We are in the final week of Covid Vaccine Victim Awareness month. If you knew about this campaign, consider yourself well informed. As you know, raising awareness of the most pressing issues of our time is extremely challenging.
It is hard enough trying to inform people about the WHO’s power grab, or Covid injection risks, or safe, effective treatments like Ivermectin. Indeed, the video I shared last week about the husband who smuggled ivermectin to his wife in a chocolate bar has already been removed by YouTube, who apparently deemed this first-hand account as ‘medical misinformation’. Fortunately, you can still view it here.
All that is hard enough. But perhaps the greatest challenge of all is getting governments, medical establishments and Big Pharma to acknowledge one of the most marginalised groups in society today: the men, women and children harmed by the Covid-19 injections, and their bereaved.
Could this be because those supposedly best placed to help them are the ones with everything to lose by doing so?
Governments are failing to acknowledge the vaccine injured properly because to do so would be political suicide. Having pushed and pressured and bullied people into taking the jabs, any administration that then admits it has harmed its own people will have to face severe consequences.
Big Pharma won’t acknowledge them, not least because they are a direct threat to their bottom line.
Most hospitals, universities and other research establishments and clinical care settings won’t acknowledge them because they don’t want to risk losing their funding from, you guessed it, Big Pharma and government.
Doctors won’t acknowledge them because the pain of participating in the biggest crime in medical history may be too much to bear and that, having taken the shots themselves, they may realise that they may have put themselves and their families at risk of injury too.
As if that’s bad enough, many vaccine-injured people are being ostracised by their own families and communities.
Thus abandoned, the vaccine injured have been left to fend for themselves.
In the last two years, the injured have resorted to funding their own investigations into finding treatments that work. They have come together to form support groups – groups like UK CV Family, Vaccine, Injured, Bereaved UK and React 19. These groups collate their own research, reach out to doctors and politicians and government committees, asking again and again for help.
But there’s a problem here. They are in pain, exhausted, and beset by strange combinations of symptoms that are both debilitating and at times, terrifying. You need energy, vigour and stamina to fight government and its corporate sponsors – and for those injured, this is in short supply. Despite that, they fight. With dignity and grace, they keep going.
Last week, vaccine injured people and the bereaved travelled to London for a peaceful rally to raise awareness of vaccine injury. They gathered outside BBC Broadcasting House, then walked in a memorial procession through the streets to 10 Downing Street.
I imagine that for many, to make a trip like that cost them a lot. I imagine that many went home and have been in bed ever since, trying to recover from the mammoth effort it took just to be there, holding a white rose, taking space in a public place to show the world we are real, not rare, and we need your help.
Here is a powerful video that was put together by someone called Alice the Journalist. It opens with speeches, then moves to the procession, as people made their way to Downing Street. Watch the faces of passers-by in the film, from about 4:20 in: their expressions of shock and sadness are telling. You can almost see the penny start to drop for these people.
We know that vaccine injury is real, not rare – but those of us who know this, need to spread the word as much as we can. Because the more visible it becomes, the more it intrudes into public conversation, the harder it’s going to be for governments to ignore.
A federal judge questioned the new California law that penalizes doctors for sharing COVID-19 “misinformation.”
The new law, which came into effect on January 1 this year, prohibits doctors from spreading what the state deems to be misinformation to patients, or risk being penalized for “unprofessional conduct,” which could result in their licenses being revoked.
Here’s a summary of the case so far if you’re not up to date.
The law has been challenged through separate lawsuits filed by two organizations and a group of doctors on the grounds of First Amendment violations. They filed a motion at the US District Court of Sacramento to hold the law until the cases are concluded.
In a hearing, Senior Judge William Shubb described the law’s definition of misinformation as “nonsense.”
“Because AB 2098 [the misinformation law] implicates [plaintiff’s] First Amendment right to receive information, she has standing,” the court wrote.
“Vague statutes are particularly objectionable when they involve sensitive areas of First Amendment freedoms because they operate to inhibit the exercise of those freedoms,” the court added, referring to a 2001 case, California Teachers Association v. State Board of Education.
“When the challenged law implicates First Amendment rights, a facial challenge based on vagueness is appropriate.”
The court granted the plaintiffs a hearing to challenge the law and blocked the enforcement of the law until the case is decided.
The law defines misinformation as “false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.”
Shubb noted that “standard of care” is not a new principle, but argued, “contemporary scientific consensus” is.
According to Deputy Attorney General Kristin Liska, who is representing Gov. Gavin Newsom, a medical professional has to violate all three aspects of the definition of misinformation for punishment to be applicable; share misinformation, contradict scientific consensus, and go against the standard of care.
However, she refused to give examples of statements that would fit the definition, saying that it would depend on the circumstances. Shubb then asked how she expects medical professionals to know what would violate the law.
This is a story about the value of standing your ground, and never letting THEM (The Hierarchy Exploiting Medics) dupe you into believing they have power over you. Truth wins out.
On 30th September 2021, I gave an invited academic lecture at a philosophical institute in Bath called Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institution (BRLSI). As the General Medical Council (GMC) states in its letter to me:
“The Institution is an independent charity that promotes science, literature and art to the City of Bath; tickets for its lectures can be bought by both member and non-members of the Institution.”
The title of my lecture was ‘Covid and the State of Evidence-based Medicine’ and I covered what I knew at the time about early treatments for Covid, as well as the emerging evidence on the Covid-19 vaccines suggesting serious safety issues. I have alluded to this talk and associated investigation in a previous Substack article.
There were probably not more than forty people in the room, with a number attending via Zoom too. Towards the end of the talk, a man’s voice came loudly through the microphone, facilitated by whomever was controlling the Zoom permissions, drowning out mine, and declaring that I should be ashamed of myself for what I had said.
The lovely organiser of the meeting was suitably embarrassed, but it was clear that his feelings were not shared by his masked and furious medical colleague, who had clearly facilitated the heckler’s dramatic outburst. The colleague later denied access to the lecture recording, which was never more widely published as is usually the case for these events.
A couple of months later I was notified by the GMC that I was under investigation for “misconduct” in relation to my lecture at the BRLSI, the allegations being that I “denied the safety of Covid-19 vaccines and spread misinformation about Covid-19 treatments”. The GMC investigation was opened to determine whether I had made “inaccurate and/or misleading comments about Covid-19 and Covid-19 vaccines”.
I received excellent advice from Solicitor Philip Hyland who responded to the GMC quite simply on my behalf pointing out that “taken at its highest there is a substantial body of medical opinion that supports what Doctor Lawrie is saying.”
This week I received the outcome of the GMC’s investigation, which is “closure of the case with no action”. In its letter to me, the GMC noted that:
“During the investigation the GMC obtained a video copy and transcript of the Lecture. During the initial part of the Lecture Dr Lawrie presented her views on the evidence on ivermectin as a treatment for Covid-19, later in her lecture Dr Lawrie presented her views on vaccines.
“It was established during the GMC investigation that the advertisement for the Lecture stated that Dr Lawrie was an external consultant to the World Health Organisation, a clinical practice guideline expert, and that she was Director of the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd and Ebmcsquared CIC. The Ebmcsquared CIC website states that it was established by Dr Lawrie as a ‘a non-profit company in March 2021 in response to the tremendous need for independent and objective health care research and provision, arising out of the Covid-19 health emergency.’
Dr Lawrie’s comments
On 10 February 2022, Dr Lawrie’s representatives submitted that ‘taken at its highest there is a substantial body of medical opinion that supports what Doctor Lawrie is saying.’
Reasons for our decision
As case examiners we must decide whether there is a realistic prospect of establishing that a doctor’s fitness to practise is currently impaired to a degree justifying action on his or her registration.
This test has two parts.
We must decide if the allegations are serious enough to warrant action on the doctor’s registration.
We must also consider whether the allegations are capable of proof to the required standard, namely that it is more likely than not that the alleged events occurred.
In making decisions, we should have regard to the GMC’s objectives. These are to protect, promote and maintain the health and safety of the public; promote and maintain public confidence in the profession; and promote and maintain proper standards and conduct for members of the profession.
Doctors are entitled to hold and express personal views, however they also have an overriding duty to patients and to uphold the public’s confidence in the profession. In the absence of expert or other evidence capable of proving that Dr Lawrie’s conduct was such that public confidence in the medical profession would be undermined, or that it risked the health, safety and well-being of the public, or that it undermined proper standards and conduct for members of the profession, we agree that there is no realistic prospect of establishing evidentially that Dr Lawrie’s fitness to practise is impaired to a degree justifying action on her registration.
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, we have decided to close the case with no action.”
To my medical colleagues out there, I do hope that this will reassure you and encourage you to speak out now.
Please remember, as the GMC letter states, that you “have an overriding duty to patients and to uphold the public’s confidence in the profession”, which is unequivocally at an all-time low. We know how busy you are, that you had little time to do your own investigations, and that being at the frontline of what was communicated to be a deadly pandemic was probably terrifying. We know you were told that the Covid-19 vaccines were safe and effective.
However, now that you know the Covid-19 vaccines are not safe and effective, that they are not the same as traditional vaccines, that there are unprecedented numbers of adverse drug reactions (ADR) reported to the official ADR databases, and that Covid ‘boosters’ are systematically destroying people’s immunity not ‘boosting’ it, please stand up for the truth, uphold your Hippocratic Oath, and do what is right. It is a strength not a weakness to be able to change one’s mind when new information comes to light. We have been waiting for you, now please stand up together with us. There’s undoubtedly a better way forward for health and wellbeing!
A few next steps you can take as a doctor
For doctors in the UK, you will find that www.doctorsforpatientsuk.com is a good starting point for peer learning and support.
Please find further reassurance in this article about GMC complaints related to Dr Aseem Malhotra’s BBC interview in which he called for a halt to the Covid vaccination programme. This interview has been viewed over 20 million times and counting.
If you are considering leaving the NHS and starting private practice, I encourage you to register as a practitioner on World Council for Health’s new community platform, Source. This is an online platform connecting local people with doctors and other health professionals in their area. Registration is free – the only condition is that you agree to abide by the Better Way Charter. We receive requests every day from people seeking doctors they can trust: allow us to direct them to you via Source.
Lastly, everything I said at BRLSI on 21 September 2021 about ivermectin and the safety issues with Covid injections is as applicable now more than ever. I will present an updated version of this lecture, ‘Covid and the State of Evidence-based Medicine’ at the ‘Harmonising Modern Medicines with Natures Remedies’ conference in The Philippines in February. Perhaps I’ll see you there!
Adams sees an inverse correlation between intelligence and an objective understanding of Covid-19 and climate change. Truth is found not at Davos, scene of the World Economic Forum’s annual conferences attended by the high and mighty, but in Walmart. Indeed, an alternative ‘Dumb Davos’ (by which he meant a gathering of people with no letters before or after their names) would be more enlightening than listening to the arrogant, self-serving class who regard themselves as the ‘elite’.
What to follow – rules or reality? One meaning of ‘observe’ is to adhere to ritualistic practice, as demonstrated by the religiously devout, and also by followers of political ideology. There is no need to think but act dutifully. The other meaning of the verb is to watch what is happening, in a focused rather than passing manner. This is the endeavour of scientists, artists, satirists and (at least in principle) journalists. It is what you would expect of intelligent people, but the Covid-19 regime has shown an incredible observational deficit.
The last three years have shown that a large grey mammal with tusks and trunk can stand incongruously in the room, and intellectual eyes and ears cannot see it. The authorities’ radical response to a purported coronavirus pandemic should have raised questions about the inevitable harm and dubious rational of lockdown, about the dehumanising and ecological damaging mask mandates, and about the experimental injections administered to most of the global populace. But the intelligentsia saw no problem with the draconian regime; indeed, many wanted harsher restrictions. The medical profession uncritically accepted the official narrative, denigrating any practitioner who spoke out.
At a rally outside the BBC headquarters last Saturday, a series of vaccine-injured people told the audience of their dual battle with debilitating symptoms and with unsympathetic doctors who deny the obvious cause. Of course, this event was not reported by the public broadcaster. Instead, the Sunday newspapers continued the campaign against dissidents. In theSunday Times, in response to Tory MP Andrew Bridgen coming out as a vaccine critic, Josh Glancy warned of a rise of conspiracy theorists peddling dangerous disinformation.
In logical absurdity, people who took the vaccine and suffered as a result are smeared as ‘anti-vaxxers’, a weaponised term prepared in advance of the mass vaccination programme. Other absurdities abound, such as the vaccinated reacting to a subsequent illness and positive Covid-19 test as a sign that the vaccine is working (because without it, they would have needed hospital treatment). Highly intelligent people seem to have lost their critical marbles.
During a silent march from the BBC to Downing Street on Saturday, in respect for the dead and injured, the comments of shoppers ranged from supportive sentiment to bemusement and insults (‘nutters’, I heard). It is quite startling how many people have been so indoctrinated by Covid-19 that they cannot begin to empathise with unfortunate victims of the vaccine. Claims of injury, to them, are heresy.
‘More Democrats (83 per cent) than Republicans (65 per cent) or those not affiliated with either major party (58 per cent) have gotten the Covid-19 vaccine. While 80 per cent of Democrats believe Covid-19 vaccines are at least somewhat effective at preventing infection with the virus, only 40 per cent of Republicans and 45 per cent of the unaffiliated share that confidence. Similarly, only 43 per cent are at least somewhat concerned that Covid-19 vaccines may have major side effects, compared with 74 per cent of Republicans and 56 per cent of the unaffiliated.’
An important factor here is the politicisation of Covid-19 in American society. Linked to this is the generally higher education level of Democrats, who perceive their Republican opponents as callous, stupid and anti-science. A Democrat voter may have a strong suggestive effect from the shot, perceiving any bodily abnormality not as an adverse reaction but a sign that the vaccine is working. They may also have more political investment in their unquestioning compliance. By contrast, a Republican voter coerced by occupational mandate may be more likely to complain.
Or were more potent doses administered in red states? It sounds too sinister to believe, but there seems to be little doubt that vaccine strength varied. Mike Yeadon, former chief scientist at Pfizer, has highlighted the concentration of reported serious adverse events in about a tenth of the batches.
As pharmaceutical products are normally produced in a tightly controlled process, Yeadon suggested deliberate differentiation (though the vaccine industry is not without a history of contamination). Yeadon is not alone in voicing concerns about differences in quality. Leaked documents from the European Medicines Agency showed that regulators had serious concerns, finding low quantities of intact mRNA in commercial preparation.
Whatever the reason for polarisation in vaccine outcomes, we cannot rely on scientific expertise or authority for answers. As Scott Adams realises, the more intelligent the person, the more miseducated into conformity. ‘Anti-vaxxer’, intended as a slur, has become a badge of honour for the awakened.
Watching a Project Veritas undercover sting operation invariably leaves me with mixed feelings. On the one hand, I’m struck with admiration for yet another one of James O’Keefe’s bold strokes against the corrupt empire that now dominates our world. On the other hand, I’m shocked by the disclosure that the Empire is staffed by such moral and intellectual lightweights.
Here he is giddily talking about deliberately mutating SARS-CoV-2 by means of “directed evolution” in order to keep Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine gravy train going:
John Leake | Courageous Discourse | January 26, 2023
This morning I woke up to conflicting messages about the true identity of Dr. Jordon Trishton Walker—a purported Pfizer executive who is the subject of Project Veritas’s latest sting. Some commentators have suggested that James O’Keefe failed to perform his due diligence—i.e., that instead of stinging a real Pfizer executive, a Project Veritas operative got a date with a drunk and boasting young man who grossly overstated his position and knowledge.
As I noted in my post of last night, it does seem incredible that a major corporation—one that has played a key role in perpetrating a global criminal fiasco—is staffed with an executive who seems to have been recruited at a frat party. On the other hand, the Pfizer internal documents tweeted by James O’Keefe appear to be authentic.
Additional documents were posted this morning by internet sleuth and fellow Substack author, Brian O’shea.
One of the strangest features of the Hall of Mirrors in which we now live is that the public facade of powerful institutions and corporations is staffed with people who seem stunningly incompetent and unserious. I’m thinking about Karine Jean-Pierre, Rochelle Walensky, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden.
Consider the irony that one of the great idols of the West—Volodymyr Zelensky—was, just a few years ago, a TV actor “who played a high school history teacher who wins the presidential election after a viral video created by his pupils shows him ranting against government corruption in Ukraine.”
The show (Servant of the People) was so popular—and Zelensky so charming—that he was anointed by the oligarchs who run Ukraine to be the next President.
Igor Kolomoisky,the billionaire oligarch who owned 70% of the media company that created the hit show, has been indicted in the United States on charges of large-scale bank fraud. Kolomoisky’s personal attorney served as Zelensky’s campaign manager. Again, who is really making the decisions that now affect all of mankind?
Mission Statement
Investigate & expose corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions in order to achieve a more ethical & transparent society.
Core Values
MORAL COURAGE – Courage is the virtue that sustains all others. We choose to overcome our fears.
WE ARE ALL LEADERS – Turning people into leaders. Completed staff work. Ownership.
COLLABORATION – Best not to work in silos. No one individual is as smart as all of us.
RESILIENCE – Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. Never, ever, ever give up. We don’t let mistakes or setbacks discourage us. Pursue perfection, knowing full well you will never attain it.
MISSION DRIVEN – The best people are motivated by purpose. We are passionate and truly believe in our cause. We must be externally focused, not internally focused.
MAKE THE STATUS QUO DO THE IMPOSSIBLE – We move mountains. Failure is not an option. We do whatever it takes.
THE TIP OF THE SPEAR – We are a loss leader. We do not shy away from conflict or litigation.
Ethical Values
Rule #1 – Truth is paramount. Our reporting is fact based with clear and irrefutable video and audio content. Truth is paramount. We never deceive our audience. We do not distort the facts or the context. We do not “selectively edit.”
Rule #2 – We do not break the law. We maintain one-party consent when recording someone is inherently moral and ethical. We never record when there is zero-party consent. In areas where we are required to have consent from all parties, we seek legal guidance regarding the expectation of privacy’s impact on our right to record.
Rule #3 – We adhere to the 1st Amendment rights of others. During our investigations we do not disrupt the peace. We do not infringe on the 1st Amendment rights of others.
Rule #4 – The Zekman Test. The undercover investigations we pursue are judged by us to be of “vital public interest” and “profound importance.” The Zekman Test is our baseline. Undercover investigative reporting is necessary because, “… there’s no other way to get the story…” Whereas the Society of Professional Journalists allows for undercover techniques, if undercover techniques are necessary to expose issues of vital public importance; we believe they are not only allowed but required.
Rule #5 – We Protect the Innocent When Possible – Embarrassing private details are not to be investigated. We stay away from irrelevant embarrassingly intimate details about private citizens personal lives. We look for individual wrong-doing and judge its public importance. The irrelevant religious or sexual dispositions of our targets are not to be investigated.
Rule #6 – Transparency. Our methods & tactics must be reasonable and defensible. We use the “Twelve Jurors on Our Shoulder” rule. The work has to be done with such a degree of integrity that it can withstand scrutiny in both law & ethics. We are comfortable with transparency. We must be willing to be ready to disclose our methods upon publication.
Rule #7 – Verifying and Corroborate Stories – Evaluate impact on third parties and Newsworthiness of Statements Alone.We consistently consider the probable truth or falsity of statements, examine any reasons to doubt the veracity of underlying assertions and whether the assertions are newsworthy. When possible, we will confirm with our subjects that their statements captured on video are accurate & truthful. At the very least, we will give our subjects an opportunity to elaborate and/or respond. In all matters, we rely on the 1st Amendment to protect our ability to publish newsworthy items after our internal deliberations. On whether there is an obligation to ensure the veracity of statements made on video, 1.) consider whether the remarks may potentially impact an innocent third party. (Factors in support of releasing the content) and 2.)The Newsworthiness of the statement alone by itself. (Factors against releasing the content).
Rule #8 – Raw Video. In certain circumstances we may release the “raw” video to the press and or the public. But as a rule, we do not.
Rule #9 – Subject Anonymity. We investigate & question sources before promising anonymity. Once we confirm, we will do everything in our power to protect the identity of our confidential sources.
Rule #10 – Being Accountable. Admit mistakes & correct them promptly.
Rule #11 – We do not manufacture content. We do not put words in our investigative subjects’ mouths. We do not lead the horse to water. Our purpose is to elicit truth.
Rule #12 – With Great Power comes Great Responsibility.
On Saturday 21st January 2023, the vaccine injured and bereaved gathered with people who support them in marches across the UK organised by Truth be Told. The London march saw thousands of protestors who began at BBC broadcasting house before a silent memorial procession. White roses were then thrown over the railings into Downing Street. Speakers included Andrew Bridgen MP, many vaccine injured individuals and those who have been trying to help amplify their voices like Mark Sharman, former ITV and BSkyB executive, who funded and produced the filmSafe and Effective a Second Opinion.
Those campaigning for better compensation without huge barriers and delays have found themselves in conflict with those who want to stop vaccination completely. It is in the interest of the former to downplay the numbers affected and the latter would benefit from a larger number. There is nothing to be gained by such conflict when both sides are trying to hold politicians to account and struggling to do so. While data is suppressed it is not possible to quantify the extent of harm but the extent can’t remain hidden forever. Whatever figure is finally put on it, it will be too high for an intervention that many of the injured did not need and which was oversold in terms of its ability to prevent infection. Whatever figure is reached, those who are injured deserve compensation and the companies who have profited do not deserve indemnity.
Several new government – and industry – funded studies are underway to develop mRNA vaccines for livestock, part of the massive expansion of the animal vaccine industry projected to be worth $26.12 billion by 2030.
Researchers at Iowa State University are undertaking a project funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to develop mRNA vaccine technology to prevent bovine respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).
“Third generation vaccines,” including DNA, RNA and recombinant viral vector vaccines, are not only administered to livestock — but they also are being developed for companion animals and wild animals.
A peer-reviewed study in the journal Viruses last year reported, “The successful application of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 has further validated the platform and opened the floodgates to mRNA vaccine’s potential in infectious disease prevention, especially in the veterinary field.”
Citing the need for biosecurity, in September 2022, the New South Wales (NSW) government fast-tracked the world’s first mRNA vaccines for foot-and-mouth disease and lumpy-skin disease, in a five-year multimillion dollar deal with U.S. biotech company Tiba Biotech.
Announcing the deal, Deputy Premier and Minister for Regional NSW Paul Toole said:
“I have now written to vaccine manufacturers to take up my challenge to develop both vaccines ready for use and manufacture in NSW by August 1 next year.
“COVID-19 demonstrated to us that all possible avenues in developing vaccines must be explored and we will leave no stone unturned.”
Dugald Saunders, NSW minister for agriculture, emphasized how important it was to “protect [NSW’s] livestock sector” and said the agreement with Tiba Biotech to create mRNA vaccines, “would be a game-changer for the industry.”
“Not enough is known at this time if mRNA vaccines can generate any long-term effects on reproduction or lifespan of domestic farm stock.
“As livestock become part of the human and animal food chain, we need to be sure that no abnormal cellular or molecular changes to the animal could be induced by this type of vaccine.”
‘Good health starts with biosecurity’
According to a report published last year by Grand View Research, the market for animal vaccines is expected to grow at a 9.3% compounded annual growth rate, because “the growing incidence of food-borne zoonotic diseases and increasing animal husbandry are boosting the demand for vaccines.”
The paper pointed to the potential of the mRNA platform to treat diseases like African swine fever, porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, porcine epidemic diarrhea virus, foot-and-mouth disease virus, bovine viral diarrhea virus, lumpy skin disease virus, bovine leukemia virus and peste des petits ruminants virus, among others.
A recent white paper, “The Future of Livestock Vaccines,” by researchers at the Livestock Research Innovation Corporation, Ontario, Canada, summed up the shift in thinking about animal vaccines:
“New technologies (e.g. mRNA, artificial intelligence) will have dramatic impact on the availability and effectiveness of vaccines available to producers. …
“The current COVID-19 pandemic has taught us many lessons, including the fact that the development, mass production and approval process of vaccines could be shortened from several years (or decades) to 8-9 months.”
“Good health starts with biosecurity,” the authors stated.
Iowa State teams up with Merck — with help from the U.S. government
Iowa State University and Merck last year announced a four-year strategic alliance to research “emerging technologies” in animal health.
Their joint research project to develop mRNA vaccine technology to prevent bovine RSV, as stated above, is funded in part by the U.S. government.
The study aims to develop a novel mRNA platform that is cost-efficient and thermostable in order to “open the door for vaccinating production animals with this technology.”
The project seeks to develop the platform for a bovine RSV vaccine “as a proof of principle for development of vaccines against this pathogen but also as a platform technology for other vaccines as well.”
The technology consists of creating electronic gene sequences for a given disease, synthesizing them into RNA, inserting them into the platform and injecting them into the animal. The RNA provides instructions to the immune cells to translate the sequence into proteins, which act as antigens.
Gates Foundation among funders of vaccines for livestock
For decades, concentrated animal feedlot operations, known as CAFOs, used antibiotics to help prevent bacterial infections from spreading through farm spaces densely packed with animals. The antibiotics also make animals grow faster.
That same year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began regulatory measures to prevent the use of livestock antibiotics for growth purposes and required farmers who wanted to use antibiotics to get them from veterinarians.
In an effort to reduce the use of publicly spurned antibiotics and to deal with the problem of viral infections common in industrial livestock production, meat producers turned to vaccines.
“Vaccines and other alternative products can help minimize the need for antibiotics by preventing and controlling infectious diseases in animal populations, and are central to the future success of animal agriculture,” according to a 2018 article in Veterinary Research.
According to a 2016 Bloomberg report, industry leaders like Elanco, Eli Lilly, Merck Animal Health and Zoetis began shifting billions of dollars of research investments from antibiotics to vaccines in advance of the 2017 FDA regulatory measures.
A 2022 report by Acumen showed that other major pharmaceutical companies, including Ceva, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Neogen Corporation, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Zoetis, Biogénesis Bagó and Pfizer are heavily investing in the animal vaccine industry.
“The future of our company is heavily grounded in vaccine development,” Dr. Rick Sibbel, a veterinarian who ran Merck’s technical services for cattle, poultry and swine, told Bloomberg.
The U.K.’s Department for International Development partnered with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to fund livestock vaccines around the world, the department tweeted in 2018.
That partnership included a $40 million grant in 2017 to develop new livestock vaccines. Gates Foundation funding to CGIAR, “global research partnership for a food-secure future dedicated to transforming food, land, and water systems in a climate crisis,” continues to focus on shifting livestock producers from using antibiotics to vaccines.
After a Corona outbreak that left three dead in a Hildesheim care home, a former employee will face trial in February…. She stands accused of one count of negligent homicide and two counts of negligent bodily injury, as well as forgery. The 45-year-old allegedly faked double vaccination against Corona by presenting a fake vaccine certificate …
Despite the infection of her son, the woman was at first allowed to continue working in late November 2021. … She is alleged to have been infected without noticing, and initially transmitted the virus to a colleague during a coffee break. Thus, a “chain of infection is alleged to have been set in motion.” Three female residents aged 80, 85 and 93 died in the outbreak.
According to the indictment, forensic medical examination revealed that Corona was the cause of death in the case of the 80-year-old. Other causes could not be ruled out for the other two victims … The woman has admitted to falsifying her vaccine certificate, but denies responsibility for the outbreak.
There were three other infections among home staff, and 11 among residents … Because the woman was known to oppose vaccination, her employer obtained information about the the date and batch numbers [listed on her certificate]. These … made it clear it was a forgery.
There’s the little things that irritate me, like the contact-tracing hocus-pocus and the ridiculous assumption that moments of transmission can be located as precisely as a coffee break. Or the awkward fact, that of the three Covid deaths this incident achieved for our un-unpluggable mortality ticker, medical examiners could assign only one to the virus with any confidence. The main thing, though, is just the incredible injustice of blaming fellow humans for infections with pervasive seasonal respiratory pathogens. This poor woman only faked vaccination to keep her job, and the outbreak at her home occurred well after the myth of vaccine efficacy against infection had collapsed. There’s just no reason to bring charges here.
If anything killed those old women, it was the care home and their decision to keep employees with positive close contacts at work. They almost certainly had no choice: These places suffer chronic staffing shortages, vastly exacerbated by pandemic-era mismanagement. And indeed, why should anyone work in a care home now? The pay is poor, you endure unusual levels of harassment over personal medical choices, and you can even face prosecution for passing on viruses your kids pick up at school.
But in a Jan. 9 update on the company’s “industry-leading mRNA pipeline,” Moderna told investors it is developing multiple new mRNA products — including a treatment designed to be injected directly into the hearts of patients who have sustained heart attacks or heart failure.
Moderna said it launched a phase 1B clinical trial of its mRNA-0184 injection, which it said: “encodes for relaxin, a naturally occurring hormone that is known to cause hemodynamic changes that are potentially beneficial for heart failure patients.”
The company stated:
“The mRNA sequence of mRNA-0184 is engineered to instruct the body to produce relaxin with an extended half-life, with the goal of producing a sustained clinical benefit in heart failure patients — this longer half-life may result in more durable effects compared to previous approaches.”
According to the Daily Mail, mRNA-0184 “uses the same technology as the company’s flagship COVID jab and is designed for people weeks or months after a heart attack to help them recover,” by “instructing human heart cells to generate a hormone that is known to improve blood flow, helping restore damaged heart muscles.”
Patients in the trial “have stable heart failure and the trial will determine how safe the shot is and how well patients can tolerate it, as well as perfecting the dosage amount and frequency.”
Relaxin is “a naturally occurring hormone that is known to cause” changes to blood flow that are “potentially beneficial for heart failure patients,” according to the company.
A federal disclosure filed by Moderna on Dec. 21, 2022, regarding its phase 1B clinical study indicates that 98 participants are expected to be enrolled and that the study is expected to be completed by May 7, 2024.
The clinical trials are taking place at six locations in Poland and the U.K.
“We are now in a super exciting program where we inject mRNA in people’s hearts after a heart attack to grow back new blood vessels and re-vascularize the heart.
“It’s a bit like science fiction medicine but that’s what is really exciting to me.”
Prior to jumping into the race to develop a COVID-19 vaccine, Moderna had a long history of failure, as persistent safety concerns and other doubts about its mRNA delivery system threatened its entire product pipeline, according to investigative journalist Whitney Webb.
‘No safety track record’ for this type of genetic therapy, expert says
Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, an outspoken critic of COVID-19 vaccines, was less enthusiastic than Bancel about Moderna’s mRNA injection targeting heart disease.
“There is no safety track record for genetic therapies that introduce functional code for production of a protein for an uncontrolled quantity and uncontrolled duration of time. There are no assurances on long-term safety of mRNA technology.”
Previous similar efforts have failed, McCullough said, casting doubt on the possibility of success for the mRNA-0184 injection.
“In a large trials program, Novartis failed to show benefit with a similar hormone, serelaxin, thus the Moderna product looks unattractive as a heart failure therapeutic,” he said.
The Gateway Pundit, reporting on Moderna’s announcement, remarked, “In short, Moderna will fix the problem it created,” in a thinly veiled reference to the increased prevalence of heart disease and heart failure among individuals who received COVID-19 vaccines.
Moderna announces several more mRNA vaccines and therapeutics that are in its pipeline
Moderna stated that it has 48 programs in development, including 36 in ongoing clinical studies.
“Moderna continues to scale, now with 48 programs in development, including 36 programs in clinical trials encompassing mRNA infectious disease vaccines and mRNA therapeutics spanning seven different modalities,” the statement read.
Bancel said:
“We enter 2023 in a great position, with significant momentum across our clinical pipeline, a highly energized team and a strong balance sheet of over $18 billion of cash and cash equivalents.
“With our infectious disease franchise continuing to accelerate with exciting near-term catalysts for RSV [respiratory syncytial virus] Phase 3 data and Flu Phase 3 data, and recent breakthroughs in the development of individualized cancer treatments, as well as our rapid advancement in rare diseases and promising cardiology programs, the Moderna platform is delivering across several modalities.
“Our progress is meeting the high expectations we set out a few years ago, and with encouraging clinical data across the entire Moderna platform, we are accelerating our investments to deliver the greatest possible impact to people through mRNA medicines … 2023 is going to be a very exciting year for Moderna, and most importantly, for patients.”
These “exciting” developments, according to the company, include candidate vaccines and therapeutics for flu, RSV, cytomegalovirus and cystic fibrosis, as well as a “personalized cancer vaccine.”
As previously reported by The Defender, several Big Pharma companies, including Moderna, are vying to develop an RSV vaccine, despite repeated failed attempts to develop a vaccine for this illness in the past. These efforts have been ramped up just as many regions in the U.S. and worldwide are reporting outbreaks of RSV.
Moderna’s RSV candidate vaccine, which utilizes mRNA technology and is known under the identifier mRNA-1345, is currently in a phase 3 clinical study, according to the company’s announcement.
Moderna is also conducting two studies, with participants in the Northern and Southern hemispheres, of its candidate mRNA-1010 seasonal influenza vaccine, which also utilizes mRNA technology.
In conjunction with Merck, Moderna announced its mRNA-4157/V940 candidate vaccine — specifically, a “personalized” cancer vaccine that has been trialed on melanoma patients and which, according to Moderna, is the first treatment to have demonstrated “efficacy for an investigational mRNA cancer treatment in a randomized clinical trial.”
In addition to injectables, Moderna also announced the ongoing development of an inhalable mRNA therapy, VX-522, “mRNA targeted at treating the underlying cause of cystic fibrosis” that is “delivered to the lung.”
The company said it expects continued sales of its COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in 2023, stating “expected minimum COVID-19 vaccines sales of approximately $5.0 billion” and “potential additional contracts in the United States, Europe, Japan, and other key markets.”
Moderna’s announcement also referenced several recent acquisitions and new partnerships the company has entered into.
This includes the acquisition of OriCiro Genomics, “a Japanese company with a novel development approach for cell-free synthesis and amplification of plasmid DNA, a key building block of mRNA manufacturing.”
A “strategic research collaboration” with CytomX Therapeutics was also announced, “for [the] development of mRNA-based conditionally activated therapeutics for oncology and non-oncology conditions.”
Moderna’s ongoing partnership with Metagenomi, “to accelerate the development of in vivo gene editing therapeutics,” was also highlighted in its announcement. Metagenomi is funded by Bayer, which acquired Monsanto, producer of the widely used weedkiller Roundup, in 2018.
As previously reported by The Defender, thousands of lawsuits are currently pending in the U.S., claiming that Roundup causes cancer.
Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD.TV’s “Good Morning CHD.”
Early in 2021 the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology accepted an undisclosed amount of money from the US government (HHS WH) as part of the COVID-19 Community Corps Program. From that point forward, ACOG broke with traditional practice on experimental and and novel therapies being contraindicated, and with federal dollars in hand, moved to a wholesale endorsement of COVID-19 vaccination with no assurances on short or long-term safety. Throughout the campaign, enthusiasm for vaccination was tepid among gravid women with <20% at any time having accepted a vaccine. However, the sharpest decline in rates of uptake occurred in the gravid and by summer of 2022, fewer than 2% were getting vaccinated.
There were no large scale randomized, placebo-controlled double blind clinical trials demonstrating safety in pregnant women. The non-randomized literature was prone to financial conflict-of-interest bias since the doctors and editors were likely affiliated with ACOG, and influenced by the government money and aspiration to promote mass vaccination. Thus, as a clinical scientist, my concern is only the neutral papers on safety were being written and published. A paper by Dick et al, caught my attention by reporting a nearly fourfold post-partum hemorrhage rate among those triple compared to double vaccinated. One could imagine how large the magnitude would have been compared to unvaccinated where hemostasis is not impaired.
Dick A, Rosenbloom JI, Karavani G, Gutman-Ido E, Lessans N, Chill HH. Safety of third SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (booster dose) during pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2022 Jul;4(4):100637. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100637. Epub 2022 Apr 7. PMID: 35398583; PMCID: PMC8988438.
In 2021, McCullough and Stricker published that because of the known dangerous mechanism of action of COVID-19 vaccination and the lack of any assurances on maternal-fetal safety, that all of the products are considered pregnancy category X which means they should not be used. This message got out to the community and rates of vaccination have progressively winnowed. As we sit here today, we should understand that ACOG and the OB/GYN community is compromised and thereby putting the maternal-fetal health of women at risk by promoting COVID-19 vaccination. Under no circumstances should a woman of childbearing potential or gravid should receive a COVID-19 vaccine. It is absolutely contraindicated.
Former ethics researcher at the W.H.O, Astrid Stuckelburger, PhD, sheds light on how our top world health agencies have used the COVID-19 pandemic to push a dangerous globalist agenda.
I just had a nice chat with Federal Air Surgeon Dr. Susan E. Northrup. By the end, she no longer can say, “I didn’t know.” If she doesn’t act now, she should be prosecuted for jeopardizing pilot lives.
Executive summary
At 10:15am on Saturday Jan 21, 2023, I made a call to the private cell phone of the Federal Air Surgeon of the FAA Dr. Susan Northrup. The call lasted 2 minutes.
In the call, I referred to the news article where she basically said that she had seen no evidence that the COVID vaccines have incapacitated pilots.
At first I thought she was lying, but it turns out she was telling the truth. She’s seen no evidence because even though she admitted on the call that she knew about Bob Snow, nobody at the FAA ever bothered to call him. Ever!!! So they’ve never seen the evidence because they deliberately refused to look at the evidence!! Get it? That’s how science works.
So I asked Dr. Northrup if she was interested in speaking with pilots who have been disabled by the COVID vaccine. She indicated she was. After all, what could she say at that point? She had to say “yes.”
It’s troubling she hasn’t talked to Bob Snow. I have talked to Bob Snow. I interviewed him for my Rumble channel even though it isn’t my job to investigate these incidents. Check out my interview with Josh Yoder and my interview with Bob Snow.
In other words, I’ve done more to investigate this incident than the FAA.
Captain Snow narrowly averted crashing the plane, but she never talked to him to assess whether the vax might have been involved. Seriously?!?! I offered to put her in touch with Captain Snow and she accepted.
So I emailed her (using her official work email at the FAA) a list of pilots, their phone numbers. She now has the contact info for these pilots:
Josh Yoder (head of US Freedom Flyers who is in touch with dozens of vaccine injured pilots)
Bob Snow (American Airlines)
Kevin Stillwagon (Delta Airlines)
Cody Flint (4 doctors have determined he was incapacitated in flight due to the COVID vaccine)
John C. Lamb (66 yr old commercial aviator with no previous heart problems. On Jan 6, his first class medical was deferred, due to 2nd AB block, Mobitz type 2. His wife had a heart attack 8 days after her Moderna shot. See this story for more details).
More importantly, in that email, I also invited her to host a public roundtable at the FAA inviting people on both sides of the “safe and effective” narrative so that the FAA could learn the truth. I just talked to Senator Ron Johnson and I can assure you that he’d be DELIGHTED to help her assemble a roundtable of doctors on both sides of the narrative to brief top FAA officials on the risks of these vaccines.
And I offered to publish her revised statement to the public so we can get the truth out that the vaccines are NOT safe and are disabling pilots.
Here’s the kicker. The corruption at the FAA runs deep. Did you know that nobody at the FAA has ever called Bob Snow? How can the FAA investigate this incident without ever even talking to the pilot?
Susan is going to have to reveal to the American public what exactly the FAA did to investigate the Bob Snow incident which happened on April 9, 2022. How is it that in 9 months nobody at the FAA (or from any other government organization) has reached out to Captain Snow? WTF? We need some transparency here on how these vaccine incidents are being investigated!
But Susan knew about Snow and she must have known that nobody reached out to call him. In other words, everyone knew they had a vaccine injured pilot and deliberately chose to NOT investigate. I have asked Susan for an explanation. If I don’t receive an explanation in 24 hours, I will call for her to resign.
I am calling for this since nobody in Congress is (other than Senator Johnson). None of them want to know. Heck, when I call members of Congress, they ignore me. Neither does the mainstream media. It appears that the responsibility for investigating these incidents falls on Steve Kirsch’s Substack (which has a full-time staff of just me) to hold these people accountable.
Susan is also going to have to talk about why there was a 300% increase in long-term disability claims filed at American Airlines (Jan – July 2022) and what investigation the FAA made into what was disabling those pilots.
We have a pilot shortage in America. What did Susan find when the FAA investigated why the disability claims skyrocketed? Or did they do nothing to investigate? If they didn’t do anything, why didn’t they? I’d like to know. The New York Times and CNN …. well, not so much.
Finally, did you know that Susan’s husband, John Hyle, is a pilot. John refused to take the COVID vaccine due to safety concerns. So it’s not just a few “anti-vaxxers” spreading “misinformation.” Susan clearly realizes that intelligent people she clearly respects have legitimate concerns that cause them to refuse to take the shot.
The narrative is falling apart.
We need public transparency on all of the things above. And we need it now before lives are lost.
We’ve had a couple of close calls. The FAA needs to be proactive about this, not REACTIVE after a crash happens.
Internment of civilian nationals belonging to opposing sides was carried out in varying degrees by all belligerent powers in World War Two. It was also the fate of those servicemen who found themselves in a neutral country.
At the outbreak of war there were around 80,000 potential enemy aliens in Britain who, it was feared, could be spies, or willing to assist Britain’s enemies in the event of an invasion. All Germans and Austrians over the age of 16 were called before special tribunals and were divided into one of three groups… continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.