several didn’t receive any heparin at any time point during their hospital stay.

Case series are considered to be one of the lowest tiers in the hierarchy of scientific evidence. Normally I wouldn’t bother to write an article about a case series. But here we have a constellation of signs and symptoms that is so uncommon that it’s previously only been described a handful of times in the medical literature, occurring again and again after a very specific exposure. Therefore, even with just two case series to back the claim up, we can be pretty certain that the Astra-Zeneca vaccine is the cause.

So, to conclude: yes, several young, otherwise healthy people have been killed by the Astra-Zeneca vaccine.

The incidence of this condition appears to be quite low. As mentioned, 132,000 people had received the Astra-Zeneca vaccine in Norway when this was discovered. And at least five of those people developed this new disease state, which the authors of the case series are calling VITT (vaccine induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia). If we assume (generously) that every case of vaccine side effects gets reported, that would mean an incidence of around one in 26,000.

However, the system for reporting of vaccine side effects is entirely dependent on three separate steps, and the system can easily fall down at any of the three steps. First, the treating clinician has to know that the patient has recently received a certain vaccine. Second, the clinician has to consider that the patient’s condition might have been caused by exposure to that vaccine. Third, the clinician has to take the time to contact the relevant authorities.

It is well known that most side effects never get reported. So what we are witnessing here could easily just be the tip of the iceberg. As societies, we’ve rushed headlong in to mass vaccination campaigns based on scant evidence. Most people seem unaware that the covid-19 vaccines have been approved based on only two months of preliminary trial data, and that the vaccine trials are still ongoing, and won’t be completed until 2022 at the earliest.

These case series show that a number of previously healthy young people have so far been killed by the Astra-Zeneca vaccine. Considering their age and underlying health status, the risk to them from covid-19 itself was infinitesimal. For healthy young people it is not at all clear that the potential benefits from the covid-19 vaccines outweigh the potential harms.

That doesn’t just go for the Astra-Zeneca vaccine. It goes for all the vaccines. It is quite possible that new revelations will arrive over the coming months concerning the other vaccines too. Now would be a good time for governments to change vaccination strategies, halt all plans to vaccinate healthy young people, and instead only vaccinate those who are at substantial risk of serious outcomes from covid-19.

It is unethical to vaccinate healthy young people until it is clear that the benefits to them outweigh the harms. At the present point in time, that is not at all clear.

April 17, 2021 Posted by aletho | Timeless or most popular | COVID-19 Vaccine | Leave a comment

Medical Mal-Practice Saying Covid Vaccine Is Safe | Dr. Roger Hodkinson

April 11, 2021

Dr. Roger Hodkinson, the Chairman of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada.

He received his general medical degrees from Cambridge University in the UK (M.A., M.B., B. Chir.) where he was a scholar at Corpus Christi College. Following a residency at the University of British Columbia he became a Royal College certified general pathologist (FRCPC) and also a Fellow of the College of American Pathologists (FCAP).

He is in good Standing with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta, and has been recognized by the Court of Queen’s Bench in Alberta as an expert in pathology.

April 16, 2021 Posted by aletho | Timeless or most popular, Video | COVID-19 Vaccine | Leave a comment

“Unprecedented Levels of Sickness”, Says NHS Consultant and “Whole Teams Being Taken Out”

Behind the cover-up and spin, the stark reality.

By Brandon Campbell | Ultimate Survival | April 14, 2021

The doctor who wrote it isn’t an “anti-vaxxer” (whatever that is exactly), a “conspiracy theorist” or “Covid denyer” or any of other other puerile labels hastily attached by the Vaccine Faction to anyone with the guts to speak out.

He is a conscientious medical doctor working on the front lines and observing at first hand what is happening to people who take the experimental vaccines and pseudo vaccines being recklessly pushed on them by the government.

As he rightly points out, if so many serious adverse reactions are already occurring in the short term, what lies in store for the vaccinated in the long term?

We would point out also that if so many, varied and extremely serious adverse reactions are occurring in the immediate-term that were not predicted and of which we were not forewarned, how sloppy has been the research and trials that preceded the release of these biochemical agents?

As the long term tests and trials were not done, nobody knows what is going to happen in the long term.

It is usual to do the trials and tests before releasing a medicine for general use. That way, if the research is done properly, we have a reasonable idea of how great are the risks and likelihood of adverse events.

An understanding of the true extent of the risks can then be assessed against how great are the risks of the disease.

The third factor is an understanding of whether the vax actually works in terms of doing what is claimed for other jabs (polio, measles, meningitis etc etc) and that is RENDERING YOU IMMUNE to the disease. By immune it is generally understood to mean what it says in Dictionary.com:

protected from a disease or the like, as by inoculation.
of or relating to the production of antibodies or lymphocytes that can react with a specific antigen.
exempt or protected.
not responsive or susceptible.

In the case of the Covid vaccines and pseudo vaccines, we get the following:

True extent of the risks:

Short-, medium- and long-term adverse effects not known. We simply cannot evaluate how much of a risk we are taking when we get the jab. A crude analogy is that of playing Russian Roulette without knowing how many bullets are in the chamber (one, two, four, none etc).

How dangerous is the disease being vaccinated against:

The government spin tries to paint the bug as deadly even though for the vast majority it isn’t. Untreated, however, it can be deadly for the elderly and already very ill and so forth, although the “with COVID” fatality stats issued by the government are clearly designed to mislead as had been covered by no end of commentators.

However, this second factor is where probably the greatest deceit lies: the painting of Covid19 as deadly.

Treatments for Covid have been know from the outset but suppressed or steadfastly ignored in every government ad, pronouncement or briefing so as to create the myth that the vaxes are “our only chance” or “our only way out of this”.

This is simply a calculated, cynical bare-faced lie. Known remedies, had they not been withheld ,would have reduced to near zero the risk of fatality from this very treatable bug. The best analogy I can think of is hiding or secretly destroying ninety percent of the food supply then declaring a famine and convincing everybody how great is their personal risk of dying of starvation.

So if the known, safe and effective treatments (that have been getting very effective results where conscientious frontline doctors have used them) had not been suppressed, we would not have had a situation in which we would be deciding whether to be vaxed because the bug would have been routinely dealt with using known medications that have been around for decades and have in all that time had no safety issues. The serious illnesses would have been at least eighty percent fewer and fatalities almost zero.

We would in, other words, have been making an informed choice as to whether to use an unproven vaccine still in the experimental stage and only authorised for emergency use and thus of uncertain risk levels (yet producing enough adverse events to cry out for caution) against the almost zero risk from a routinely treatable bug.

In fact there would have been no emergency to justify the use of experimental vaccines recklessly rushed into the marketplace.

In other words, this entire emergency with its rushed and highly suspicious vaccines, lockdowns, illnesses, fear relentlessly drummed into us by the media, fatalities, economic destruction, and so forth ad nauseam, this whole scenario derives not from the alleged pandemic but from the government’s negligence or malice aforethought in keeping the highly workable, effective and safe remedies away from the public.

The government alleges that 120,000 people have been killed by this bug. Well, if those numbers are to be believed, then around 90,000 (80 percent) or more of those would not have died had the remedies been made available and backed by the same investment of money, resources and energy as that devoted to the vax roll out, the test and trace and the propaganda blitz designed to terrify the people.

Thus the government has killed around 90,000 people through its own wilful negligence and when the full effects of the booby-trapped vaccines make themselves felt over the next few years, God-alone-knows how many more.

And bear in mind too, as if the above mentioned ineptitude and homicidal skulduggery were not enough, there is STILL a third factor to be taken into account, uncertainty as to whether the unneeded vaxes even work in terms of rendering you immune to the bug.

But our conjecture is all very well, so let’s hear what a medical doctor working with this fiasco on the front lines has to say. And as you read this bear in mind the pressure that is put on medical staff to keep quiet, so much so that any doctor or nurse speaking out knows they are doing do so at considerable personal risk. It speaks volumes both of their heroism and of the seriousness of what they are witnessing.

Rapid Response:

Re: Do doctors have to have the covid-19 vaccine?

Important editorial notice for readers: This is a rapid response (online comment by a third party) and not an article in The BMJ. It is attributed in a misleading way on certain websites and social media. The Editor, 08/04/2021.

I have had more vaccines in my life than most people and come from a place of significant personal and professional experience in relation to this pandemic, having managed a service during the first 2 waves and all the contingencies that go with that.

Nevertheless, what I am currently struggling with is the failure to report the reality of the morbidity caused by our current vaccination program within the health service and staff population. The levels of sickness after vaccination is unprecedented and staff are getting very sick and some with neurological symptoms which is having a huge impact on the health service function. Even the young and healthy are off for days, some for weeks, and some requiring medical treatment. Whole teams are being taken out as they went to get vaccinated together.

Mandatory vaccination in this instance is stupid, unethical and irresponsible when it comes to protecting our staff and public health. We are in the voluntary phase of vaccination, and encouraging staff to take an unlicensed product that is impacting on their immediate health, and I have direct experience of staff contracting Covid AFTER vaccination and probably transmitting it. In fact, it is clearly stated that these vaccine products do not offer immunity or stop transmission. In which case why are we doing it?

There is no longitudinal safety data (a couple of months of trial data at best) available and these products are only under emergency licensing. What is to say that there are no longitudinal adverse effects that we may face that may put the entire health sector at risk?

Flu is a massive annual killer, it inundates the health system, it kills young people, the old the comorbid, and yet people can chose whether or not they have that vaccine (which had been around for a long time). And you can list a whole number of other examples of vaccines that are not mandatory and yet they protect against diseases of higher consequence.

Coercion and mandating medical treatments on our staff, of members of the public especially when treatments are still in the experimental phase, are firmly in the realms of a totalitarian Nazi dystopia and fall far outside of our ethical values as the guardians of health.

I and my entire family have had COVID. This as well as most of my friends, relatives and colleagues. I have recently lost a relatively young family member with comorbidities to heart failure, resulting from the pneumonia caused by Covid.

Despite this, I would never debase myself and agree, that we should abandon our liberal principles and the international stance on bodily sovereignty, free informed choice and human rights and support unprecedented coercion of professionals, patients and people to have experimental treatments with limited safety data. This and the policies that go with this are more of a danger to our society than anything else we have faced over the last year.

What has happened to “my body my choice?” What has happened to scientific and open debate? If I don’t prescribe an antibiotic to a patient who doesn’t need it as they are healthy, am I anti-antibiotics? Or an antibiotic-denier? Is it not time that people truly thought about what is happening to us and where all of this is taking us?

April 16, 2021 Posted by aletho | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | COVID-19 Vaccine | Leave a comment

Norway Stops Experimental AstraZeneca COVID Shots: “Higher Risk Associated with AstraZeneca Vaccine than from COVID-19 Disease”

By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | April 15, 2021

Norway became the second country today to halt injections of the experimental AstraZeneca COVID shots, joining Denmark.

A statement issued by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health stated what many of us in the Alternative Media have been stating for months now: The COVID “vaccine” is more dangerous than COVID itself, especially for young people.

Since use of the AstraZeneca vaccine was put on hold on 11th March, the Norwegian Institute of Public Health has considered further use of the AstraZeneca vaccine in Norway, together with other experts.

“We now know significantly more about the association between the AstraZeneca vaccine and the rare but severe incidents with low platelet counts, blood clots and haemorrhages, than when Norway decided to pause use of the AstraZeneca-vaccine in March,” says Geir Bukholm, Director of the Division of Infection Control and Environmental Health at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health.

“Based on this knowledge, we come with a recommendation to remove the AstraZeneca vaccine from the Coronavirus Immunisation Programme in Norway,” says Bukholm.

Bukholm points out that this has not been an easy recommendation to make. It has a direct consequence for when the risk groups can receive a coronavirus vaccine, with subsequent protection, while also having an impact on when it will be possible to lift infection control measures.

Higher risk associated with AstraZeneca vaccine than from COVID-19 disease in Norway

Having come a long way in vaccinating the oldest citizens, Norway has reduced the risk of death for many of those most at risk. Since most of the elderly have either been vaccinated, or soon will be, this means that continued use of the vaccine would mainly be among the under-65 years age group if we were to use this vaccine in Norway.

Calculations have been performed based on Norwegian data where the risk of dying from COVID-19 disease among the different age groups is compared with the risk of dying from the severe, but rare, condition with severe blood clots observed after AstraZeneca vaccination.

“Since there are few people who die from COVID-19 in Norway, the risk of dying after vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine would be higher than the risk of dying from the disease, particularly for younger people,” says Bukholm.

In addition, there is reason to assume that there is scepticism about using the AstraZeneca vaccine in Norway, and it is uncertain how many people would have accepted an offer of this vaccine now. (Source.)

The Norwegian Institute of Public Health also announced that they are not pursuing purchasing any of the Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) COVID shots either.

Postponed rollout of Janssen vaccine

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) announced on 9th April that they have begun signal management for the COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen to investigate whether there is an association between the vaccine and several reported cases of severe blood clots among vaccinated people. Janssen has announced a pause in deliveries to Europe after the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended a temporary pause in the use of the Janssen vaccine, following reports of several cases of severe blood clots after vaccination in the USA.

“Use of the Janssen vaccine in Norway has been put on hold until more information becomes available from ongoing investigations,” explains Bukholm. (Source.)

The World Owes Gratitude to Norwegian Medical Professor Pål Andre Holme

Norwegian physician and professor of medicine at Oslo University Hospital, Pål Andre Holme, is the courageous doctor who told the world last month that the AstraZeneca COVID shots were causing fatal blood clots, and that young people were dying needlessly.

His work and his willingness to call out Big Pharma is what has probably led to Norway and Denmark halting these experimental injections, stating that the injections pose a greater risk for young people than the COVID virus, and his work I am sure paved the way for researchers to look at similar results with the Johnson and Johnson experimental injections.

Chief physician and professor Pål Andre Holme told Norwegian papers on Thursday, just hours before the EMA was set to release the findings of its promised “safety review” (which was conducted even more hastily than the initial vaccine studies), that he has a new theory about what caused the reactions in the health workers, and unfortunately, per Holme, the AstraZeneca jab acted as the trigger.

“The reason for the condition of our patients has been found,” chief physician and professor Pål Andre Holme announced to Norwegian national newspaper VG today.

He has lead the work to find out why three health workers under the age of 50 were hospitalized with serious blood clots and low levels of blood platelets after having taken the AstraZeneca Covid vaccine. One of the health workers died on Monday.

The experts have worked on a theory that it was in fact the vaccine which triggered an unexpected and powerful immune response – a theory they now believe they have confirmed.

“Our theory that this is a powerful immune response which most likely was caused by the vaccine has been found.

In collaboration with experts in the field from the University Hospital of North Norway HF, we have found specific antibodies against blood platelets that can cause these reactions, and which we know from other fields of medicine, but then with medical drugs as the cause of the reaction,” the chief physician explains to VG.

Though he acknowledged the theory was just that – a theory, Holme insisted there was nothing else that could have triggered such an intense immune response in all three patients. The vaccine was the only common factor.

When asked to clarify why he says “most likely” in the quote, Holme confidently responds that the reason for these rare cases of blood clots has been found.

“We have the reason. Nothing but the vaccine can explain why these individuals had this immune response,” he states.

VG also asks how Holme can know that the immune response is not caused by something other than the vaccine.

“There is nothing in the patient history of these individuals that can give such a powerful immune response. I am confident that the antibodies that we have found are the cause, and I see no other explanation than it being the vaccine which triggers it,” he responds.

In an attempt to explain to readers why they should care, Holme concluded: “We’re talking about relatively young people that have become very sick here, and died, that probably wouldn’t have got such a serious case of Covid.” (Source.)

Let’s hope Norwegian Health Politicians react to the news of the halt of the AstraZeneca COVID injections better than the head of the Danish Medicines Agency, Tanja Erichsen, did yesterday at a press conference where Turkish TV recorded her passing out on live TV.

No explanation was given for her fainting. She was reportedly taken to a hospital and later released.

April 15, 2021 Posted by aletho | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | COVID-19 Vaccine | Leave a comment

Another of the Many Dark Sides of Vaccines. Getting the “Vaccine” After Having Had the Infection

Covid Vaccines Can Be Deadly for Patients who have been Previously Diagnosed with COVID-19

By Luke Yamaguchi and Dr. Gary G. Kohls | Global Research | April 12, 2021

Introduction by Dr. Gary G. Kohls

If Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca or any of the host of for-profit, Vaccine Pushing, corporate-connected entities that inhabit the CDC, the NIAID, the NIH, the Departments of Health, Dr Fauci, Dr Osterholm, Dr Offit, Dr Hotez, “Dr” Bill Gates, the World Economic Forum, the WHO, your personal physician, your nurse practitioner, your neighbors or friends, your hospital or clinic CEOs or your talking heads on TV urge you to get the Covid shot after already having had the disease (or perhaps even simply having had a “positive” PCR test along with some influenza-like symptoms), you will know that you are being given irresponsible, dangerous, potentially lethal advice from a relatively vaccinology-illiterate source that probably has financial conflicts of interest, and you should search elsewhere for unbiased, ethical advice.

Shamefully, all of the truly science-based, vaccinology-literate sources of accurate information have had their “dangerous” books figuratively burned or black-listed/banned from YouTube, Google, FaceBook, etc,. – a reality that should make everybody eager to know exactly what is so threatening to the industries of Big Pharma, Big Media, Big Medicine and assorted for-profit governmental agencies, all of which that have been turning once-honorable vaccinologists into crass pseudo-scientists who do what their corporate paymasters demand of them.)

Getting a Covid “vaccine” after having had the infection should be regarded as a relative contradiction until comprehensive clinical studies are done that have established both short and long-term safety and efficacy. So far there are no such research studies being done. Vaccine Pushers are not interested in getting to those truths and the propaganda has been so intense, that the narrative has been established, so that admitting that there are problems is not an option.

However there is already plenty of evidence exposing the dangers of blindly inoculating everybody on the planet (Bill Gates wants all 7+billion people – including infants – to be inoculated and then given regular booster shots with any one or more of the experimental Covid “vaccines”!). The following article summarized important information that is accumulating in the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) – recognizing that only about 1% of actual adverse events ever get reported to the site.

The author of this important piece – Luke Yamaguchi – had to do a lot of painstaking research to collate the information on the patients (as of April 1, 2021) that died after receiving the Covid-19 shot. Because the full article came to well over 5000 words, I have abbreviated for this Duty to Warn article it by deleting the clinical data for each of the patients. That information can be easily obtained by clicking on the link provided.

Dr. Gary G. Kohls, April 11, 2021

***

On January 26, Dr. Hooman Noorchashm sent an open letter to the FDA and Pfizer warning of the potential dangers of giving Covid vaccines to people who have already had (or currently have) COVID-19. As a physician-scientist with an MD and PhD in cellular immunology, Dr. Noorchashm based his warning on an “immunological prognostication” outlined below:

People who have recently had (or currently have) COVID-19 can have viral antigens present in the endothelial lining of blood vessels, among other tissues.
If these viral antigens are present, the immune response triggered by Covid vaccination will target these tissues causing inflammation and damage.
In blood vessels, this can result in blood clot formation with the potential for major complications.

In other words, people who have previously had COVID-19 will be at greater risk of adverse events if they receive Covid vaccinations. To be clear, this is a theory based on an understanding of immunology. But is there any evidence to support this hypothesis?

According to an article in The Telegraph, recent data shows that Covid vaccine side effects are seen up to three times more often in people who have previously had COVID-19. The data comes from the King’s College ZOE app which has logged details from more than 700,000 vaccinations. The ZOE data shows that 12.2% of people reported side effects after their first dose of Pfizer vaccine, but that jumped to 35.7% in people who had previously had COVID-19. For the AstraZeneca vaccine, 31.9% of people reported symptoms following their shot, rising to 52.7% for people who had previously been infected with COVID-19.

In addition to this data, anecdotal stories in the news suggest that some people who previously had COVID-19 and recovered, died after receiving a Covid vaccination.

Dr. J Barton Williams, a 36-year-old orthopedic surgeon from Tennessee, is one such case. According to a local news report, Dr. Williams died of a “COVID-related illness” known as multi-system inflammatory syndrome that causes inflammation in the blood vessels and other tissues. He also tested positive for COVID antibodies, meaning he previously had COVID-19 but never knew it. Dr. Williams died just weeks after receiving his second Covid vaccination.

It is ironic that he survived COVID-19 without even knowing it, only to die after receiving a Covid vaccine intended to save his life.

In another news report, a California resident who had tested positive for COVID-19 in December, died just hours after receiving his Covid vaccine on January 21, 2021.

Turning our attention to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), we see many such cases of people who got COVID-19 and survived, only to die soon after receiving their Covid vaccine.

What follows in Annex is a compilation of such cases.

ANNEX

Deaths Same Day as Vaccination

Deaths One Day After Vaccination

VAERS ID: 1082717

VAERS ID: 1106667

VAERS ID: 1092651

VAERS ID: 949474

VAERS ID: 946225

VAERS ID: 1046915

VAERS ID: 1000280

VAERS ID: 937773

VAERS ID: 1095238

VAERS ID: 944732

VAERS ID: 970976

VAERS ID: 974172

VAERS ID: 1074955

VAERS ID: 946959

VAERS ID: 1075097

VAERS ID: 1125079

Deaths Two Days After Vaccination

VAERS ID: 1003382

VAERS ID: 1020227

VAERS ID: 1032873

VAERS ID: 1105193

VAERS ID: 1038635

VAERS ID: 1038442

Deaths Three Days After Vaccination

VAERS ID: 1112164

VAERS ID: 965561

VAERS ID: 982541

VAERS ID: 935343

VAERS ID: 1030712

VAERS ID: 992599

VAERS ID: 1022397

VAERS ID: 1075657

Deaths Four or More Days After Vaccination

VAERS ID: 1006303

VAERS ID: 998138

VAERS ID: 1069118

VAERS ID: 979926

VAERS ID: 1000228

VAERS ID: 1006316

VAERS ID: 952881

VAERS ID: 1012047

VAERS ID: 1010114

VAERS ID: 1033448

VAERS ID: 1055149

VAERS ID: 953754

VAERS ID: 1017675

The original source of this article is The Dark Side of Vaccines

April 14, 2021 Posted by aletho | Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine | Leave a comment

Rolling Out Paedophile Enablers To Promote The COVID-19 Vaccine

Wake TF Up Weekly | April 14, 2021

If we live in a society that truly advocates for informed consent, it is paramount that we only take advice from reliable sources. It is also crucial to ensure that those who may be of a nefarious nature, attempting to sway our decisions in a particular direction, are kept at an arm’s length.

For example, you would never take medical advice from a trio of genocidal mass murderers.

Hence, on Monday, when I learned on watching UK Column that Edwina Currie was propagating for vaccine uptake, I took notice. In her video piece, she did the dirty work of her handlers, as instructed, playing her part in the stage show, doing what politicians do best – sowing division.

Referring to those who will decide against being vaccinated, or those who cannot be vaccinated, she exclaimed;

“Exercising their freedom not to have a vaccine? And they’re ‘perfectly healthy’? I don’t want them sitting next to me in theatre. I don’t want them standing next to me at the theatre bar. I don’t want them next to me or anywhere near me, or even on the same carriage on the train. So yea, they can exercise their freedom by staying at home. But millions and millions of us – 15 million pensioners – can’t wait to get out. You know what the main side effect of being vaccinated is, don’t you? And that’s itchy feet. We can go out there and I think there’s an obligation on our government to try and keep us as safe as possible. We are the majority.”

It should first be mentioned that ‘itchy feet’ is not the main side effect of being vaccinated, as Edwina points out. Far more common, as per the data of the UK’s government-approved Yellow Card system are cardiac disorders, of which there have been almost 6000 cases, and psychiatric disorders, of which there have been, give or take a few, 10,000 reports. This is on top of the 92 cases of blindness, the 55 spontaneous abortions, the 6700 blood disorders, 608 anaphylactic reactions and the 2000+ immune system disorders. And of course, there is another known side effect that can be considered a little more serious than mere itchy feet syndrome – namely, death – which has occurred 786 times. Surely worth a mention? Or why let facts spoil a good Big Pharma marketing promotion?

It should also be mentioned to Edwina that the idea the COVID-19 vaccine will keep her safe is erroneous. Recently released documents by the UK government predict that the next wave of COVID-19 infection will see the majority of hospitalisations and deaths ‘dominated’ by people who have already been vaccinated. Straight from the mouths of the corrupt horses that she served for decades. Perhaps, it should be the unvaccinated who are best avoiding people like Edwina if that’s the case. But why mention any of that when the COVID cult you shill for is watching?

In fact, sitting next to Edwina or standing next to her at a bar may not be desirable for a lot of people when we consider her background – and it has nothing to do with her immune system or vaccination status. Having her sat in a separate carriage on a train may indeed be worth contemplating – particularly if the train is bound for a prison. Surely, when one enables the mass rape and rampant sexual abuse of innocent children, there is no alternative destination for them, right?

British MP, Peter Morrison was Private Parliamentary Secretary to Margaret Thatcher when she was Prime Minister of the UK and, like a long list of Westminster squad members, he was a notorious paedophile. Morrison would prey on children who were resident in care homes in the North Wales region. Between the years of 1974 and 1990, it is believed that over 600 children were abused in these institutions, of which the MP was a regular visitor. The depraved pervert was on two separate occasions found in the company of young boys in public lavatories by police officers where he would subject them to sexual abuse. In the typically British tradition of governments and law enforcement agencies allowing paedophiles to abuse, without the consequence of punishment, Morrison was not charged by British police, who we now know in 2021 are more suited to harassing and assaulting women, children and senior citizens than they are to putting away actual criminals such as paedophiles.

But police officers were not the only people to have turned a blind eye to the crimes of Peter Morrison. The Prime Minister did too. Margaret Thatcher had been warned by her own personal bodyguard, Barry Strevens, who was aware of claims that the MP was involved in orgies of abuse involving children. Instead of taking action to stop the paedophilia and having Morrison investigated and charged, the most powerful woman in the nation did nothing – besides subsequently promoting Morrison to Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party, that is.

As the years went on, victims would begin to come forward testifying to the crimes of Morrison, including a man who claimed to have been plied with alcohol before being raped by him at the age of 14 when he was an occupant of the now infamous Elm Guest House. Then in 2015, an investigation was initiated into a possible link between Morrison and the murder of an 8-year-old boy by the name of Vishal Mehrotra, who died mysteriously in 1981. It wasn’t until 2020 when an independent inquiry was carried out, that it was proven many top government officials were fully aware of these crimes and instead of intervening to prevent further rape and abuse, decided to look the other way.

One of those government officials was Edwina Currie.

In 2002, Edwina wrote and published her autobiography. In it she broached the topic of Morrison’s paedophilia and very clearly stated that she knew he was ‘a noted paederast’, and had heard him admit to this. Edwina would even go so far as to defend him when she opined that the crimes he engaged in would not be illegal today. As your average person will be aware, raping 14-year-old children after setting them drunk is as illegal and immoral today as it was back when Morrison was doing it. So is having sex with boys in public toilets. Not in the eyes of this demented woman though. To this day, she sees nothing wrong with her failure to act, as the lives of children were destroyed at the hands of a political reprobate. When quizzed about this she claimed that she had no proof that Morrison was a rapist, contradicting the claims in her book that she knew perfectly well and that he himself was not shy about talking of his twisted sexual preferences.

5 years, neither Edwina nor any of her colleagues did anything to stop the child abuse that they knew was occurring under their very noses. The ‘open secret’ led to continued sexual exploitation of vulnerable children in care homes. Refusing to act on the information that was present allowed the sick pervert, Morrison, to resume his rape and assault of boys. And now, today, this woman who actively and admittedly enabled a cycle of abuse to take place at the hands of a filthy vulture wants to lecture the public, looking down her big nose at those who value their freedom? A woman who allowed children to be defiled and degraded is virtue signalling to the public, brashly condemning those who don’t obey the dictates of the criminals in Westminster and their slithering, greasy pharmaceutical companions? Is this woman for real?

She should be hanging her head in shame every day of her existence, knowing that she allowed the deranged psychopaths of her institution to rape children. She should be summoned to court for her failure as a human being to prevent the unmentionable acts that were committed on the innocent and locked up for her complicity. Instead, she is publicly carrying out the wishes of a criminal cabal who will stop at nothing to see that humanity is fractured. Instead, she bows to the demands of a cesspit full of reptiles who are determined to create an underclass of citizens. She wilfully, with glee, mocks the people who are ‘exercising their freedom’ – the same people who paid her salary throughout the entirety of her useless political career and received zilch from her in return for their contributions.

Except of course for one thing which no one will ever forget. It was righteous-acting Edwina, who sees herself as such a responsible citizen that she would not dare risk sitting next to an unvaccinated person in a theatre lest she picks up and spreads a virus with a 99.97% survival rate, who introduced one of the most maniacal, evil and disgusting paedophiles/necrophiles in history into the lives of the children of Broadmoor hospital. I am of course talking about Jimmy Saville. It was indeed Vaccina Edwina who rubber-stamped and signed off on Saville’s access to the hospital, giving him unrestricted passage to the patients. As is now well known, Saville would go on to become a serial abuser of children and the tales of his monstrous, unnatural behaviour would leave scars on the minds of those who heard them first hand. It would devastate the lives of those who had to live them.

Saville was an individual Edwina once described as being ‘an amazing man’, stating he ‘has my full confidence’. This, despite the fact that, many civil servants in her circle had been privy to rumours that Saville had a reputation as a sleazebag, with a particular preference for younger girls. Regardless, Saville’s position in the hospital was approved, and with Edwina’s freshly stamped blessings he launched a campaign of perversion on children on an unimaginably horrific scale.

This is Edwina Currie – who views you as a second class citizen if you do not agree to be injected with a dangerous, experimental, unapproved, unnecessary jab that may leave you paralysed, blind or dead.

In my book, The COVID-19 Illusion; A Cacophony of Lies, I show how the COVID-19 pandemic is an illusion designed to bring about a New World Order that will enslave every man, woman and child alive and change the very essence of our society if it is allowed to happen. Those who designed this illusion are deeply disturbed, shameless creatures with zero empathy. They think that they can do or say whatever they like without any accountability. A perfect example of such a person is Edwina Currie. Coldheartedly and devoid of empathy, this psychopath has allowed children to be brutally raped. Callously she enabled paedophilia to be carried out inside what were believed to have been trusted establishment buildings. Edwina has no remorse and does not feel at all guilty about this. She is a soulless narcissist; unfeeling and uncompassionate. Yet, she believes that, if you chose not to be vaccinated, it is you who is unworthy and it is you who society should shun. Not her.

This is how detached from reality these people are. They are swimming in a sea of malevolence, helplessly corrupted to the core. They are the people who spit on the freedoms that were earned over centuries of battle by men and women with dignity and pride. They want to infect that freedom with their poisonous Communitarianism, which will benefit them in their Ivory Towers as the rest of humanity suffers. If you do indeed let them, they will succeed. Whether you are vaccinated or unvaccinated, people like Edwina Currie are a threat to your existence and a stain on your contentment and happiness. They are obsessively enabling the psychopathic leeches above them, as they destroy Western values. Just like Edwina sided with the predators who stalked Broadmoor and the North Wales children’s homes, she is now siding with the sinister forces that want to create hell on earth for you and your family. She will attempt to do this by turning you against your fellow human being. She will try to convince you that those who are not beholden to illegal government dictates are dangerous and dirty. She will try to brainwash you into believing this garbage, as she demonizes what she thinks is the minority and boasts of being part of the majority – exactly like the Nazis did in the 1930s.

Crazed and deranged people like Edwina Currie, who turn their backs on the vulnerable when they are being abused, are only relevant when people are divided.

Unite. Don’t allow her to be relevant.

April 14, 2021 Posted by aletho | Civil Liberties | COVID-19 Vaccine, Human rights, UK | Leave a comment

Use of J&J’s Hazardous Covid Vaccine Suspended in US

By Stephen Lendman | April 14, 2021

In response to potentially life threatening blood clots showing up in individuals jabbed with J & J’s experimental, hazardous covid vaccine, the CDC, FDA, and HHS recommended suspension of its use, a joint statement saying the following:

“As of April 12, more than 6.8 million doses of the Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) vaccine have been administered in the US.”

The “CDC and FDA are reviewing data involving six reported US cases of a rare and severe type of blood clot in individuals after receiving the J&J vaccine.”

“In these cases, a type of blood clot called cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) was seen in combination with low levels of blood platelets (thrombocytopenia).”

“All six cases occurred among women between the ages of 18 and 48, and symptoms occurred 6 to 13 days after vaccination.”

Reported numbers of blood clots and other serious adverse events may be the tip of the iceberg.

Mass-jabbing for covid since last December with experimental, rushed to market drugs pose serious — potentially irreversible — harm to millions of unwitting people.

Suspending use of AstraZeneca’s covid vaccine earlier in Europe and J & J’s in the US isn’t good enough.

Use of these hazardous drugs should be permanently halted.

The same goes for Pfizer/Moderna’s mRNA covid drugs.

Growing numbers of individuals have already been harmed. Countless thousands died.

As long as these drugs continue to be used, adverse events and death will keep increasing exponentially.

Knowing the hazards these drugs pose, the FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMS) OK’d their use under “emergency” conditions that don’t exist.

On Wednesday, the CDC will convene an Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices meeting to further review serious blood clots from use of J & J’s covid vaccine.

It advised individuals experiencing severe headache, abdominal pain, leg pain, or shortness of breath within three weeks after being jabbed with the vaccine to seek medical care.

After the European Medicines Agency suspended use of AstraZeneca’s covid vaccine because of blood clots earlier, the agency once again OK’d its use —falsely claiming benefits outweigh the risks.

Since use of J & J’s covid drug began in late February, various sites in four US states halted use because of severe reactions.

An earlier article discussed what the Corporate Research Project called J & J’s disturbing “rap sheet.”

In August 2019, Cleveland County, Oklahoma District Court Judge Thad Balkman ruled for the state against Johnson & Johnson, saying:

J&J “caused an opioid crisis that is evidenced by increased rates of addiction, overdose deaths and neonatal abstinence syndrome, in Oklahoma,” adding:

“(M)isleading marketing and promotion (of the company’s opioids) compromised the health and safety of thousands of Oklahomans.”

“We have proven that Johnson & Johnson have built its billion dollar brand out of greed and on the backs of pain and suffering of innocent people” — despite warnings from its scientific advisors.

Oklahoma’s Attorney General Mike Hunter called J & J an “opioid kingpin.”

Lead state attorney Brad Beckworth said “(w)e’ve shown that J & J was at the root cause of this opioid crisis,” adding:

“It made billions of dollars from it over a 20-year period (yet) always denied responsibility” for selling hazardous to health drugs to unwitting consumers.

Court rulings against the firm forced it to pay billions of dollars in damages.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder earlier accused the company of “recklessly put(ting) at risk the health of some of the most vulnerable members of our society — including young children, the elderly and the disabled.”

Its hazardous covid vaccine is produced by its Janssen division.

Earlier, it produced the anthrax vaccine administered to around 150,000 US forces deployed to the Persian Gulf for the 1990-91 Gulf War — even though concerns were raised about adverse longterm health consequences.

Experimental anthrax vaccines contained squalene-based adjuvants that caused severe autoimmune diseases and deaths among Gulf War veterans years later.

Illnesses included rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, neuritis risking later paralysis, uveitis risking blindness, neurological harm, congenital disabilities in offspring, cognitive impairment, and systemic lupus erythematosus, among other health issues.

From 1990 to 2001, over two million doses of anthrax vaccine were administered to US military personnel.

Squalene adjuvants are a key ingredient in many vaccines.

J & J uses them in its covid vaccine.

There’s nothing remotely safe and effective about mass-jabbing with hazardous, experimental Pfizer/Moderna’s DNA altering mRNA technology or J & J/AstraZeneca’s covid vaccines.

Using them as directed risks serious near-or-longer-term harm to health and no protection from seasonal flu-now called covid.

April 14, 2021 Posted by aletho | Aletho News | COVID-19 Vaccine, United States | Leave a comment

Danish drug regulator FAINTS at press conference announcing AstraZeneca vaccine halt

RT | April 14, 2021

Denmark will completely abandon the rollout of AstraZeneca’s Covid-19 vaccine due to a risk of rare blood clots. One of the country’s top drug officials passed out at a press conference delivering the news.

As National Health Board Director Soeren Brostroem announced the decision, the Danish Medicines Agency’s acting director of pharmacovigilance, Tanja Erichsen, fainted and collapsed to the ground.

Tanja Erichsen fra Lægemiddelstyrelsen falder om på pressemøde. Skulle være OK igen. #astrazeneca #covid19 #corona #coeonadk #covid19dk pic.twitter.com/zWz6ZjzL68

— Engelhardt 🇺🇦 (@engelhardtcph) April 14, 2021

Erichsen’s fall sparked panic, as Brostroem and other officials rushed over to check on her. The medicines agency later announced that she had regained consciousness, but was taken to hospital for a checkup. No explanation was given for her fainting.

Denmark was the first country in the world to suspend the rollout of AstraZeneca’s Vaxzevria shot in March, though a number of other countries followed suit, among them France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Denmark, however, is the first country in the world to permanently ditch the British-Swedish developed jab.

“In the midst of an epidemic, it has been a difficult decision to continue our vaccination program without an effective and readily available vaccine against Covid-19,” Brostroem said at the press conference. “However, we have other vaccines at our disposal, and the epidemic is currently under control.”

The suspension is expected to push the country’s vaccination timeline back by “some weeks,” according to a report from Danish broadcaster TV2.

Denmark began vaccinations in December, and has to date approved four vaccines – from AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech. Only two shots, from Moderna and Pfizer, are currently available to Danes, after Johnson & Johnson delayed its own European rollout on Tuesday, due to several cases of blood clots being reported in the US.

April 14, 2021 Posted by aletho | Aletho News | AstraZeneca, COVID-19 Vaccine, Denmark | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Iran Blockade Complications

Aletho News Videos

or go to

Aletho News Archives – Video-Images

Book Review

Alarmist climate science as a textbook example of groupthink

By Paul MacRae | May 1, 2012

… Groupthink was extensively studied by Yale psychologist Irving L. Janis and described in his 1982 book Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes.

Janis was curious about how teams of highly intelligent and motivated people—the “best and the brightest” as David Halberstam called them in his 1972 book of the same name—could have come up with political policy disasters like the Vietnam War, Watergate, Pearl Harbor and the Bay of Pigs. Similarly, in 2008 and 2009, we saw the best and brightest in the world’s financial sphere crash thanks to some incredibly stupid decisions, such as allowing sub-prime mortgages to people on the verge of bankruptcy.

In other words, Janis studied why and how groups of highly intelligent professional bureaucrats and, yes, even scientists, screw up, sometimes disastrously and almost always unnecessarily. The reason, Janis believed, was “groupthink.” He quotes Nietzsche’s observation that “madness is the exception in individuals but the rule in groups,” and notes that groupthink occurs when “subtle constraints … prevent a [group] member from fully exercising his critical powers and from openly expressing doubts when most others in the group appear to have reached a consensus.”[2]

Janis found that even if the group leader expresses an openness to new ideas, group members value consensus more than critical thinking; groups are thus led astray by excessive “concurrence-seeking behavior.”[3] Therefore, Janis wrote, groupthink is “a model of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.”[4]

The groupthink syndrome

The result is what Janis calls “the groupthink syndrome.” This consists of three main categories of symptoms:

1. Overestimate of the group’s power and morality, including “an unquestioned belief in the group’s inherent morality, inclining the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their actions.” [emphasis added]

2. Closed-mindedness, including a refusal to consider alternative explanations and stereotyped negative views of those who aren’t part of the group’s consensus. The group takes on a “win-lose fighting stance” toward alternative views.[5]

3. Pressure toward uniformity, including “a shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgments conforming to the majority view”; “direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments against any of the group’s stereotypes”; and “the emergence of self-appointed mind-guards … who protect the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions.”[6]

It’s obvious that alarmist climate science—as explicitly and extensively revealed in the Climatic Research Unit’s “Climategate” emails—shares all of these defects of groupthink, including a huge emphasis on maintaining consensus, a sense that because they are saving the world, alarmist climate scientists are beyond the normal moral constraints of scientific honesty (“overestimation of the group’s power and morality”), and vilification of those (“deniers”) who don’t share the consensus. … Read full article

Blog Roll

Subscribe to Aletho News

Enter your email address to receive new posts by email.

Email Address:

Join 2,459 other subscribers
Visits Since December 2009
- 7,489,792 hits
Looking for something?

Search for:
Archives
Archives
Calendar

May 2026

M T W T F S S

1 2 3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17

18 19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28 29 30 31

« Apr
Categories

Aletho News Civil Liberties Corruption Deception Economics Environmentalism Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism Fake News False Flag Terrorism Full Spectrum Dominance Illegal Occupation Mainstream Media, Warmongering Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity Militarism Progressive Hypocrite Russophobia Science and Pseudo-Science Solidarity and Activism Subjugation - Torture Supremacism, Social Darwinism Timeless or most popular Video War Crimes Wars for Israel
Tags
9/11 Afghanistan Africa al-Qaeda Australia BBC Benjamin Netanyahu Brazil Canada CDC Central Intelligence Agency China CIA CNN Covid-19 COVID-19 Vaccine Donald Trump Egypt European Union Facebook FBI FDA France Gaza Germany Google Hamas Hebron Hezbollah Hillary Clinton Human rights Hungary India Iran Iraq ISIS Israel Israeli settlement Japan Jerusalem Joe Biden Korea Latin America Lebanon Libya Middle East National Security Agency NATO New York Times North Korea NSA Obama Pakistan Palestine Poland Qatar Russia Sanctions against Iran Saudi Arabia Syria The Guardian Turkey Twitter UAE UK Ukraine United Nations United States USA Venezuela Washington Post West Bank WHO Yemen Zionism

May 2026
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
	1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18	19	20	21	22	23	24
25	26	27	28	29	30	31

Aletho News
If Americans Knew
No Tricks Zone
Contact:

atheonews (at) gmail.com
Disclaimer

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fair Use

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

DMCA Contact

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

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

We will respond and take necessary action immediately.

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

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

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Featured Video

Book Review

By Paul MacRae | May 1, 2012

Blog Roll

Subscribe to Aletho News

Visits Since December 2009

Looking for something?

Archives

Calendar

Categories

Tags

Contact:

Disclaimer

Site info