"Own Nothing – be Happy" 😍🫂
feat. Klausi McSchwabbin' pic.twitter.com/oVLTVSVvtJ— Snicklink (@snicklink) September 26, 2023
MRNA vaccines must be banned once and for all
By Angus Dalgleish | TCW Defending Freedom | September 29, 2023
Those of us who knew from the beginning that the sequence of CoV-SARS-2 contained inserts which could not have possibly occurred naturally, and were similar to ones that had already been published from the Wuhan laboratory, have had to endure unbelievable scorn, scientific ostracism and the ignominy of being ‘cancelled’ by the MSM as well as by professional colleagues for nearly three years now.
In the summer of 2020 a paper I co-authored, describing the findings of an Anglo-Norwegian team of scientists who had demonstrated unique ‘fingerprints’ of laboratory manipulation in the Covid virus, was suppressed in both the US and UK. This was at the time that the World Health Organization, leading science journals and others were going to huge lengths to persuade us that Covid was a natural occurrence, and that we should spend a lot more money to fight any such future threats.
Only now does the Telegraph (uncritically) report that the US government is no longer going to fund the research it denied doing for nearly three years and the MSM sat on. Yet it has been an open secret for anyone who follows primary sources of information (the ones ignored by the MSM and the BBC specifically, reported as misinformation by Ofcom and targeted by the Orwellian Counter-Disinformation Cell of the UK government) that mRNA vaccines did not do what it says on the vial, as it were.
First the ‘vaccine’ did not stay at the site of injection as promised but travelled throughout the body and were found at post-mortems to be everywhere.
Accusations of dramatic variations in batch-to-batch variability – an absolute ‘no no’ in vaccine manufacture protocols – which could explain why side effects were more common in some batches than others were denied but were borne out by definitive Danish research reported here. These alarming concerns seem to have been brushed off by the regulators when they should have immediately begun investigating them in depth.
All the while the regulatory authorities and politicians, parroting their ‘highest standards’ assurances, have repeatedly declared the mounting disturbing UK Yellow Card and US VAERS adverse event reports to be nothing to be worried about.
Last June, whistleblowers led by the scientists Sucharit Bhakdi and Kevin McKernan raised an entirely new issue of concern – that of serious levels of DNA contamination. Once again this was ignored by the MSM. Though quite happy to report the odd side effect from the vaccines as an excuse to point out that they are extremely rare, they have never addressed the increasingly problematic official ‘safe and effective’ mantra.
Finally there was a small breakthrough. An isolated but braver branch of the MSM in the form of the Spectator Australia has finally blown the lid on serious levels of contamination of both Pfizer and Moderna mRNA Covid vaccines. The article describes how the genomics scientist Kevin McKernan from Boston used Pfizer and Moderna vials as controls in a study only to find that they contained highly significant DNA plasmid contamination. It reports that McKernan was alarmed to find the presence of an SV40 promoter in the Pfizer vaccine vials, a sequence that is ‘used to drive DNA into the nucleus, especially in gene therapies’ and that this is ‘something that regulatory agencies around the world have specifically said is not possible with the mRNA vaccines’. These SV40 promoters are also well recognised as being oncogenic or cancer-inducing.
Others have confirmed these findings. A German biologist whistleblower has found contamination rates of up to 354 times the recommended limit. All this has been reported to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). It is highly significant.
To put it bluntly, this means that they are not vaccines at all but Genetically Modified Organisms that should have been subject to totally different regulatory conditions and certainly not be classed as vaccines. This has been recognised by the Australian version of the FDA, the TGA, which has changed the picture so much that the Premier of Victoria Dan Andrews, who was the greatest proponent of the vaccine and of its mandatory use, has resigned – though at the time of writing the vaccine has not been mentioned as the reason for his resignation. (Paula Jardine reported in these pages in December 2021 on this regulatory sleight of hand in granting vaccine Emergency Use Authorisations for what were gene therapies.)
All this data, which is slowly breaking through into the public domain, comes hard on the heels of the latest findings that booster vaccines actually increase the chance of getting infected by 3.6 times. This is according to an in-depth study published by the Cleveland Clinic, one of the largest health care organisations in the world, who monitored their staff as well as patients.
It gets worse. Supporters of this technology have claimed that it can be adapted to chase new variants. But it can’t. The results of bivalent vaccines (with components against at least two variants) are seeing the same result. Authors of the Cleveland study say that ‘there is not a single study that has shown that the Covid-19 bivalent vaccine protects against severe disease or death caused by the XBB lineages of the Omicron variant. At least one prior study has failed to find a protective effect of the bivalent vaccine against the XBB lineages of SARS-CoV-2.’
In one study, all bivalent-vaccinated mice which were challenged with Covid became ill.
This was predicted by many of us as the SARS viruses are subject to immunological imprinting: that is, once they have seen a vaccine they will make the same response to any close variant (this is also known as ‘antigenic sin‘) making further vaccines not only useless but more dangerous as they induce antibodies that enhance infection (ADE antibodies), not cross reactivity as has been claimed by the manufacturers.
This is not the end of the issues with the mRNA ‘vaccines’. Several immunology studies have shown that the boosters induce an antibody switch from neutralising subtypes to tolerising subtypes as well as inducing significant T cell suppression, all of which will encourage new infections and suppress the immune response to cancer.
At the end of last year I reported that I was seeing melanoma patients who had been stable for years relapse after their first booster (their third injection). I was told it was merely a coincidence and to keep quiet about it, but it became impossible to do so. The number of my patients affected has been rising ever since. I saw two more cases of cancer relapse post booster vaccination in my patients just this last week.
Other oncologists have contacted me from all over the world including from Australia and the US. The consensus is that it is no longer confined to melanoma but that increased incidence of lymphomas, leukaemias and kidney cancers is being seen after booster injections. Additionally my colorectal cancer colleagues report an epidemic of explosive cancers (those presenting with multiple metastatic spread in the liver and elsewhere). All these cancers are occurring (with very few exceptions) in patients who have been forced to have a Covid booster whether they were keen or not, for many so they could travel.
So why are these cancers occurring? T cell suppression was my first likely explanation given that immunotherapy is so effective in these cancers. However we must also now consider DNA plasmid and SV40 integration in promoting cancer development, a feature made even more concerning by reports that mRNA spike protein binds p53 and other cancer suppressor genes. It is very clear and very frightening that these vaccines have several elements to cause a perfect storm in cancer development in those patients lucky enough to have avoided heart attacks, clots, strokes, autoimmune diseases and other common adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines.
To advise booster vaccines, as is the current case, is no more and no less than medical incompetence; to continue to do so with the above information is medical negligence which can carry a custodial sentence.
No ifs or buts any longer. All mRNA vaccines must be halted and banned now.
MHRA Finally Admits it Failed to Test the Safety of Mass Manufactured Covid Vaccine Batches
UK’s medicines regulator comes clean
By JJ Starky| The Stark Naked Brief | September 28, 2023
On December 8th, 2020, June Raine, the Head of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), publicly declared that “no corners have been cut” during the temporary authorisation of the Pfizer Covid vaccine. However, thanks to the persistence of former Ministry of Defence employee, Nick Hunt, recent findings prove Raine’s statement was not true.
For context, it’s common in development trials across various sectors to first use products made in small-scale facilities or laboratories. Investing in mass production usually comes later, once there’s sufficient confidence in the product’s design. Scaling up, naturally, introduces new risks.
With pharmaceuticals, regulations are in place to manage this process. This is to ensure the final product remains consistent and effective.
Concerns first arose in 2022 regarding the Pfizer Covid vaccine. There were suspicions that the vaccine MHRA approved in December 2020, manufactured using “Process 2”, differs from the version tested in Pfizer’s clinical trials, manufactured using “Process 1”. Josh Guetzkow, an Israeli academic, brought the difference to light, referencing Freedom of Information requests from various countries and Pfizer documents released by U.S. courts.
In May 2023, he published this rapid response in the British Medical Journal alongside Professor Retsef Levi, airing his concerns.
Guetzkow highlighted two things. First, there is a lack of publicly available reports comparing vaccines produced by both processes. Second, there is significant variability in the rate of serious adverse events across different vaccine lots, underscoring the need to better understand variability in the production process.
In October 2020, Pfizer had committed to comparing safety and immunogenicity results between vaccines produced by both processes. Yet, when Hunt submitted his initial FOI request concerning the latter to MHRA in July, their initial response directed him to the European Medicine Agency’s archive without specific guidance.
Here’s the bombshell.
Nick then requested an internal review. In their response, MHRA admit their replies “were not compliant with the (FOI) Act and did not provide or address the specific information (Nick) asked for”.
They then confess they do not possess the “Process 2” report.
The document goes on to state the “Process 2 drug… was shown to be comparable through side-by-side comparability studies and heightened characterisation testing”. In short, trust us, we’ve seen the data but we can’t show it to you and we don’t have it.
Worse yet, MHRA also revealed they failed to chase Pfizer on the promised report that the company should have published comparing the products. This was because of the “extensive usage of vaccines manufactured via Process 2”.
Multi-Hit Hypothesis for the Oncogenic Potential of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines
Pathophysiologic Support for the Observation of “Turbo Cancer” after Vaccination
By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH | Courageous Discourse | September 29, 2023
As an internist and specialist, it is hard for me to believe that a novel biologic product could cause heart, neurologic, thrombotic, and immunologic disease but to make matters even worse, could also play a role in the initiation and acceleration of oncogenesis. In Western countries before the pandemic, the leading causes of death were heart disease 40%, cancer 40%, and death from other known causes (homicide, suicide, accidents, etc). The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines if proven to promote cancer, would then be implicated in rises in all-cause mortality being observed world wide.
In 1984, Sutherland and Bailer proposed the “Multi-Hit Hypothesis of Carcinogenesis:”
“A new multihit model of carcinogenesis is developed for use in evaluating age-specific cancer incidence rates in human populations. The model allows for some heterogeneity in both risk (perhaps genetic) and pathway (number of hits).”
They essentially said it takes multiple different hits or insults to cells and their genetic machinery to cause a normal cell to become cancerous. Forty years later, Sutherland and Bailer could not have dreamed about the application of their hypothesis to global mass genetic vaccination given every six months to a broad population, some with high risks for, or even with incipient cancer.
Angues and Bustos just released a paper on the Authorea preprint server that assemblies the evidence to date that both mRNA and the Spike protein work within human cells to cause changes that result in oncogenesis. The figure shown is consistent with a multi-hit hypothesis of oncogenesis after injection with Pfizer or Moderna.
Raquel Valdes Angues, Yolanda Perea Bustos. Navigating Uncharted Waters: Could COVID-19 and/or Certain COVID-19 Vaccines Promote Malignancy?. Authorea. September 21, 2023.
Many questions remain including cumulative dose effect, predisposition (e.g. loss of function mutations in BRCA1/2 P53), additional exposures such as UV radiation, smoking, alcohol, and finally catabolism of mRNA and Spike. Undoubtedly decades of research will be needed to fully understand COVID-19 vaccination and cancer. As we point out in our book Courage to Face COVID-19, it took over 40 years from when Sir Austin Bradford Hill causally associated smoking with lung cancer until there was capitulation by the medical orthodoxy. Let’s hope the world wide exposure of mRNA and alacrity of modern research can shorten this timeframe.
Here are some reasonable first steps:
- Remove all COVID-19 vaccines from human use to reduce any additional exposure
- CDC should link vaccine administration data with all government cancer registries
- The National Cancer Institute should urgently fund mRNA COVID-19 vaccine cancer research
- Vaccinated with prior histories of cancer should make a specific post-vaccination oncology clinic visit to consider reassessment or restaging
- Vaccinated with no prior history of malignancy should check to see they are up to date on routine cancer screening (prostate, lung, breast, ovary, uterus, colon).
- All vaccinated patients and their doctors should be alert to any change in health status and have a low threshold for clinical investigation
Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
President, McCullough Foundation
Five evidence-based early known Covid facts – ignored and censored
Highly acclaimed experts presented evidence-based facts on Covid-19 early in 2020, but were ignored and censored by authorities
BY THEO L. GLÜCK | FREEDOM RESEARCH | SEPTEMBER 26, 2023
The official narrative in the Covid crisis tried to persuade the public that various mandates and coercions, limiting people’s individual freedoms, were all based on science. The myth of this has visibly eroded, as it has been revealed how much of the strategies, influencing the lives of millions, was based on fear, pressure from media and political tactics. Reference to science was often enough used as a disguise.
Five evidence-based facts known already in 2020, but ignored by the authorities:
- The virus had spread much more widely and was far less dangerous than initially claimed by the authorities.
- The risk from Covid-19 differed by a factor of 1,000 for different age groups, and the risk was much higher for people with comorbidities (e.g. obesity, diabetes, anxiety disorders, etc.) and nutrition deficiencies.
- Those who had recovered from the disease had developed strong natural immunity, but this evidence-based fact was systematically ignored or downplayed by the authorities.
- Covid-19 vaccines received marketing authorisation without having been tested in clinical trials for virus transmission or infection.
- Covid-19 vaccines have considerable side effects that were already known during the clinical trials of the vaccines.
The closure of parks and playgrounds was part of lockdown policies, carried out with reference to science.
Already in 2020, there were a number of important and evidence-based facts about both Covid-19 and the response to the Covid crisis that were highlighted by many scientists and doctors. Consideration of these facts would have prevented the introduction of ill-considered and ineffective Covid measures and reduced the resulting harms.
The virus had spread much more widely and was much less dangerous than claimed
The SARS-Cov-2 virus was already much more widespread globally in early 2020 than official sources (including the World Health Organization, or WHO) claimed. Prof. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Eran Bendavid wrote on March 24, 2020, that fears of Covid-19 were based primarily on a miscalculated death toll reported by the WHO, which was vastly exaggerated as it did not take into account the actual rate of infection. This meant, in particular, that the mortality rate among those infected was much lower than initially claimed and the risk posed by Covid-19 to the vast majority of people, particularly those under 70, was many times lower.
A team led by professor John P. Ioannidis of Stanford University scientifically showed in a study published already in May 2020 that the risk of dying from Covid-19 for people under the age of 65, even in pandemic epicentres, was very low, and deaths amongst people under the age of 65 with no comorbidities were remarkably uncommon. They proposed that strategies focusing specifically on protecting high-risk elderly individuals should have been considered in managing the pandemic.
On October 14, 2020, the Bulletin of the World Health Organisation published a study by prof J. P. Ioannidis, according to which the median rate of deaths among people infected with Covid-19 in autumn 2020 was 0.23-0.27%, with a rate of 0.05% among people under 70 years of age, which was tens of times lower than official (including the WHO’s) estimates in March and April 2020.
Even though such evidence-based data were known early on, the authorities in many countries and the WHO continued to scare the public about the particular danger of a novel viral disease, and imposed restrictions on millions of healthy people. Among other things, many countries restricted people from exercising, staying outdoors and playing sports, thereby compromising people’s overall health and increasing the risk of developing all the diseases (including Covid-19) more severely.
Thousand-fold difference in the risk from Covid-19
Harvard University Professor Martin Kulldorff had already stated in April 2020 that it was clear from the data from Wuhan early on in the crisis that there was a thousand-fold difference in the risk from Covid-19 across different age groups, and that failing to account for this difference was one of the major flaws in the public response to the Covid crisis.
Prof Martin Kulldorff was quick to point out the thousand-fold difference in risk from Covid-19 (Thérèse Soukar, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons)
Among people exposed to Covid-19, people in their 70s had roughly twice the mortality of those in their 60s, 10 times the mortality of those in their 50s, 40 times that of those in their 40s, 100 times that of those in their 30s, 300 times that of those in their 20s, and a mortality that was more than 3000 times higher than it was for children. According to Kulldorff, public authorities should have taken this wide variation between age groups into account when designing Covid interventions. Counter measures specifically targeting the elderly, the highest risk group, would have not only protected them but other groups as well. Age-specific measures had to be part of the strategy, otherwise unnecessary mortality, hospital burden and economic losses followed.
Professor Mark Woolhouse of the University of Edinburgh also estimated early on that the elderly were 10,000 times more at risk from Covid-19 than those under 15. But it goes e ven further. It’s not just the elderly, it’s the elderly who are infirm, have comorbidities or are frail. These were the people who were particularly at risk, and the main target group that should have been addressed. In his view, this was also the most important and obvious reason why there were alternatives to social closures and other coercive state measures.
In addition, it was clear from quite early on that it were the people with serious comorbidities that would fall seriously ill. In one of Europe’s epicentres of the early outbreak, Italy, a report found as early as in March 20, 2020, that the median age of the 3200 deaths testing positive for Covid-19 was 78.5 years, and more than 95% of them had one or more comorbidities. A large-scale study in the US confirmed that over 95% of hospitalised adults were persons with at least one comorbidity condition and the main risks were obesity, anxiety and fear disorders and diabetes. However, it was also clear, for example, that the proportion of overweight people varied widely between countries, even within the same age groups. For example, obesity already affects 42% of the US population, but in Vietnam the same number is only 2%, in India 4% and <10% in most of the African countries.
The association of nutritional deficiencies with severe morbidity was also known before the Covid crisis. Vitamin D, for example, plays an important role in the immune system. Already in the first half and second half of 2020, studies showed a clear correlation between the low levels of vitamin D and the risk of severe Covid-19 disease. For that reason, many doctors and researchers stressed the need for adequate vitamin D intake in the autumn of 2020, ahead of the second wave, especially for older people at risk.
Although these facts were known early on, authoroties continued to scare the public by claiming, among other things, that the virus did not discriminate between infected people and could be fatal to anyone. Health authorities also failed to advise people to take important steps to support their general health, such as getting enough fresh air and sunshine, eating a healthy diet, controlling blood pressure and diabetes, losing weight, etc. On the contrary, authorities directed people indoors, in many countries penalised them for going outdoors, and just promoted vaccinations instead of various treatments and lifestyles.
In the UK, scary posters were used in large-scale campaigns to get people to follow the “rules”
Ignoring natural immunity
The importance of natural immunity was systematically downplayed by the health authorities, major vaccine manufacturers and the World Health Organisation (WHO). In some countries (such as the USA), it was not even taken into account in the implementation of Covid measures, while the authorities only reiterated the need to vaccinate as many people as possible.
At the same time, studies carried out before the vaccination campaigns started, i.e. by the end of 2020, clearly showed that recovery from the disease provides strong immunity for at least 8 months and most likely longer. By October 2021, at least 81 studies had already been published confirming immunity to Covid-19 conferred by recovery.
In addition, a number of studies at the beginning of the Covid crisis showed that a significant proportion of the population may have already had immunity to Covid-19, as SARS-Cov-2 was only one of several coronaviruses. Nearly half of the unaffected individuals had the corresponding T-cells, indicating the body’s previous exposure to coronaviruses and ability to cope with them.
Many doctors and scientists, including Dr. Robert W. Malone, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, Dr Marty Makary, Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Tess Lawrie, Dr. Richard Urso, Dr. Paul E. Alexander, Prof Norman Fenton, Prof Martin Neil and others found it puzzling that health officials chose to ignore the scientific fact that infection provided long-lasting and strong protection to millions of people who had recovered from Covid-19. Prof. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Prof. Martin Kulldorff have stressed that while natural infection may not have provided permanent infection-blocking immunity, it offered, in high likelihood, permanent anti-disease immunity against severe disease and death. However, scientists who during the Covid crisis stressed the importance of natural immunity and asked to take into account when divising public policies, were not only ignored but censored and cancelled.
Ignoring natural immunity has had serious consequences, including avoidable vaccine complications and harms, loss of lives, financial and other collateral damage, and loss of credibility of the public health authorities.
Vaccines were not tested for reduction of virus transmission or infection
Covid-19 vaccines, which were introduced at warp speed, were not tested in clinical trials to see if they reduced infection or transmission. Shortly before their vaccine was granted emergency marketing authorisation in the US (on 3 December 2020), this fact was admitted by the CEO of Pfizer, Albert Bourla, and later by a Pfizer official during an official hearing at the European Parliament, although the vaccine manufacturers gave the public an impression that the vaccines protected against infection and transmission.
To the experts who looked closely at the design and results of the Covid-19 vaccine clinical trials, the fact that the vaccines were not tested for reduction of virus transmission or infection was evident already in late 2020. For example, the editor of British Medical Journal (BMJ) Dr. Peter Doshi stated on October 21, 2020, that none of the vaccine clinical trials had been designed to detect the efficacy of these vaccines on reducing any serious outcomes such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths. Neither did they examine the efficacy of vaccines for their ability to interrupt transmission of the virus.
Dr Peter Doshi considers it wrong that primary data from clinical trials are not available (screenshot from Youtube)
Prof. William A. Haseltine drew attention to the serious shortcomings of these clinical trials on 23 September 2020, after Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson had published their vaccine trial protocols. According to him, the trials seemed to be designed to prove that their vaccines worked, even if the measured effects were minimal, as they mainly investigated only how well could the vaccines prevent mild Covid-19 symptoms. Haseltine pointed out that a closer look at the protocols made it clear that these trials did not provide confidence in vaccine efficacy in protecting against serious illness or in preventing an infection of Covid-19. It also appeared that these trials were intended to pass the lowest possible barrier of success. Haseltine concluded that these vaccines were not the “silver bullet” that would end the Covid crisis.
Yet tens of millions of people around the world were subjected to compulsory vaccination, and many lost their jobs because of non-compliance, severely restricting their individual freedoms and fundamental rights.
Ignoring the side effects of the vaccines
Data on the side effects of the vaccines were already available in documents published by the vaccine manufacturers on their clinical trails in late 2020, although few were able to or considered it important to look at them in depth. This was made considerably more difficult by the fact that vaccine manufacturers refused to publish the raw data needed for an objective assessment. Raw data from clinical trials have still not been fully disclosed.
For example, the Pfizer vaccine trial was designed, conducted, analysed and compiled by Pfizer staff and all the raw data belong to the company. The BMJ editorial board believes that refusing to disclose the original data is morally unacceptable for any clinical trials, but especially those involving major public health interventions. The BMJ has been calling on vaccine manufacturers for years to disclose the original data from clinical trials, since clinical trial data must be available for independent scrutiny.
Nevertheless, experts pointed out many inconsistencies and questionable findings in the Covid-19 vaccine trial reports already in early 2021, such as the facts that:
- higher-risk target groups (elderly and immuno-compromised individuals) were clearly under-represented in the trials,
- a number of subjects were withdrawn for unknown reasons,
- even the officially reported rate of adverse reactions was several times higher than it was, for example, for flu vaccines.
In addition, it has come to light that the vaccine manufacturer Pfizer was aware of several serious side effects amongst the vaccine participants in clinical trials in early 2021, but chose to conceal them, such as the case of 12-year-old Maddie De Garay, who became disabled in the trial and is now partially paralysed, requiring a wheelchair and feeding tube. None of her 35 adverse reactions were mentioned in the New England Journal of Medicine article reporting on the vaccine trial.
Regardless of all that, since the beginning of 2021, mass vaccination campaigns were launched in many countries of the world, which in a short period of time transformed from an attempt of vaccinating the vulnerable target groups (the elderly) into an increasingly massive effort to vaccinate as many people as possible, even up to with children and infants, providing no rational argument or evidence base to do so.
A new expert analysis of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine trial papers published in 2022 clearly found that participants in these clinical trials were more likely to experience a serious adverse reaction to vaccination than to be hospitalized for Covid-19.
Summary
As shown above, there is ample reason to argue that the evidence base for the decisions made in the greatest global health crisis of recent decades was severely deficient. Covid measures were determined not on the basis of evidence nor reasonable assumptions, but rather on the basis of emotional reactions and political tactics, fuelled by fear and media pressure. Societies were under constant pressure from global organisations (WHO, European Commission, etc.), authorities and the mass media – which included the increasingly loud rhetoric of maximizing lockdown, maximizing masking, maximizing vaccination etc.
However, there were also those in power who relied on knowledgeable experts (e.g. in the US, states such as South Dakota, Florida, Texas, etc.), as did some who were in charge of public health institutions (for example in Sweden), succeeding to resist irrational and unscientific pressures while enduring media bashing, vilification and unpopularity. At said places, the decision-makers generally avoided locking down the society and did not impose coercive state measures (compulsory mask mandates, compulsory vaccination, etc.). Thanks to their non-conformist and common sense approach, we now know much about which measures worked and which didn’t, the mistakes every society should avoid in future health crises, and how the slogan of ‘follow the science’ was often used as propaganda to subjugate societies to the dictates of a line of authority.
Cost of Living Crisis to Cause ‘Thousands of Extra Deaths’ in UK – Report
By Chimauchem Nwosu – Sputnik – 27.09.2023
Some UK military personnel and their families have been turning to food banks because of the increasing pressures from the cost of living crisis, a British news network has reported.
The raging cost of living crisis that has had the UK in its stifling grasp is going to cause thousands of extra deaths this year, according to new research, as life expectancy across the UK will plummet by 6.5 percent this year.
The research suggests that untimely mortalities in the United Kingdom are expected to rise from 463 to 493 per 100,000 inhabitants.
The findings have shone a light on critical concern for the populace at large. The unrelenting cost-of-living crisis, combined with a prolonged period of soaring prices, is anticipated to result in a significant 6.5 percent drop in life expectancy throughout the nation this year.
Furthermore, the report highlights a stark disparity: the most economically disadvantaged households are projected to face a four times higher death toll than their wealthier neighbours. This discrepancy arises from the fact that the less affluent must allocate a more significant portion of their income to pay for energy, the cost of which has rocketed.
Recent statistics from the previous month indicate that the UK’s inflation rate stood at 6.7 percent. Despite this reduction from its peak of 11.1 percent, Britain continues to have the worst inflation of all G7 member states.
“The mortality effects of inflation and real-terms income reduction are likely to be large and negative, with marked inequalities in how these are experienced. Implemented public policy responses are not sufficient to protect health and prevent widening inequalities,” researchers noted.
These findings come on the heels of a recent alert from the UK-based consumer association ‘Which’ last month, when it pointed out that rising food prices had left low-income households in the country in dire straits and having to make painful decisions about whether to pay the utility bills or put food on the table.
Swiss Immunologist’s Request: “Entire mRNA ‘Vaccine’ Platform Must Be Banned”
The long sinister shadow of the mRNA induced spike protein
By P Gosselin | No Tricks Zone | September 27, 2023
Dr. Thomas Binder wrote a letter to the editor of the Swiss Medical Journal in the response to an interview of Prof Christoph Berger and President of the Federal Commission for Vaccination Issues #EKIF, explaining why the entire mRNA ‘vaccine’ platform must be banned.
Dr. Thomas Binder. Image cropped here.
Firstly, Binder writes, “The effective dose of the expressed foreign protein is unknown and varies greatly between individuals, mRNA ‘vaccines’ should never have been approved.”
Secondly, “The cells that express the protein foreign to the body and then present it on their surface are falsely recognized by the immune system as being foreign or infected by an alien, thus are destroyed in an autoimmune attack similar to transplant rejection.”
He continues: “If it was only expressed by skeletal muscle cells capable of regeneration, this would not be problematic. But the LNPs [lipid nanoparticles] are chosen in such a way that they introduce the mRNA into any body cell, including those of the heart, brain, embryo and fetus. Worse: As physiological doses did not induce a relevant immune response, a horrendous dose of mRNA was chosen, which can lead to the destruction not only of a few, but of so many cells that this can cause serious illness and death. Worse: The chosen antigen and LNPs are themselves toxic.”
He notes: “Kevin McKernan found contamination with up to a third of functional bacterial plasmid DNA from the manufacturing process, which explains the spike expression over years detected by pathologists.” Finally, it has not been ruled out yet that the DNA can be integrated into the genome and even be inherited by offspring.”
Read entire letter here.
FDA rush to approve killer ‘vaccines’ but reject life-saving allergy treatment
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!
New Warnings Show DNA Contamination and Persistence of Spike Protein in COVID Vaccine Recipients
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 Pfizer mRNA vaccine is contaminated with the plasmid DNA vector that was used as the template for in vitro transcription reaction.
- This DNA could cause rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest.
- The DNA can and likely will integrate into the genomes of transfected cells.
- There is a very real hazard for genome modification of long-lived somatic cells, which could cause sustained autoimmune attacks towards that tissue.
- There is also a theoretical risk of future cancer, depending on the piece of DNA and site of integration.
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 Reality Behind the Long Covid causing Damage to Multiple Organs Study
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 …
Featured Video
Trita Parsi: Iran War Ends Today? Threats of Deporting Trita Parsi
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Iran UN ambassador calls for destruction of all nuclear weapons
Iran’s ambassador to the UN Gholamali Khoshroo
Press TV – March 29, 2017
Iran’s ambassador to the UN Gholamali Khoshroo has called for the total eradication of nuclear weapons.
Khoshroo reiterated Iran’s call during a UN conference aimed at creating a nuclear weapons ban treaty in New York on Tuesday.
“Iran, as a victim of chemical weapons, strongly feels the danger posed by the existence of weapons of mass destruction and is determined to engage actively in international diplomatic efforts to save humanity from the menace of nuclear weapons,” he said.
Khoshroo stressed that Iran is committed to its Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) obligations, which include negotiations based on effective nuclear disarmament measures.
He added that several countries continue to ignore international calls and treaties for nuclear disarmament and even continue to increase their nuclear stockpiles. “They do not have political determination to abandon doctrines of nuclear deterrence and nuclear terror,” he went on to say.
Iran’s UN ambassador noted that boycotting the talks by many countries, including the US, shows that the world’s nuclear powers are by no means committed to the eradication of nuclear arms. Britain and France were also among the some 40 countries that did not join the talks.
“We note that prohibition of nuclear weapons must be accompanied by the elimination of such weapons. There can be no doubt that without complete abolition of nuclear weapons, there will be no absolute guarantee against the danger of nuclear war and the use of such weapons,” Khoshroo added.
Blog Roll
Aletho News- The Crusades – colliding narratives
- Trita Parsi: Iran War Ends Today? Threats of Deporting Trita Parsi
- What Is SIDS?
- DHS docs: Govt bracing for nationwide anti-AI riots, preparing to crack down on dissent
- India signals rethink over West Asia
- Israeli Ex-Navy Chief admits massive damage from Iran missiles
- The strategic arsenal US lost in war against Iran – and why replenishment will take years
- Documents Suggest Fauci Knew COVID Was Created in Wuhan Lab, and mRNA Vaccines Wouldn’t Work
- No return to pre-war status for Strait of Hormuz – Iran’s top diplomat
- Ex-South Korean President sentenced for trying to provoke conflict with Pyongyang
- If Americans Knew
- Did Trump just threaten a nuclear attack on Iran? Another merger for Israel-Firster David Ellison –Daily Update
- Israeli Firm Accused of Launching Smear Campaigns During US, European Elections
- As World Cup kicks off, Gaza amputee girls chase football dreams
- Oxfam: More Palestinians killed by Israel across West Bank in last 3 years than previous 17 years combined
- US-Iran ceasefire may be imminent, but will Israel blow it up? – Daily Update
- The Issue of Israel Is Ending Democracy In Michigan
- Israel is stealing homes, livelihoods, and lives in West Bank
- Gaza is not an aberration – Israel planned this genocide decades ago
- Israel is changing the face of Lebanon, mainstream media is normalizing it – 3 articles
- Genocide lobby benefits from EU anti-racist fund
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Significant CO2 Fluxes From Non-Volcanic Sources Are Largely Neglected In Carbon Budgets
- Women Climate Scientists Being Harassed, Insulted By Skeptics, Claims Berkeley Earth Researcher
- Germany’s Longterm Spring Climate Data Show “No Climate Trend”
- New Study: Solar Photovoltaic, Wind Power Fail To Meet Annual Energy Demands 62% Of The Time
- Germany’s Die Welt: “Too Much Is Too Much” … Green Energies Are Cannabalizing Each Other!
- Germany’s Ecological Holocaust… Once Fairy Tale Forests Getting Cleared For Wind Turbines
- A Grand Solar Minimum Has Arrived…Global Cooling Of At Least 1°C Is Expected By The 2030s, 2040s
- European “Expert Commission” Urges COVID-19-Like Global Climate State Of Energency!
- Real-World Observations Do Not Support The Position That Climate Change Is Human-Caused
- Germany’s AfD Party Calls Debunked Climate Scenarios “Greatest Fraud In Human History”
Aletho News 