By Roger Watson | TCW Defending Freedom | September 25, 2023
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), quick to approve an experimental and untested Covid-19 ‘vaccine’, is now stalling over approval of a new device that could save the lives of people who go into anaphylactic shock.
Anaphylactic shock, or anaphylaxis, is an extreme immune system reaction to an allergy which leads to a massive release of chemicals around the body, principally histamine, in an effort to deal with an allergen. This reaction of the body is, in fact, an overreaction and the response leads to difficulties with breathing and sudden and dramatic drop in blood pressure (shock). If untreated it can be fatal.
One of the first lines of treatment for anaphylaxis is an EpiPen which can be carried by those who know they have allergies. It is a device containing the drug noradrenaline (called norepinephrine in the US) that counteracts the shock induced by anaphylaxis. However, an EpiPen requires the injection of noradrenaline intramuscularly. This is invasive and if the person is unable to administer the drug others can be reluctant, either not knowing how to use the device or being afraid to. Also, the drug has to get from the musculature to the bloodstream to be effective. This can take five to ten minutes during which time the person may die.
How much better if noradrenaline could be administered more directly into the bloodstream. Manufacturing a device to do this intravenously, far less expecting anyone other than a medic, nurse or paramedic to have the expertise to do this in an emergency, is a tall order. But drugs can be administered rapidly into the bloodstream nasally and a company, ARS Pharmaceuticals, has developed an injection-free device for administering noradrenaline nasally in the form of an epinephrine nasal spray.
What’s not to like, you may think. Well, the FDA don’t like it and have withheld approval pending further testing. The FDA objections are based on the need for further clinical data in people with anaphylaxis due to the fear that it may fail to work.
It is, surely, heartening that the FDA has the best interests of potential anaphylaxis sufferers at heart. If only they had had the same concern on 2021 when they approved the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccines. It has been exposed in these pages from the start of the Covid-19 vaccine rollout that these were ‘experimental’ medications and had not been tested adequately before approval. Well, they have been tested now and the outcome is clear: they were completely unnecessary; they do not work; and they are extremely dangerous leading to injury and death. They undoubtedly have played a large part in the level of excess deaths observed in recent years.
According to UK government figures, the overall fatality rate from Covid-19 (always a disputed figure due to the difficulty in distinguishing ‘with Covid’ from ‘from Covid’) is 0.1 per cent. The estimated fatality rate from anaphylaxis – made uncertain by the fact that many suspected cases are dead before being found – is between 0.7 and 2 per cent. Recent England hospital Covid-19 admissions are approximately 3,000 per month at the latest available figures. The annual rate of hospitalisation in England for anaphylaxis in 2022-23 was 26,000; at approximately 2,000 monthly, the same order of magnitude as the Covid-19 admissions.
Bearing in mind that it is not easy to distinguish Covid-19 from other respiratory infections but that anaphylaxis is unmistakable and more fatal and, assuming a similar situation in the US, the recent FDA decision regarding nasally administered noradrenaline for anaphylaxis in the light of their unseemly haste over Covid-19 vaccinations is hard to understand. Could political and financial pressured be involved? Surely not!
Regulatory Agencies Are Ignoring Science Which Continues to Paint a Troublesome Picture
BY JEFFEREY JAXEN | SEPTEMBER 25, 2023
On August 31, 2023, roughly two weeks before the latest COVID booster recommendation by FDA/CDC/ACIP, independent researchers published an online, open-access analysis announcing “… it is possible to distinguish, by tryptic digestion, followed by mass spectrometry analysis, synthetic Spike proteins originated from the translation of the mRNA vaccines from natural Spike circulating in biological fluids.”
In other words, the researchers devised a method to determine how long the synthetic spike protein created by mRNA vaccines was present in the human body of vaccinated individuals.
This was a big deal. Their approach represents the first proteomic detection of recombinant Spike in vaccinated subjects. How long did they find it lasted?
They write, “The specific PP-Spike fragment was found in 50% of the biological samples analyzed, and its presence was independent of the SARS CoV-2 IgG antibody titer. The minimum and maximum time at which PP-Spike was detected after vaccination was 69 and 187 days, respectively.” Below is a chart from their study comparing the detection of the spike protein in the body of vaccinated and “after infection non vaccinated.”
The FDA and CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) didn’t care and approved the new COVID booster anyway calling for yearly boosters ‘like the flu shot.’
The mRNA vaccine technology used against a circulating coronavirus is a new, never-before-used approach and method. Proper safety testing and an understanding of what happens when you repeatedly inject billions is unknown. Why the approval? Well because it was an emergency we were told… we just didn’t have time. You understand right?
Yet, with the newly updated booster announced by the CDC for 6 months and older, with no exceptions we are still aggressively injecting. Why? America is the outlier with its cavalier approach to experimenting on its population as new warnings appear almost weekly from this injectable tech platform.
The CDC states mRNA vaccines use mRNA created in a laboratory to teach our cells how to make a protein that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. The Covid vaccine’s one and only purpose is to create that spike protein. It has only one job.
Do you think regulators or the pharmaceutical companies making the shots cared to understand what else that spike did after it was created or how long it persisted?
Pfizer’s Nonclinical overview submitted to FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, a document which doctors had to sue the agency in court to obtain, states:
“The protein encoded by the RNA in BNT162b2 is expected to be proteolytically degraded like other endogenous proteins… Therefore, no RNA or protein metabolism or excretion studies will be conducted.”
In other words, we aren’t going to bother looking because one can’t find what one doesn’t search for.
Two years later, public assertions like the one from The Infectious Disease Society of America still regularly repeated estimates that the spike proteins generated by COVID-19 vaccines last up to a few weeks.
The flashing warning of public health ignorance and medical neglect carried all the way to CDC’s ACIP meeting in 2022, two years into the most aggressive vaccine campaign in world history when Professor of Pediatrics at Nationwide Children’s Hospital Dr. Pablo Sanchez asked the therapeutic head of Moderna’s respiratory vaccine division the following question:
“I’ve asked this before and I just don’t have a clear idea about how long the spike protein the messenger RNA in our bodies produce… how long has it been detected in patient serum or tissues or even in animal studies? Do you know how long it may persist in blood or serum or tissues?”
To this question, Rituparna Das, Moderna’s Therapeutic Area Head of Respiratory Vaccines and the company’s ACIP lead answered:
“The spike protein, ah, availability I believe is on the order of days, but, like less than a week. But I will confirm that with our tox [toxicology] folks as well.”
No one knew for sure, not even the injectable product’s manufacturer, and more importantly, no one cared to know.
Yet the spike continued to turn up as the culprit in more pathogenic insults to humanity. In 2023, researchers reporting circulating spike protein detected in post–COVID-19 mRNA vaccines myocarditis stated:
“A notable finding was that markedly elevated levels of full-length spike protein, unbound by antibodies, were detected in the plasma of individuals with post vaccine myocarditis, whereas no free spike was detected in asymptomatic vaccinated control subjects”
The CDC/ACIP response was that the benefits outweigh the risks… simplistic, insulting, and lacking transparency talking down to the people being targeted by this novel shot.
The authors of the August 2023 suggested that the spike protein may be integrating into the human cells. A similar, and in ways more detailed, warning was just given by well-respected cancer genomics researcher at the University of South Carolina Phillip Buckhaults, Ph.D. during his recent testimony in front of the South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs Committee which he stated, among other things, that:
The CDC’s website states the following outdated and scientifically lazy explanation, at best, of what happens to human DNA after being injected with COVID-19 shots.
According to Professor Buckhaults, this is just not true… at all.
Two further points raised by Professor Buckhaults were first, that the plasmid DNA contamination was not present in the material used in Pfizer’s initial vaccine trials for regulatory approval. It was only after approval and rapid scale-up of manufacturing did the company used questionable, scientifically reckless techniques which led to the contamination. Second, Professor Buckhalut’s lab, a world leader in this type of research, estimates that each vaccination contains about 200 billion pieces of plasmid DNA encapsulated in the lipid nanoparticle.
We know it is now a basic technique to find the synthetic spike in vaccinated individuals. Perhaps even more troubling, it’s basic genetic research to find out if the plasmid DNA is integrating into and forever changing the DNA/genetics of vaccinated individuals yet health agencies and labs just don’t seem to want to look.
With the CDC clearly not willing to do even the most basic steps to regain the public trust lost, as new director Cohen claimed was her main goal, the public must back away further from an apparently rogue government body. As prominent scientists and doctors denounce the agency and its products, we have hit breakaway speeds into historically uncharted territory as public health agencies, once a fixture running in the background of America, have become a cyclic, menacing threat with each new booster rollout campaign.
The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | September 23, 2023
However hard Big Pharma is pushing the new Covid jabs, investors know the truth.
Even though we are getting closer to winter, a perfect time to sell Covid jabs, Moderna’s share price is down 44%.
And Pfizer’s is down 36%.
Clearly investors in the know realise that people just aren’t taking the Covid shots anymore.
So the sales team has been brought in to try and drum up business. All over the MSM news today are reports of a new study which claims to show that Long Covid can cause long-term damage to multiple organs.
The study, published in The Lancet is titled “Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study”.
Read any MSM coverage of this study and you will be led to believe that a third of Long Covid patients sustained damage to multiple organs five months after infection. Lung injuries were almost 14 times higher among Long Covid patients, whilst brain and kidney injuries were three and two times higher respectively.
‘Study lead Dr Betty Raman said people who had more than two organs affected were “four times more likely to report severe and very severe mental and physical impairment”’.
Scary stuff, sign me up for my booster now.
But is the study all that it is made out to be?
First of all the declarations of interests page is over 1,600 words long with reference after reference to links with Big Pharma.
Secondly, and most importantly, the study is massively flawed. It recruited 2,710 participants and whittled these down to 259 who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1 2020 and Nov 1 2021.
This group was then compared with 52 non-Covid-19 controls from the community. The average age of the study group was 57 and the control group was 49. As the study says, “compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity and had more comorbidities”. 50% of the study group were obese compared with only 37% of the control group. 40% had smoked at some point in their lives compared with only 17% of the control group. I could continue with percentages of all the pre-existing comorbidities but I think you get the picture.
(For those who will ask the question, 40% of the control group were vaccinated at follow-up compared with 44% of the study group.)
So what do you think happens when you take an unhealthy, older group of people who have been in hospital with Covid and you compare them with a younger, healthier group of people from the community. You geniuses, you guessed it. You find that the unhealthier group are unhealthier.
Give the Big Pharma sales team a genius medal for that one and a sucker medal to the MSM who did the sales pitch for them.
But don’t take it from me, here is what Professor Francois Balloux, Director of the UCL Genetics Institute in London, has to say about the study:
Thus, my point is not that the conclusions of the study are necessarily false but that the control group is inadequate. I worry the study may have been published as is because it fits a particular narrative, and not necessarily because it is sound and robust.
By choosing a control group made of elderly, frail, terminally ill patients, it might be possible to demonstrate that Covid actually repairs organ damage, which would obviously be an absurd conclusion, and which should rightly be called out. Yet, here we are …
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | September 21, 2023
Another Covid booster approval using shocking new data has the many turning away for good from the FDA and CDC. Learn the facts about the new COVID-19 shot that was just approved for all Americans over the age of 6 months.
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | September 21, 2023
While virtually every US Health Advisor is recommending the new COVID-19 booster for everyone older than 6 months old this Fall, Florida Surgeon General, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, has taken a firm stance to urge healthy people under 65 to NOT get the booster. Hear about the lack of evidence of efficacy and the attacks he has endured from the mainstream media.
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 21, 2023
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Tuesday for the third time introduced legislation to lift the COVID-19 vaccination requirement for young adults in the U.S. Senate Pages Program — and for the third time, the resolution failed.
The Senate Pages program, which pays young adults ages 16 and 17 to assist on the senate floor, requires applicants be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 — including all boosters.
Paul last week introduced the same resolution but it failed to pass. His first attempt, which also did not pass, was a broader resolution introduced on Sept. 7 that sought to remove COVID-19 testing, vaccination and masking requirements for pages.
A press release issued Wednesday by Paul’s office said Senate Democrats “for the third time” refused to “follow the science” and “unanimously objected” to the resolution.
According to Paul, the requirement is politically motivated, not based on science, and puts healthy American young adults at risk for vaccine-induced myocarditis.
In a senate floor speech before the vote, Rand cited numerous studies that reported an increased risk of heart inflammation with each successive COVID-19 vaccination.
Paul said:
“Why are we forcing these kids to do something that I would say is against medical advice to be a page in our program here?”
“How would you feel if your perfectly-healthy football player or band member is given the vaccine and comes home with heart inflammation?”
Risk of vaccine-related myocarditis is greater than risk of hospitalization from COVID-19
Rand pointed out that a study by epidemiologist Dr. Tracy Beth Høeg, Ph.D., reported the risk of myocarditis in teenage boys after receiving a second dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was roughly 5 times greater than the risk of hospitalization from COVID-19.
“So you’re asking yourself, ‘Well, can my kid go to the hospital or get the heart inflammation?’” Paul said. Both are rare, he said, but there is a greater chance of heart inflammation.
Paul noted that among healthy children and young adults, there is a “nearly zero” risk of dying from COVID-19.
The public knows this and has “largely resisted” vaccinating their children against COVID-19, he added.
The argument that young people be vaccinated to protect more vulnerable populations does not hold up, Paul said, because “No serious scientist now argues that COVID-19 vaccines stop transmission. No one.”
He added, “Yet here we are, with Democrats saying, ‘You’re not smart enough to make your own decisions. We will make these medical choices for you.’”
‘In a free society, no one should be forced to receive an injection’
Paul called out Democrats for endorsing authoritarianism by expecting “submission” from U.S. parents. He said:
“They don’t want you to have the choice to keep your kids safe and make a decision whether or not your kid, who may well have already had COVID, needs yet another vaccine … They just want you to shut your eyes, be quiet and do as you’re told.”
Paul said the Democrats’ medical policy for citizens is to, “Shut up. Do as you’re told. Take the injection. We don’t care if your kid might get sick. We don’t care if you have a choice. We don’t care if you have any say in your kid’s medical care.”
“In a free society,” he added, “no one should be forced to receive an injection into their body that they do not wish to have.”
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication. She has taught at various academic institutions in the United States and is fluent in Spanish.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
By Guy Gin | Making (Covid) Waves in Japan | September 21, 2023
My last post presented evidence for what I’ll call the hot lot hypothesis (HLH): the different rates of reported deaths among Covid vaccine batches are due to differences in toxicity, with the earlier batches being especially bad.
But some commenters brought up a legitimate issue with the HLH, which I’ll call the unhealthy vaccinee bias (UVB): the earliest batches were given to the eldest of the elderly and the sickest of the sickly who die at higher rates regardless of what does or doesn’t get injected into them. So hot lots might just be a statistical illusion that goes away once you control for pre-existing health factors, kind of like Covid vaccine effectiveness.
But in Japan, the sick and elderly didn’t get the jabs first; healthcare workers did. In fact, the high-risk elderly only started getting jabbed almost two months after low-risk healthcare workers (February 17th vs April 12th 2021). This is noteworthy not just because it reminds us that the jabs were primarily sold to the population as a way to ‘stop the spread’ but also because it means the earliest batches delivered to Japan went to working-age people, giving us a chance to test the hot lot hypothesis free from the unhealthy vaccinee bias.
And if we were to search for evidence of, say, higher cardiovascular deaths in working-age males, where better to look than the monthly statistics for deaths due to arrhythmia and heart failure rather than just deaths reported after the jabs? The below graphs come yet again from Nagoya University’s Prof Seiji Kojima.
Monthly changes in the number of deaths among men aged 10 to 49 due to arrhythmia from 2018 to 2022
Monthly changes in the number of deaths among men aged 10 to 49 due to heart failure from 2018 to 2022Did you notice anything odd that happened between February and April 2021? Now, these clear spikes in deaths among men aged 20-49 due to arrhythmia and heart failure don’t necessarily prove the hot lot hypothesis beyond doubt. Maybe the CIA was trying out a new version of its heart attack gun in Japan at the time. But absent any other convincing explanation, I’m going to assume that Pfizer and BioNTech were scraping the bottom of the vat to enable healthcare workers in Japan to roll up their sleeves for their first and second Covid jabs back in early 2021.
Well, any healthcare workers who got lucky in the lot lottery and who’ve kept up to date with their shots will now be able to get the seventh from this week. But not to worry. I’m sure the manufacturers have fixed any and all quality assurance issues they’ve never publicly acknowledged.
Or maybe not.
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 20, 2023
A new study of 17 countries found a “definite causal link” between peaks in all-cause mortality and the rapid rollouts of the COVID-19 vaccines and boosters.
Researchers with Canada-based Correlation Research in the Public Interest found more than half of the countries analyzed had no detectable rise in all-cause mortality after the World Health Organization declared a global pandemic on March 11, 2020 — until after the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines and boosters.
They also found that all 17 countries, which make up 10.3% of the global population, had an unprecedented rise in all-cause mortality that corresponded directly to vaccine and booster rollouts.
Through a statistical analysis of mortality data, the authors calculated the fatal toxicity risk-per-injection increased significantly with age, but averaged 1 death per 800 injections across all ages and countries.
By that calculation, with 13.5 billion injections given up to Sept. 2, 2023, the researchers estimated there were 17 million COVID-19 vaccination deaths (± 500,000) globally following the vaccine roll-out.
“This would correspond to a mass iatrogenic event that killed 0.213 (± 0.006) % of the world population and did not measurably prevent any deaths,” the authors wrote.
This number, they noted, is 1,000 times higher than previously reported in data from clinical trials, adverse event monitoring and cause-of-death statistics gleaned from death certificates.
In other words, “The COVID-19 vaccines did not save lives and appear to be lethal toxic agents,” they wrote.
The shots were the most toxic for the most elderly across all 17 countries analyzed.
The authors concluded governments should “immediately end the baseless public health policy of prioritizing elderly residents for injection with COVID-19 vaccines, until valid risk-benefit analyses are made.”
The 180-page paper, by Denis Rancourt, Ph.D. former physics professor and lead scientist for 23 years at the University of Ottawa, Marine Baudin, Ph.D., Joseph Hickey, Ph.D. and Jérémie Mercier, Ph.D. was published Sept. 17.
Using all-cause mortality to identify deaths caused by vaccines
All-cause mortality (ACM) — a measure of the total number of deaths from all causes in a given time frame for a given population — is the most reliable data used by epidemiologists for detecting and characterizing events causing death and for evaluating the population-level impact of deaths from any cause, the authors wrote.
Unlike other measures, ACM data are not susceptible to reporting bias or to biases that may exist in subjective assessments of the cause of death. Any event, from a natural disaster like an earthquake to a wave of seasonal or pandemic illness appears in ACM data.
Using methodologies developed in their previous research on COVID-19 and vaccination in India, Australia, Israel, the U.S. and Canada, the authors used changes in all-cause mortality rates to identify deaths associated with mass vaccination.
Rancourt told The Defender that after identifying the “stunning” correlation between vaccines, boosters and rising ACM in those five countries, the authors looked for other countries that had similar data so they could repeat the analysis to determine if the same synchronicity occurred.
They tracked and statistically analyzed the temporal relationship between spikes in national all-cause mortality rates, stratified by age where data were available, and the COVID-19 pandemic period and the vaccine and booster rollouts.
In other words, they analyzed whether “excess mortality” appeared following the announcement of the COVID-19 pandemic and following the introduction of initial vaccines or booster shots relative to previous all-cause mortality rates.
Excess mortality is a term used in epidemiology and public health that refers to the number of deaths from all causes during a crisis above and beyond what we would have expected to see under ‘normal’ conditions, according to Our World in Data.
Controlling for confounding factors such as seasonality, the authors calculated the vaccine-dose fatality rate (vDFR) — the ratio of vaccine-attributable deaths to the number of vaccines given. They found it ranged from 0.02 to 5%, depending on country, age and number of shots given and that the overall, all-ages vDFR for all 17 countries averaged 0.126 ± 0.004%.
“These findings appear to confirm arguments made by biologists including Mike Yeadon and Sucharit Bhakdi that the dangers for adverse autoimmune reactions would be predicted to increase with each subsequent exposure to the transfection,” said Childrens’ Health Defense Staff Scientist J. Jay Couey.
Factors such as seasonal illnesses can complicate analysis of all-cause mortality rates, because deaths from things like respiratory illnesses tend to peak in winter.
To eliminate seasonality as a possible confounding factor, the Correlation researchers, examined all available data for countries that rolled out the vaccines but where there was no seasonal fluctuation (equatorial countries) or the vaccines/boosters were rolled out during the summer and so the effects of the rollouts could be seen most clearly.
Those countries, all located in the equatorial region or the Southern Hemisphere where the rollouts were in the summer, included Argentina, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, Suriname, Thailand and Uruguay.
The authors are working on extending this analysis to all countries across the world where data is available, Rancourt told The Defender.
Vaccination associated with high all-cause mortality regime in all countries
In nine of 17 countries analyzed, there was “no detectable excess mortality in the year or so between when a pandemic is announced on 11 March 2020 and the starting time of the first vaccine rollout in each country,” the paper reported.
In Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paragua, Philippines, Singapore, Suriname, Thailand and Uruguay, excess mortality appeared only after the vaccine rollout.
In the other eight countries — Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and South Africa — excess mortality can be seen prior to the vaccine rollout.
However, the researchers said, “In all 17 countries, vaccination is associated with a regime of high mortality, and there is no association in time between COVID-19 vaccination and proportionate reduction in ACM.”
Also, all 17 countries showed a strong correlation with higher rates of ACM in early 2021, following the initial vaccine rollout and in early 2022, when the boosters were rolled out.
The authors underscore the finding that where age-stratified data were available, there were “remarkable temporal associations” between rapid first dose and booster rollouts and immediate peaks in all-cause mortality, and the transition to what Rancourt called “a new regime in mortality, where the mortality just stayed high for a long time.”
The paper includes reporting, graphs and data analysis by a number of different methods showing the temporal relationships between the pandemic announcement, vaccines and spikes in all-cause mortality for each individual country.
Causation, not just correlation
The authors argue the evidence collected supports a causal link between vaccines and high mortality rates.
First, they cite autopsy studies, adverse event monitoring and peer-reviewed publications, studies of vaccine-induced pathologies, analysis of adverse events in industry clinical trials and payouts from global vaccine injury compensation programs, which together they say demonstrate the COVID-19 vaccines caused many individual deaths.
Then they point to several population-level studies, including their own prior research, that demonstrated a likely causal link.
And they cite principles of immunology that explain the mechanisms from severe harm from the COVID-19 vaccines.
The authors also addressed and discounted several proposed alternative explanations for the spikes in ACM, including that those changes are due to seasonal variation, heat waves, earthquakes, conflict, COVID-19 countermeasures, underlying health conditions or the appearance of COVID-19 variants.
They argued that COVID-19 variant “waves” cannot explain the spikes, they wrote.
For that to occur, the new variants would have to cause simultaneous peaks and surges in mortality in 17 countries, “which is a statistically impossible occurrence if we accept the theories of spontaneous viral mutations and contact spreading of viral respiratory diseases; and all the resulting peaks of mortality would have the remarkable coincidence of occurring precisely when vaccine boosters were rolled out.”
The authors concluded that the strong correlation between vaccine rollouts and the new higher regimes of ACM shows causality, according to the “experiment, temporality and consistency” criteria laid out by Dr. John Ioannidis in a 2016 paper.
The same phenomenon, they write, is observed in different age and geographical settings (experiment), the rises in all-cause mortality are synchronous with the vaccine rollouts (temporality) and the phenomenon is qualitatively the same each time it occurs (consistency).
Prioritizing elderly people for vaccination was ‘reckless’
These “conclusive” findings contradict the common claims that the vaccines, despite their adverse effects, actually saved lives.
Instead, the authors write:
“We have found no evidence in our extensive research on ACM that COVID-19 vaccines had any beneficial effect. If vaccines prevented transmission, infection or serious illness, then there should be decreases in mortality following vaccine rollouts, not increases, as in every observed elderly age group subjected to rapid booster rollouts.”
To the contrary, the study confirmed the authors’ previous findings that vDFR grows exponentially with age. They found the risk of dying from the COVID-19 injection doubled with every 4-5 years of age, which is approximately half the doubling age of dying of all causes of mortality, including cancer, pneumonia and heart disease.
They found large and age-dependent values of vDFR in elderly people that included, for example, a rate of 0.55% (one death per 180 injections) for people 80 and over in Israel to 5% (one death per 20 injections) for people 90 and over in Chile and Peru.
That means, the authors said, that there is not and was never any age-stratified risk of fatality data to support the public health policies that prioritized elderly people for vaccination.
“Prioritizing elderly people for COVID-19 vaccination, in the absence of relevant data, was reckless.”
Brenda Baletti Ph.D. is a reporter for The Defender. She wrote and taught about capitalism and politics for 10 years in the writing program at Duke University. She holds a Ph.D. in human geography from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a master’s from the University of Texas at Austin.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Millions of taxpayer dollars being spent on programs that target speech
By Tom Parker | Reclaim The Net | September 19, 2023
Since the start of September, the Biden administration’s National Science Foundation (NSF) and State Department have awarded grants totaling more than $4 million to programs, studies, and other initiatives that target “misinformation” — a term that the Biden admin has used to demand censorship of content that challenges the federal government’s Covid narrative.
The NSF has awarded the following nine grants since September 1:
The State Department has awarded the following five grants since September 1:
These awards were granted as the Biden admin faces a major lawsuit for pressuring Big Tech to censor content that it deems to be misinformation.
An appeals court recently stated that the Biden regime violated the First Amendment when pushing social media platforms to censor and in an Independence Day ruling on this case, a judge described the Biden admin’s actions as “Orwellian.” The Supreme Court is now considering whether to hear the case.
While some of the grants focus have been awarded to non-American organizations, whose misinformation targeting efforts don’t fall under the scope of the First Amendment, these types of programs can result in the speech of Americans being targeted.
For example, Biden’s State Department has previously funded foreign think tanks that created “disinformation” blacklists. These blacklists were used to target American conservative media outlets.
Both of the agencies that awarded these grants have been involved in prior censorship controversies.
In addition to funding groups that created disinformation blacklists, Biden’s State Department has flagged thousands of accounts to Twitter, now known as X, for censorship.
Meanwhile, the NSF has been accused of funding programs that develop tech that targets vaccine dissent and has funded research on correcting “false beliefs” online.
The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | September 18, 2023
Nothing screams ‘cult’ more than a building being lit up in corporate colours to celebrate a product launch.
Further evidence of the big pharma brainwashing can be seen with the Empire State Building turning Pfizer blue in celebration of the CDC recommending that everyone, from 6 months of age and older, can get this season’s updated Covid shot.
They then sponsored news articles to tell everyone that Covid is here again but that Pfizer is here to save us.
Seems like COVID’s everywhere again. But here’s good news from Pfizer!
This season’s updated COVID-19 shots are now available for ages 6 months and up, and they’re designed to help protect against recent variants.
That is why today, at 8pm, the Empire State Building turned its iconic building blue to announce that the CDC recommends everyone 6 months of age and older get this season’s updated COVID-19 shot. The blue light symbolizes our gratitude and appreciation for the updated vaccines and all those who made it possible.
COVID-19 isn’t gone, and vaccination remains one of our best tools to help protect against the virus that causes the disease. Ask your doctor or pharmacist about this season’s updated COVID-19 shots. Learn more and schedule at the CDC’s website, vaccines.gov.
Sponsored by Pfizer.
In almost religious like devotion, Pfizer wants your gratitude and appreciation for the updated vaccines. Because billions of dollars just isn’t enough anymore, they also want your adoration and eventually your soul.
We have got to the point now where everyone knows Covid is mild for most and that the vaccines don’t do anything. But there is a significant percentage of the population who are still in denial and convince themselves that the jabs work, save lives and make them morally superior.
Bobs Cartoons summed it up nicely with this image.
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
The Omission of Israeli Terrorism in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
By Karin Brothers | Global Research | December 6, 2014
… The Israeli settlements — all of which are illegal – have been identified as a major impediment to peace. The refusal of a major “global” terrorism report to name the Israeli settlers as one of the groups most responsible for terrorism not only misrepresents a major source of regional violence but exposes the Global Terrorism Index as a propaganda tool that supports a U.S. agenda.
In recent years, governments have been attempting to thwart terrorism by blocking supportive fund-raising. When it comes to Israeli settlements, however, the US and Canada actually encourage fund-raising by giving organizations (such as Christian Friends of Israeli Communities (CFOIC) and the Jewish National Fund) financial support in the form of donor tax-deductions.
Charities which provide funds for the Israeli settlements should be regarded as terror-financing organizations. They should not only lose their tax-deductible status, but they should be banned because they support the violation of international humanitarian law. The terror-financing laws that are being strictly enforced for Muslim charities should be applied to Christian and Jewish charities as well. … Read full article
Aletho News If Americans Knew No Tricks Zone
Aletho News 