UPDATE 06. February 2021: India's expert panel rejects Pfizer's application for Covid-19 vaccine

UPDATE 05. February 2021: Doctor with bioweapons expertise calls COVID-19 vaccines “weaponized medicine”

“We postulated that there may be increased vaccine side-effects in this group ..."UPDATE 02. February 2021: Researchers Uncover How the CDC Illegally Inflated COVID-19 Death Statistics + Study suggests Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine less effective against South African variant + Comparing the Covid-19 vaccines developed by Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson

UPDATE 01. February 2021: WHO warns against administering Moderna coronavirus vaccine to pregnant women


UPDATE 30. January 2021: Dr. Simone Gold Blows The Lid Off The COVID Lie and Sounds The Alarm About the Vaccines! [Must See]

UPDATE 29. January 2021: COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca is now authorised across the EU. This follows the granting of a conditional marketing authorisation by the European Commission on 29 January 2021, while battles are faught between the EU and vaccine producers over failing deliveries. + Dr Andrew Wakefield: This Is Not A Vaccine It Is An Irreversible Genetic Modification - PLEASE SHARE

UPDATE 28. January 2021: 24 Residents Dead in 3 Weeks as One Third of UK Nursing Home Residents Die After Experimental mRNA COVID Injections

UPDATE 27. January 2021: COUNTER-NARRATIVE BY THE BRITISH QUEEN'S GOVERNMENT OF GIBRALTAR + Why Would Anyone Choose to Receive an Experimental COVID mRNA Injection?

UPDATE 26. January 2021: AstraZeneca rejects ‘completely incorrect’ claim that Covid vaccine is less than 10 percent effective among elderly + SARS-CoV-2 has not been proven to exist: the shocking research of Christine Massey

UPDATE 25. January 2021: Merck ends COVID vaccine program, cites inferior immune responses

UPDATE 24. January 2021: 53 Dead in Gibraltar in 10 Days After Experimental Pfizer mRNA COVID Injections Started

UPDATE 23. January 2021: *URGENT BITCHUTE EXCLUSIVE: Anybody Getting The Experimental Vaccine Must See This: VAERS - Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System

Image result for covid-19 vaccineUPDATE 22. January 2021: These are the first 329 cases where mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the USA in December 2020 and the patients died as a result.

UPDATE 22. January 2021: RNA 'Vaccine' are GMO Implants, Not Vaccines + W.H.O. Comes Clean, Pandemic Over! The Plot to Steal America

UPDATE 21. January 2021: Vaccine skeptics now being labeled part of “extremist” groups in latest merger of Big Pharma and the police state government

UPDATE 21. January 2021: COVID-19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Disease

UPDATE 19. January 2021: RNA ‘Vaccines’ Are GMO Implants, Not Vaccines

UPDATE 16. January 2021: 55 Americans Have Died Following COVID Vaccination, Norway Deaths Rise To 29

UPDATE 15. January 2021: 23 Dead In Norway After Taking COVID Vaccine + COVID-19 vaccine reactions being blamed on PEG, but could it be the body responding to mRNA transhumanist genetic reprogramming?


UPDATE 13. January 2021: EMA hacked with BioNtech covid vax files released (get the data-set)

UPDATE 12. January 2021: Rate of adverse events caused by coronavirus vaccines 50x higher than flu shots + 10 Things You Need to Know about the Experimental COVID Vaccines (Very Important Article)

UPDATE 09. January 2021: “Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine." - Discussion between Dr. David Martin, Rocco Galati, Judy Mikovits, Ph.D und Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the Inocculations - it is a synthetic pathogen used in the mass-"vaccinations"!

UPDATE 06. January 2021: Vaxxed v. Unvaxxed: Lawsuit Seeks to Protect Americans From Discrimination Based on Vaccination Status + EU health authority approves Moderna mRNA vaccine

UPDATE 05. January 2021: MUST WATCH !!! -->>> FOCUS ON FAUCI

UPDATE 05. January 2021: Experimental COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Operating System Designed To Program Human DNA, Says Moderna

ICYMI: Say what? WHO says there is “no evidence” that COVID-19 vaccines will prevent spread of disease… so what good are they? + The story of mRNA: How a once-dismissed idea became a leading technology in the Covid vaccine race + The Whole Truth: Covid-19 and Covid-19 Vaccines (pdf) By Professor Jean-Bernard Fourtillan et. al. Warning Vaccine ! (video)

+ U.S. GOVT LOSES LANDMARK VACCINE LAWSUIT - Forced vaccinations now can be legally stopped - no quality control for 32 years + UK: MHRA awarded over £980,000 for collaboration with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Health Organisation

+ NUREMBERG CODE + UNESCO statement on bioethics and human rights

Pfizer and Moderna’s “95% effective” vaccines—we need more details and the raw data

Image result for covid-19 vaccinePeter Doshi - 04. 

Five weeks ago, when I raised questions about the results of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s covid-19 vaccine trials, all that was in the public domain were the study protocols and a few pressreleases.

Today, two journal publications and around 400 pages of summary data are available in the form of multiple reports presented by and to the FDA prior to the agency’s emergency authorization of each company’s mRNA vaccine.

While some of the additional details are reassuring, some are not. Here I outline new concerns about the trustworthiness and meaningfulness of the reported efficacy results.

“Suspected covid-19”

All attention has focused on the dramatic efficacy results: Pfizer reported 170 PCR confirmed covid-19 cases, split 8 to 162 between vaccine and placebo groups. But these numbers were dwarfed by a category of disease called “suspected covid-19”—those with symptomatic covid-19 that were not PCR confirmed. According to FDA’s report on Pfizer’s vaccine, there were “3410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group.”

With 20 times more suspected than confirmed cases, this category of disease cannot be ignored simply because there was no positive PCR test result. Indeed this makes it all the more urgent to understand. A rough estimate of vaccine efficacy against developing covid-19 symptoms, with or without a positive PCR test result, would be a relative risk reduction of 19% (see footnote)—far below the 50% effectiveness threshold for authorization set byregulators. Even after removing cases occurring within 7 days of vaccination (409 on Pfizer’s vaccine vs. 287 on placebo), which should include the majority of symptoms due to short-term vaccine reactogenicity, vaccine efficacy remains low: 29% (see footnote).

If many or most of these suspected cases were in people who had a false negative PCR test result, this would dramatically decrease vaccine efficacy. But considering that influenza-like illnesses have always had myriad causes—rhinoviruses, influenza viruses, other coronaviruses, adenoviruses, respiratory syncytial virus, etc.—some or many of the suspected covid-19 cases may be due to a different causative agent.

But why should etiology matter? If those experiencing “suspected covid-19” had essentially the same clinical course as confirmed covid-19, then “suspected plus confirmed covid-19” may be a more clinically meaningful endpoint than just confirmed covid-19.

However, if confirmed covid-19 is on average more severe than suspected covid-19, we must still keep in mind that at the end of the day, it is not average clinical severity that matters, it’s the incidence of severe disease that affects hospital admissions. With 20 times more suspected covid-19 than confirmed covid-19, and trials not designed to assess whether the vaccines can interrupt viral transmission, an analysis of severe disease irrespective of etiologic agent—namely, rates of hospitalizations, ICU cases, and deaths amongst trial participants—seems warranted, and is the only way to assess the vaccines’ real ability to take the edge off the pandemic.

There is a clear need for data to answer these questions, but Pfizer’s 92-page report didn’t mention the 3410 “suspected covid-19” cases. Nor did its publication in the New England Journal of Medicine. Nor did any of the reports on Moderna’s vaccine. The only source that appears to have reported it is FDA’s review of Pfizer’s vaccine.

The 371 individuals excluded from Pfizer vaccine efficacy analysis

Another reason we need more data is to analyse an unexplained detail found in a table of FDA’s review of Pfizer’s vaccine: 371 individuals excluded from the efficacy analysis for “important protocol deviations on or prior to 7 days after Dose 2.”  What is concerning is the imbalance between randomized groups in the number of these excluded individuals: 311 from the vaccine group vs 60 on placebo. (In contrast, in Moderna’s trial, there were just 36 participants excluded from the efficacy analysis for “major protocol deviation”—12 vaccine group vs 24 placebo group.)

What were these protocol deviations in Pfizer’s study, and why were there five times more participants excluded in the vaccine group?  The FDA report doesn’t say, and these exclusions are difficult to even spot in Pfizer’s report and journal publication.

Fever and pain medications, unblinding, and primary event adjudication committees

Last month I expressed concern about the potential confounding role of pain and fever medications to treat symptoms. I posited that such drugs could mask symptoms, leading to underdetection of covid-19 cases, possibly in greater numbers in people who received the vaccine in an effort to prevent or treat adverse events. However, it seems their potential to confound results was fairly limited: although the results indicate that these medicines were taken around 34 times more often in vaccine versus placebo recipients (at least for Pfizer’s vaccine—Moderna did not report as clearly), their use was presumably concentrated in the first week after vaccine use, taken to relieve post-injection local and systemic adverse events. But the cumulative incidence curves suggest a fairly constant rate of confirmed covid-19 cases over time, with symptom onset dates extending well beyond a week after dosing.

That said, the higher rate of medication use in the vaccine arm provides further reason to worry about unofficial unblinding. Given the vaccines’ reactogenicity, it’s hard to imagine participants and investigators could not make educated guesses about which group they were in.  The primary endpoint in the trials is relatively subjective making unblinding an important concern. Yet neither FDA nor the companies seem to have formally probed the reliability of the blinding procedure, and its effects on the reported outcomes.

Nor do we know enough about the processes of the primary event adjudication committees that counted covid-19 cases. Were they blinded to antibody data and information on patients’ symptoms in the first week after vaccination?  What criteria did they employ, and why, with a primary event consisting of a patient-reported outcome (covid-19 symptoms) and PCR test result, was such a committee even necessary? It’s also important to understand who was on these committees. While Moderna has named its four-member adjudication committee—all university-affiliated physicians—Pfizer’s protocol says three Pfizer employees did the work. Yes, Pfizer staff members.

Vaccine efficacy in people who already had covid?

Individuals with a known history of SARS-CoV-2 infection or previous diagnosis of Covid-19were excluded from Moderna’s and Pfizer’s trials. But still 1125 (3.0%) and 675 (2.2%) of participants in Pfizer’s and Moderna’s trials, respectively, were deemed to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 at baseline.

Vaccine safety and efficacy in these recipients has not received much attention, but as increasingly large portions of many countries’ populations may be “post-Covid,” these data seem important—and all the more so as the US CDC recommends offering vaccine “regardless of history of prior symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.” This follows on from the agency’s conclusions, regarding Pfizer’s vaccine, that it had ≥92% efficacy and “no specific safety concerns” in people with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection.

By my count, Pfizer apparently reported 8 cases of confirmed, symptomatic Covid-19 in people positive for SARS-CoV-2 at baseline (1 in the vaccine group, 7 in the placebo group, using the differences between Tables 9 and 10) and Moderna, 1 case (placebo group; Table 12).

But with only around four to 31 reinfections documented globally, how, in trials of tens of thousands, with median follow-up of two months, could there be nine confirmed covid-19 cases among those with SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline? Is this representative of meaningful vaccine efficacy, as CDC seems to have endorsed? Or could it be something else, like prevention of covid-19 symptoms, possibly by the vaccine or by the use of medicines which suppress symptoms, and nothing to do with reinfection?

We need the raw data

Addressing the many open questions about these trials requires access to the raw trial data. But no company seems to have shared data with any third party at this point.

Pfizer says it is making data available “upon request, and subject to review.” This stops far short of making data publicly available, but at least leaves the door open. How open is unclear, since the study protocol says Pfizer will only start making data available 24 months after study completion.

Moderna’s data sharing statement states data “may be available upon request once the trial is complete.” This translates to sometime in mid-to-late 2022, as follow-up is planned for 2 years.

Things may be no different for the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine which has pledged patient-level data “when the trial is complete.” And the ClinicalTrials.gov entry for the Russian Sputnik V vaccine says there are no plans to share individual participant data.

The European Medicines Agency and Health Canada, however, may share data for any authorized vaccines much earlier.  EMA has already pledged to publish the data submitted by Pfizer on its website “in due course,” as has Health Canada.

Peter Doshi, associate editor, The BMJ

Competing interests: I have been pursuing the public release of vaccine trial protocols, and have co-signed open letters calling for independence and transparency in covid-19 vaccine related decision making.


Calculations in this article are as follows:  19% = 1 – (8+1594)/(162+1816); 29% = 1 – (8 + 1594 – 409)/(162 + 1816 – 287). I ignored denominators as they are similar between groups.

FeaturedPeter Doshi

EPILOGUE: The pharmaceutical venture Pfizer/BioNTech expects around $15 billion of revenue from sales of its Covid-19 vaccine this year, while Wall Street had anticipated $12.7 billion.





First published on BITCHUTE February 7th, 2021.

Coronavirus Pt. 6: The COVID Vaccines – part 2 – UPDATED

By Dr Sherri Tenpenny, DO, AOBNMM, ABIHM - first published: 28. December 2020 - updated 05. January 2021

Part 1 here

Vaccine-induced Spike Antibodies: Havoc on the Lungs

When the coronavirus vaccine is injected, the mRNA contains “instructions” for building the spike protein that has been identified on the surface of the SARS-CoV2 virus. The cell’s reverse transcriptase enzymes are called into action, leading to the mass production of the spike (S) protein, the protein thought to play a vital role in its infectivity.

However, is this a good thing?

The 2019 study by Liu, Li et al, “Anti-spike IgG antibody causes severe acute lung injury by skewing macrophage responses during acute SARS-CoV infection” is worthy of your time to read and study.

The investigation was undertaken to study the effect vaccine-induced, spike-protein antibodies have on preventing SARS-CoV infections and to examine the possible effect the spike-protein antibodies have on the immune system.

What the researchers discovered was startling.

Sixteen macaque monkeys were given two injections; half of the animals received a modified vaccinia virus with an inserted spike protein (ADS-MVA) or a control vaccine made with a modified vaccinia virus without the spike protein antigen (ADC-MVA). Three healthy, non-vaccinated monkeys were included as additional controls.

The animals were sacrificed between weeks 9 and 21, after receiving the second injection; the vaccine containing the spike protein induced very high antibody responses to the spike protein (anti-S-IgG). Although the antibodies had reduced the viral load in the upper respiratory tract, they caused a serious, antibody-enhanced injury in the lungs. In fact, there was a direct and positive correlation between the level of antibody in serum and the degree of lung injury. The tissues had evidence of diffuse alveolar damage (DAD), with various degrees of exudate (pus-like fluid) and hemorrhage (bleeding).

Even more, the lungs were large filled with large quantities of macrophages (pus) that had been weakened and inactivated.

Macrophages are a type of white blood cell that engulf, digest and eliminate microbes and foreign proteins through a process called phagocytosis. There are two primary types of macrophages. The M1 cells kill pathogens by secreting pro-inflammatory mediators and the M2 cells, which have an anti-inflammatory function and regulate wound healing. Antibodies formed against the SARS-CoV spike protein binds to the surface of M2 macrophages and weaken their function, allowing the M1 macrophages to release unchecked quantities cytokines. Instead of healing and repairing the infected lung tissues, the anti-S-IgG antibodies stifle the M2 cells and promote M1-caused inflammation. The results are a disaster.

 A Summary of The Study’s Findings:

  • We present evidence of a detrimental role of the anti-S-IgG (anti-spike protein antibody) and acute lung injury during a SARS-CoV infection.
    • Vaccine-induced, spike-specific antibodies resulted in severe acute lung injury in SARS-CoV infected Chinese macaques
  • Anti-S-IgG antibody failed to prevent SARS-CoV lower respiratory tract infection (pneumonia) and amplify (increase) M1 macrophage infiltration and accumulation in the lungs.
  • Anti-S-IgG causes severe acute lung injury (ALI) when the lungs become re-infected and/or re-exposed to coronaviruses by removing the inflammation-resolving work of the M2 macrophages.
  • Animals who died of SARS-CoV infection had an accumulation of pro-inflammatory M1 macrophages and an absence of wound-healing M2 macrophages in their lungs.
  • Histological examination [the lung tissue of the sacrificed animals] in 6 of the vaccinated macaques revealed acute diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) with various degrees of severity. Most of the macaques in the control group given the non-spike protein vaccine showed only minor to moderate lung inflammation. (Note: alveoli are the tiny air sacs in the lungs that oxygenate the blood.)
  • Without the presence of the anti-S-IgG antibodies, M2 macrophages began healing the lungs within two days of infection.

Evidence Ignored

The above study was very recent (2019) but is it one of MANY dating back to 2002 documenting how damaging the COVID vaccine(s) are going to be once a person is vaccinated and then is re-exposed to circulating coronaviruses.

But that’s not the only problem caused by the COVID-19 vaccines.

Most garden-variety respiratory viruses cause infection by binding to specific receptors on the surface of the host’s cells. To block this attachment, antibodies formed from previous infections or by vaccines bind the circulating virus and neutralize it. This stops, or at least weakens, the progression to a full-blown infection.

However, in some viruses, the antibodies formed against them bind only loosely to the viral surface proteins. Instead of stopping an infection, this mechanism promotes invasion into the cell, enhancing the infection instead of stopping it.

Antibodies: Neutralizing vs Non-Neutralizing

A neutralizing antibody is shaped like the letter Y. The upper arms are called the Fab fragments and the stem is called the Fc fragment. The Fab fragments bind to an invading pathogen. The Fac fragment then binds to an Fac receptor on the surface of white blood cells, such as macrophages, lymphocytes, natural killer (NK) cells and others. Normally, this signals the white blood to release tiny bits of inflammatory chemicals to destroy the microbes

However, when the spike protein antibody (anti-S-IgG) engages with the Fac receptor on the surface of the cytomembrane, the “door opens” and allows the complex to enter host cells. And, if the Fab fragments of the antibody are only weakly bound to the surface of the pathogenic protein, the antibody acts like a Trojan horse. The loosely bound protein material “escapes” from the end of the Fab fragments, it highjacks that reverse transcriptase enzyme system and begins to replicate, enhancing the infection rather than stopping it.

This is the process of how antibody derived enhancement, or ADE, works. It’s like having an “on button” on a replicator but no “off button.” As the mRNA replicates, more and more non-neutralizing antibody is produced, leading to accelerated autoimmune diseases, primarily affecting the lungs, liver and kidneys. ADE may even plan a role in the development of fulminant ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) after patients have recovered from COVID.

ADE has been identified in more than 40 kinds of viruses including HIV, Dengue, West Nile and coronaviruses. There are seven or the 36 circulating coronavirus strains (LINK) are known to infect humans.

Every Animal Tested

In a 2012 study of mice, ferrets, hamsters, and Cynomolgus monkeys, using various coronavirus proteins and various adjuvants, researchers reported immunopathology in every animal that had been vaccinated and then re-exposed to a SARS-CoV virus.

Researchers clearly stated the following:

This combined experience provides concern for trials with SARS-CoV vaccines in humans. Clinical trials with SARS coronavirus vaccines have been conducted and reported to induce antibody responses and to be ‘‘safe.” However, the evidence for safety is for a short period of observation. The concern arising from the present report is for an immunopathologic reaction occurring among vaccinated individuals on (re)exposure to infectious SARS-CoV, the basis for developing a vaccine for SARS.

Researchers concluded the following:

The SARS-CoV vaccines all induced antibody protection against infection with SARS-CoV. However, [viral] challenge of the mice given any of the vaccines led to the occurrence of Th2-type immunopathology suggesting hypersensitivity to SARS-CoV components. Caution in proceeding to application of a SARS-CoV vaccines in humans is indicated.

Unanswered questions

We know so little about the COVID vaccines.

  • Does the vaccine prevent the infection or only lessen a patient’s symptoms?
  • Does it keep them from spreading the virus? If so, why do we still need to distance and wear a mask?
  • How long will the antibody last? In otherwords, how long to we have to worry about viral re-exposure?
  • What if you already have a co-morbidity such as an autoimmune disease?
  • How well does it protect the elderly, many of whom have received a flu vaccine?

We are only a few weeks into this mass global vaccination campaign, and thousands of side effects are already being reported.

With all the evidence being ignored, is avoiding an infection with a 99% survival rate, worth the risk of the vaccine?

My vote will be unequivocally no.

1-5-2020: UPDATE: In less than 1 month and with 1M doses delivered, the latest data from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) shows there have now been 40,433 adverse events REPORTED from the Covid19 vaccinations in the USA….AND THERE MAY BE THOUSANDS MORE UNREPORTED

Look at the list of side effects:  HERE


DOWNLOAD the courses by Dr. Tenpenny for free (registration required)


Advanced Vaccine Courses

Deepen your knowledge on specific vaccines and specific vaccine topics. Learn at your own pace. 



Re-published on BITCHUTE February 7th, 2021.

channel image

Citizen of Gotham

COG - Gates' Luciferase: (Implantable Quantum Dot Microneedle Vaccination Delivery System) #060606
COG - H.R. 6666 T.R.A.C.E. ACT & "I, Pet Goat II" Subliminals (Satanism's Homage to the Draconians)
COG - Dissolving Illusions by Suzanne Humphries & Roman Bystrianyk, MD (Fear-mongering, History, & Truth of Vacs)
COG - Dissolving Illusions by Suzanne Humphries & Roman Bystrianyk, MD (Vitamin C)
COVID: PSYOP of HUMANKIND (Vaccinations are Poison)


Worth To Watch Again (2016):

Polly Tommey - "How Dare You Cripple, Maim, and Murder the Minds of Our Children"

Re-published on BITCHUTE - February 9th, 2021.



ORIGINAL 07. Februry 2021 - Re-published on BITCHUTE February 8th, 2021.

Dr Vernon Coleman

Dr Vernon Coleman

International best-selling author, Dr Vernon Coleman MB ChB DSc FRSA, explains precisely what informed conset means, why it's important and why vaccines are the only drugs given without informed consent. 
For more unbiased information about other important matters, please visit https://www.vernoncoleman.com 


Why the flu has ‘disappeared’ ?

Global circulation of influenza viruses, 2018-2021 (WHO FluNet)

By SPR - 07. February 2021 (upd.)

Why has the flu disappeared since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic?

In 2020, after the global coronavirus pandemic began, influenza viruses mysteriously disappeared from global circulation (see WHO FluNet chart above). Some skeptics suspected that influenza was simply reclassified as covid, while many journalists and ‘fact checkers’ claimed influenza was suppressed by face masks and lockdowns.

But influenza has not been reclassified as covid, and influenza viruses have disappeared even in countries without face masks and lockdowns (e.g. Sweden), while they did not disappear during previous flu epidemics and pandemics, despite face masks, school closures, and other measures.

Instead, influenza viruses have simply been displaced by the more infectious novel coronavirus. This displacement effect is well known from previous influenza pandemics: the 1918 flu virus was displaced by the 1957 flu virus, which in turn was displaced by the 1968 flu virus (see chart). The 2009 swine flu virus temporarily displaced previous flu viruses, but eventually couldn’t assert itself (see chart). And even during the current coronavirus pandemic, more transmissible virus strains have repeatedly displaced previous coronavirus strains, often within weeks.

The last coronavirus pandemic is thought to have occurred in the 1890s (“Russian flu”), which is why a coronavirus displacing influenza viruses was not seen for more than a century. It is well known, however, that influenza vaccinations do not reduce the overall incidence of influenza-like illnesses, as influenza viruses simply get replaced by other respiratory viruses, including coronaviruses.

But why do countries with little or no covid – most of them are islands – also have no influenza? Because they closed their borders early. If the coronavirus doesn’t get in, influenza viruses – which normally oscillate between the northern and southern hemispheres – won’t get in, either.

An interesting and open question is whether the novel coronavirus might permanently suppress some or all of the existing influenza virus strains. This might, at last, be a positive development.

Additional figures

1) Competition between various respiratory viruses

Temporal patterns of seasonal respiratory viral infections in Glasgow (UK). Red: rhinoviruses, orange and yellow: influenza viruses; light green: coronaviruses.

Temporal patterns of viral respiratory infections (Nickbaksh et al, 2019)
2) The 2009 swine flu virus (almost) displacing other flu viruses

3) Sweden: No lockdown, no face masks, no influenza

4) Timeline of pandemic influenza viruses
Timeline of pandemic influenza viruses (Nickol, 2019)

See also


Researchers Uncover How the CDC Illegally Inflated COVID-19 Death Statistics

By Edward Hendrie - 02. February 2021

On February 1, 2021, Patrick Howley, writing for National File, reported that an investigation by the Public Health Policy Initiative uncovered evidence that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) violated federal law by fraudulently inflating COVID-19 fatality numbers.


Howley reported that the report reveals that the “CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent.”  Howley explained how that was done:

On March 24th the CDC published the NVSS COVID-19 Alert No. 2 document instructing medical examiners, coroners and physicians to deemphasize underlying causes of death, also referred to as pre-existing conditions or comorbidities, by recording them in Part II rather than Part I of death certificates as “…the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID-19 being the underlying cause of death more often than not.” This was a major rule change for death certificate reporting from the CDC’s 2003 Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting and Physicians’ Handbook on Medical Certification of Death, which have instructed death reporting professionals nationwide to report underlying conditions in Part I for the previous 17 years. This single change resulted in a significant inflation of COVID-19 fatalities by instructing that COVID-19 be listed in Part I of death certificates as a definitive cause of death regardless of confirmatory evidence, rather than listed in Part II as a contributor to death in the presence of pre-existing conditions, as would have been done using the 2003 guidelines. The research draws attention to this key distinction as it has led to a significant inflation in COVID fatality totals. By the researcher’s estimates, COVID-19 recorded fatalities are inflated nationwide by as much as 1600% above what they would be had the CDC used the 2003 handbooks.

Howley explains the effect of the CDC fraud and what should be done about it:

By enacting these new rules exclusively for COVID-19 in violation of federal law, the research alleges that the CDC significantly inflated data that has been used by elected officials and public health officials, in conjunction with unproven projection models from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), to justify extended closures for schools, places of worship, entertainment, and small businesses leading to unprecedented emotional and economic hardships nationwide. A formal petition has been sent to the Department of Justice as well as all US Attorneys seeking an immediate grand jury investigation into these allegations.

The report from the Public Health Policy Initiative is titled COVID-19 Data Collection, Comorbidity & Federal Law: A Historical Retrospective. The report explains the method used by the CDC to artificially inflate the COVID-19 death statistics.

The CDC published guidelines on March 24, 2020 that substantially altered how cause of death is recorded exclusively for COVID-19. This change was enacted apparently without public opportunity for comment or peer-review. As a result, a capricious alteration to data collection has compromised the accuracy, quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of their published data, leading to a significant increase in COVID-19 fatalities. This decision by the CDC may have subverted the legal oversight of the OMB as Congressionally authorized by the PRA & IQA as well.

The report explains that under this newly adopted CDC reporting scheme “COVID-19 became emphasized as a cause of death as frequently as possible, while comorbidity was simultaneously deemphasized as causes of death.”

The investigators reiterated what it had revealed in a prior July 24, 2020, report titled If COVID Fatalities Were 90.2% Lower, How Would You Feel About Schools Reopening?“The CDC has instructed hospitals, medical examiners, coroners and physicians to collect and report COVID-19 data by significantly different standards than all other infectious diseases and causes of death.”

The state public officials dutifully followed the new CDC guidance, which means that “COVID-19 data is collected and reported by a much different standard than all other infectious diseases and causes of death data.”

In that July 24, 2020, article, the researchers explained:

On March 24th, the NVSS, under the direction of the CDC and National Institute of Health (NIH), instructed physicians, medical examiners, and coroners that COVID-19 would:

    • be recorded as the underlying cause of death “more often than not;”
    • be recorded as the cause of death listed in Part I of the death certificate even in assumed cases;
    • be recorded as the primary cause of death even if the decedent had other chronic comorbidities. All comorbidities for COVID-19 would be listed now in Part II, rather than in Part I as they had been since 2003 for all other causes of death.

March 24th, 2020 – NVSS COVID-19 Alert No. 2

“Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause? The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID19 being the underlying cause more often than not.

“Should “COVID-19” be reported on the death certificate only with a confirmed test? COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death. Certifiers should include as much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case, medical records, laboratory testing, etc. If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II. (See attached Guidance for Certifying COVID-19 Deaths)”

It’s worth noting that Part I of a death certificate is the immediate cause of death listed in sequential order from the official cause on line item (a) to the underlying causes that contributed to death in descending order of importance on line item (d), while Part II is/are the significant conditions NOT relating to the underlying cause(s) in Part I.

As we will demonstrate shortly, comorbid conditions are always listed on Part I of death certificates as causes of death per the 2003 CDC Handbook, so that accurate reporting can be developed.  Comorbidities are seldom placed in Part II, as this is typically the place where coroners and medical examiners can list recent infections as underlying factors.

Prior to the March 24th and April 14th decisions, any comorbidities would have been listed in Part I rather than Part II and initiating factors, like recent infections, would have been listed on the last line in Part I or in Part II.

The graph below represents the actual deaths due to COVID-19 if those deaths had been reported according to the traditional CDC rules that were listed in the 2003 CDC Medical Examiner’s and Coroner’s Handbook on Death Registrationwhich were in effect until the new COVID-19 rules were issued by the CDC on March 24, 2020. The new reporting rules only apply to COVID-19. All other causes of death still follow the traditional rules set forth in the 2003 CDC Handbook. Notice how the new CDC guidance for reporting COVID-19 deaths initiated in the March 24, 2020, COVID-19 Alert No. 2  inflated the number of deaths from COVID-19 1600%.

The March 24, 2020, COVID-19 Alert No. 2 referred to additional documents providing further guidance, which seemed to be a reference to a March 4, 2020, CDC document titled Guidance for Certifying COVID-19 Deaths, which explained how to list COVID-19 in Part I of the Death Certificate to show how to list COVID-19 as the “underlying cause” of death.

Since the new rules were such a clear departure from the prior practice it was necessary for the CDC to elaborate with further guidance in April 2020.

I explained how the scam worked in a September 1, 2020, blog post titled, The COVID-19 Comorbidity Scam of the CDC.

The CDC admitted in its March 24, 2020, COVID-19 Alert No. 2 that “the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID19 being the underlying cause more often than not.”

COVID-19-Comorbidity-Deception-By-CDC Download

Source: James Fetzerblog



India's expert panel rejects Pfizer's application for Covid-19 vaccine

Cites serious adverse events

By Sohini Das  - 06. February 2021


Pfizer on Friday said it had withdrawn its application, and would submit additional data as it becomes available in the near future

India’s expert panel on Covid-19 drugs and vaccines has turned down US pharmaceutical major Pfizer's application for emergency use authorisation for its vaccine candidate -- already in use in the US and UK -- in the absence of any plan on the firm's part to generate safety and immunogenicity data in the local population.

Immunogenicity means the ability of a vaccine candidate to generate the desired immune response against the pathogen.

Pfizer on Friday said it had withdrawn its application, and would submit additional data as it becomes available in the near future.

India has insisted on having a safety and immunogenicity trial in the country. This became an important consideration for the expert panel, which noted that there had been several serious adverse events in the case of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and the causality of these events was being investigated.

The company met the subject expert committee (SEC) on February 3. Sources revealed that the Indian drug regulator had decided to not allow emergency use approval for any vaccine candidate unless it was backed by data from a local bridge trial. "Safety and immunogenicity data from at least a 1,600-volunteer bridge trial in India is a must for the expert panel to recommend approval to any vaccine candidate," said a source in the know.

A spokesperson for Pfizer, however, said, “Based on the deliberations at the meeting and our understanding of additional information that the regulator may need, the company has decided to withdraw its application. Pfizer will continue to engage with the authority and resubmit its approval request with additional information as it becomes available in the near future.”

chartThe SEC noted, “The firm presented its proposal for emergency use authorisation of its Covid-19 mRNA vaccine, BNT162b, before the committee. The committee noted that incidents of palsy, anaphylaxis, and other serious adverse events (SAEs) have been reported during post marketing, and the causality of the events with the vaccine is being investigated. Further, the firm has not proposed any plan to generate safety and immunogenicity data in Indian population. After detailed deliberations, the committee has not recommended for grant of permission for emergency use in the country at this stage.”

Earlier, the firm had missed appearing before the SEC thrice, blaming a short notice and time-zone difference for it.

The source added that Pfizer had also indicated there were no plans to manufacture the vaccine in India. “Pfizer's shipments have been falling globally, and the firm may have decided to focus on these geographies for the moment and increase production. To get approval in India, it would not only have to come back with data on facial palsy cases, but also with the clinical trial protocol for the bridge trial," said the source.

The US administration is trying to order more Covid-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna through the summer. These companies have to supply 100 million doses each to the US and will have to significantly increase the number of weekly doses they release to achieve that goal.

While it has withdrawn the application, the firm said it remained committed to making the vaccine available for use in India.

”Pfizer remains committed to making its vaccine available for use by the government in India and to pursuing the requisite pathway for emergency use authorisation that enables the availability of this vaccine for any future deployment," it said. Pfizer did not wish to comment on when it can re-apply for approval in India.

The vaccine requires refrigeration at minus 70 degree Celsius. The company had drawn up elaborate cold-chain plans for the same.


Doctor with bioweapons expertise calls COVID-19 vaccines “weaponized medicine”

By  - 05. February 2021

While some doctors are encouraging people to get in line for their COVID-19 vaccine, others are bravely speaking out about why rushing to get an untested shot might not be such a good idea.

Dr. Lee Merritt, a former president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, has admitted that she believes the current coronavirus vaccines are actually very dangerous bioweapons that are being deployed against the population.

Dr. Merritt knows plenty about bioweapons, having studied them while she served as an orthopedic surgeon for the United States Navy for nearly a decade. She has also published several peer-reviewed papers and was on the board of the Arizona Medical Association.

In an interview with The New America, Dr. Merritt said that she believes we’re living in a time of “fifth-generational warfare” where covert biological agents, propaganda and economic warfare are being used instead of weapons on the battlefield to turn the tide of power between nations.

She said that vaccines are most effective when they are used for deadly, untreatable viruses like polio and smallpox. However, scientists have already found some promising coronavirus treatments, such as hydroxychloroquine and intravenously delivered vitamin C, which makes one wonder why a vaccine is so urgent.

She stated: “If we are at biowarfare right now as a part of this multi-dimensional warfare, if you have a treatment in your back pocket, they cannot terrorize you with viruses and that’s important because… [the vaccine] doesn’t prevent transmission by their own admission.”

Of course, the media regularly censors information about effective ways to prevent and treat the disease, leaving the masses to believe a vaccine is the only option. Social media is also doing its best to silence those who share information about natural ways to reduce your risk, and the major platforms are also working overtime to stop people from discussing the potential dangers of these vaccines.

COVID-19 vaccines are nothing like traditional vaccines

Unfortunately, as she points out, coronavirus vaccines are nothing like the vaccines we have long used. With these vaccines, messenger RNA is injected into people’s bodies, which changes their genetic code so they start producing their own modified version of the virus, which the immune system learns to fight – at least in theory.

However, not only has this particular vaccine never been tested over the long term, but this entire approach to vaccination has never undergone long-term studies to prove its safety in humans. Animal studies have shown an “antibody-dependent enhancement” that sees the virus making its way into the body undetected because a person’s immune system sees it as being part of the body, she says, which can cause swift death.

In fact, she says that the longest they have ever followed people after getting the vaccine is two months, which is not nearly enough time to determine if there will be an antibody enhancement problem.

This, she says, is precisely how a foreign adversary would go about waging clandestine biowarfare on its enemies without the process being traced back to them.

She calls the vaccines “a perfect binary weapon,” saying: “There’s no way I know exactly what that mRNA is programmed to and neither do you and neither do most doctors. The doctors can’t get at that data. That’s for the guys at the very top of this project… If I were China and I wanted to take down our military, I’d just make an mRNA that I know it doesn’t exist in nature so nobody’s going to die from a vaccine and then two years later, I release whatever it is that I made… and it causes this immune enhancement death.”

When you see all the footage of people proudly rolling up their sleeves to get the coronavirus vaccine, it’s pretty scary to think of what might happen if Dr. Merritt is right and the masses are willingly being injected with a form of weaponized medicine.

Sources for this article include:




Study suggests Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine less effective against South African variant

People queue for a COVID-19 swab test, after a new SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus variant originating from South Africa was discovered, in Ealing, West London, Britain February 2, 2021. REUTERS/Henry Nicholls/File Photo reuters_tickers
By Kate Kelland - 02. February 2021

LONDON (Reuters) - The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine may be less able to protect against infection with a South African variant of the virus that has a worrying mutation, according to results of a British study released on Tuesday.

The preliminary data, which have yet to be peer-reviewed and involve a small number of patients, also suggest a significant proportion of people aged over 80 may not be sufficiently protected against new variants of the virus until they have had two doses of the vaccine, researchers leading the study said.

"Of particular concern ... is the emergence of the E484K mutation (found in the South African variant), which so far has only been seen in a relatively small number of individuals," said Ravi Gupta, a professor at Cambridge University's Institute of Therapeutic Immunology & Infectious Disease, who co-led the study.

"Our work suggests the vaccine is likely to be less effective when dealing with this mutation."

Britain and many other countries have begun rolling out the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine to try to stem the spread of the pandemic disease.

While the highly effective vaccine is designed to be given in two doses around three weeks apart, Britain's government has opted to extend that time gap to up to 12 weeks to try to swiftly reach as many people as possible with a first dose.

The study released on Tuesday used blood samples from 26 people who had received their first dose of the Pfizer vaccine three weeks previously to test whether the shot would protect against two variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus - the UK variant, known as B1.1.7., and the South African variant, which has the E484K mutation.

When testing the blood serum samples, all but seven of the participants had levels of antibodies sufficiently high to neutralise the virus – that is, to protect against infection, the researchers said.

When the scientists added all the key mutations found in B1.1.7 variant, however, they found the efficacy of the vaccine was affected, with, on average, two-fold higher concentrations of antibody required to neutralise the virus.

When the E484K mutation was added, even greater levels of antibody were required for the virus to be neutralised - with an average of a 10-fold increase needed, the researchers said.

Dami Collier, who co-led the work, said the findings suggest "a significant proportion of people aged over 80 may not have developed protective neutralising antibodies against infection three weeks after their first dose of the vaccine."

Clinical trial data released last week on two other COVID-19 vaccines - from Novavax and Johnson & Johnson - also found the South African coronavirus reduced their ability to protect against the disease.

(Reporting by Kate Kelland, editing by Timothy Heritage)


WHO warns against administering Moderna coronavirus vaccine to pregnant women

By  - 01. February 2021

Image: WHO warns against administering Moderna coronavirus vaccine to pregnant women

The World Health Organization (WHO) warned that pregnant women should not get Moderna’s Wuhan coronavirus vaccine. It issued the warning because of insufficient data proving that it was safe for pregnant women. The global health body’s pronouncement applied to more than three million expectant mothers in the U.S., who are at a higher risk of suffering from severe COVID-19.

In a Jan. 26 statement, the WHO said it did not recommend giving the Moderna mRNA shot to pregnant women. “While pregnancy puts women at a higher risk of severe COVID-19, the use of this vaccine in pregnant woman is currently not recommended,” the statement said. Frontline healthcare workers and those with underlying conditions are among the pregnant women at high risk for the disease.

WHO Department of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals Director Kate O’Brien stressed the need for clinical trials on pregnant women using the Moderna vaccine. “There is no reason to think there could be a problem in pregnancy. We are just acknowledging the data is not there at the moment,” she said during a Jan. 26 virtual press briefing.

A number of medical professionals have opposed the exclusion of pregnant women from vaccination. They argue that patients themselves should decide whether they want to avail of the jab or not. The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) is among these parties against the exclusion of pregnant women from vaccination trials and guidance.

ACOG said in a statement that pregnant women should have the final say on taking the jab and be informed of any risks. “Pregnant individuals are more likely to have certain manifestations of severe illness associated with COVID-19 infection. Further, upwards of half of pregnant individuals also fall into another high-priority category – including frontline workers and those with underlying conditions,” it said.

The statement added that “ACOG continues to urge that for pregnant individuals, the decision to vaccinate must be left to each patient in [consultation] with their trusted clinician.”

Similar guidance has been issued for the Pfizer/BioNTech Wuhan coronavirus vaccine

Excluding pregnant women in vaccine trials is not an uncommon practice. However, doctors have expressed concerns about pregnant women being unable to receive the vaccine. Millions of pregnant or breastfeeding women are members of the workforce.

According to an October 2020 report by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), female workers comprise 75 percent of the healthcare workforce. About 330,000 healthcare workers “could be pregnant or recently postpartum at [the] time of vaccine implementation, it added. Furthermore, the report stated that pregnant COVID-19 patients are twice as likely to be admitted to intensive care units and thrice more likely to require a ventilator than non-pregnant patients.

U.K. Royal College of Midwives Director for Scotland Dr. Mary Ross Davie said: “There is not enough evidence to recommend vaccinating pregnant women against COVID-19. There is no evidence of harm, but there is also no current evidence of safety as pregnant women were excluded from all of the vaccination trials.”

A similar guidance had been issued with the earlier Pfizer/BioNTech Wuhan coronavirus vaccine. LifeSiteNews reported in early December 2020 that the British government warned against pregnant or breastfeeding women getting the BNT162b2 jab. According to U.K. authorities, the vaccine’s effects on fertility are still “unknown.” (Related: Moderna’s and Pfizer’s vaccines share the same problem: They’re unsafe for people with allergies.)

The U.K. issued the warning in a 10-page guide outlining the vaccine’s proper storage, dilution and administration. Section 4.6 of the guide dealt with fertility, pregnancy and lactation. It said: “COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 is not recommended during pregnancy … [and] should not be used during breast-feeding.” The document also warned women of child-bearing age that “pregnancy should be excluded before vaccination” and that they should “avoid pregnancy for at least two months after their second dose.” (Related: Pfizer coronavirus vaccine warning: No breastfeeding or getting pregnant after being immunized… it might damage the child.)

Head over to VaccineDamage.news to find more about the risks pregnant women face with COVID-19 vaccines.

Sources include:

Natural News




CDC.gov [PDF]


Assets.Publishing.Service.gov.uk [PDF]


Comparing the Covid-19 vaccines developed by Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson

By Helen Branswell - 02. February 2021

vaccine silhouette

CVS registered pharmacist Ken Ramey prepares to give a Covid-19 vaccine at the Isles of Vero Beach assisted and independent senior living community in Vero Beach, Fla.WILFREDO LEE/AP

In an ideal world, a pandemic vaccine could be delivered in a single shot, so supplies could be stretched to cover a lot of people. It would trigger no side effect more significant than a sore arm. And it would be easy to ship and store.

Soon, it seems, this ideal of a Covid-19 vaccine will be within reach. 

Last Friday, Johnson & Johnson announced that a one-dose vaccine being developed by its vaccines division, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, had been shown to be 66% protective against moderate to severe Covid infection in a multicountry study. But, importantly, it was 85% effective in protecting against severe disease. And there were no hospitalizations or deaths among people in the vaccine arm of a large clinical trial. 

Overall efficacy varied a bit geographically, especially in South Africa, where a new variant appears to evade to some degree the immunity induced both by infection and by Covid vaccines, which were designed to target earlier strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Johnson & Johnson said it will apply to the Food and Drug Administration for an emergency use authorization this week. That means sometime later this month or early in March its vaccine will likely start to be used in the United States, though the company is not expected to be able to supply substantial numbers of doses until April.

Earlier STAT published a head-to-head comparison of the vaccines developed by Pfizer and its partner, BioNTech, and by Moderna, which have been in use in the country since December. We’re updating it here with information about the J&J vaccine, with the caveat that some data from this likely new entry to the U.S. vaccination program haven’t yet been made public.

Please note that in the initial rollout of vaccine, individuals are unlikely to be offered a choice of which vaccine they want. Supplies are too scarce. The vaccine available at the place where you are being vaccinated is the one you’ll get.

Vaccine types

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are made using messenger RNA, or mRNA, a technology that delivers a bit of genetic code to cells — in effect, a recipe to make the surface protein (known as spike) on the SARS-2 virus. The proteins made with the mRNA instructions activate the immune system, teaching it to see the spike protein as foreign and develop antibodies and other immunity weapons with which to fight it.

The J&J vaccine uses a different approach to instruct human cells to make the SARS-2 spike protein, which then triggers an immune response. It is what’s known as a viral vectored vaccine. A harmless adenovirus — from a large family of viruses,  some of which cause common colds — has been engineered to carry the genetic code for the SARS-2 spike protein. Once the adenovirus enters cells, they use that code to make spike proteins.  J&J employs this same approach to make an Ebola vaccine that has been authorized for use by the European Medicines Agency.

Target population

The Pfizer vaccine has been authorized for use for people aged 16 and older. Moderna’s has been cleared for use in people 18 and older, though the company is now testing its vaccine in 12- to 17-year-olds. J&J’s vaccine has been tested in people 18 and older, so for the time being, this vaccine won’t be available for use in children and teens under 18 either.

Vaccine efficacy

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines have shown astonishing — and essentially equivalent — degrees of efficacy, at least in the early stages after vaccination. 

The Pfizer vaccine showed efficacy of 95% at preventing symptomatic Covid infection after two doses. The vaccine appeared to be more or less equally protective across age groups and racial and ethnic groups. 

The Moderna vaccine was 94.1% effective at preventing symptomatic Covid-19, after the second dose. The vaccine’s efficacy appeared to be slightly lower in people 65 and older, but during a presentation to the Food and Drug Administration’s advisory committee in December, the company explained that the numbers could have been influenced by the fact there were few cases in that age group in the trial. The vaccine appeared to be equally effective across different ethnic and racial groups.

But comparing efficacy in those vaccines to the efficacy of Johnson & Johnson’s is challenging because of differences in the designs of the Phase 3 clinical tests — essentially the trials were testing for different outcomes. Pfizer’s and Moderna’s trials were testing for slightly different criteria, with Pfizer counting cases from seven days after receipt of the second dose of vaccine and Moderna waiting till day 14 to start counting cases. Both tested for any symptomatic Covid infection.

J&J, by contrast, sought to determine whether one dose of its vaccine protected against moderate to severe Covid illness — defined as a combination of a positive test and at least one symptom such as shortness of breath, beginning from 14 or 28 days after the single shot. (The company collected data for both.)  

Because of the difference in the trials, making direct comparisons is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. Additionally, Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines were tested before the emergence of troubling new variants in Britain, South Africa, and Brazil. It’s not entirely clear how well they will work against these mutated viruses.

The J&J vaccine was still being tested when the variants were making the rounds. Much of the data generated in the South African arm of the J&J trial involved people who were infected with the variant first seen in South Africa, called B.1.351.

The J&J one-dose vaccine was shown to be 66% protective against moderate to severe Covid infections overall from 28 days after injection, though there was variability based on geographic locations. The vaccine was 72% protective in the United States, 66% protective in South America, and 57% protective in South Africa.

But the vaccine was shown to be 85% protective against severe disease, with no differences across countries (eight) or regions (three) in the study, nor across age groups among trial participants. And there were no hospitalizations or deaths in the vaccine arm of the trial after the 28-day period in which immunity developed.

It’s not yet known if any of these vaccines prevent asymptomatic infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Nor is it known if vaccinated people can transmit the virus if they do become infected but don’t show symptoms.

Number of doses/amounts of vaccine per dose

Both the Moderna and the Pfizer vaccines require two shots: a priming dose, followed by a booster shot. The interval between Moderna doses is 28 days; for the Pfizer vaccine, it’s 21 days.

Each dose of Pfizer’s contains 30 micrograms of vaccine. Moderna went with a much larger dose of vaccine, 100 micrograms. It means the company is using a little more than three times as much vaccine per person as Pfizer is. And yet, they aren’t getting better results. The government’s vaccine development program, formerly called Operation Warp Speed, has asked Moderna to test if it could lower the dosage of its vaccine without eroding the vaccine’s protection.

The J&J vaccine is, as mentioned, a single-dose vaccine. The company is also testing a two-dose regimen, with the two shots given eight weeks apart. The results from that 30,000-person trial aren’t expected until sometime in May.

Side-effect profile

In the vernacular of vaccinology, vaccines that trigger a range of transient side effects in a lot of recipients are known as reactogenic.

All of these vaccines — in fact, most if not all the Covid-19 vaccines that have reported data so far — fall into the reactogenic category. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, an expert panel that helps the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention set vaccination policies, has advised hospitals they may want to stagger vaccinations among employees  — for instance, don’t vaccinate all emergency room staff at the same time — in case some feel too unwell to work the day after being vaccinated.

The most common side effects are injection site pain, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, and joint pain. Some people in the clinical trials have reported fever. Side effects are more common after the second dose; younger adults, who have more robust immune systems, reported more side effects than older adults.

It will take time to come up with a firm estimate of how frequently this side effect occurs. The most recent data from the CDC suggest that anaphylaxis occurs at a rate of about 2.1 cases per one million doses given of the Moderna vaccine, and 6.2 cases per million doses of the Pfizer. Many of the people who have developed anaphylaxis have a history of severe allergies and some have had previous episodes of anaphylaxis. 

To date the J&J vaccine has not been associated with anaphylactic reactions.

Safety for those who are pregnant or lactating

None of the vaccines has been tested in these two groups.

Moderna has completed animal studies the FDA demanded of manufacturers; these studies look for evidence that the vaccine might harm the pregnancy or the developing fetus. The company said it saw no such signals.

Pfizer has only interim data from its animal studies, but said it saw no concerning signs either.

The CDC recommends until those studies are conducted, the choice of whether to get vaccinated should rest with the person who is pregnant or lactating. This is a more permissive stance than has been taken in some countries, which have said people who are pregnant should not be vaccinated with these vaccines.

The J&J vaccine hasn’t yet been through the regulatory process, so it’s too early to say what the FDA and the CDC will recommend. The company plans to include pregnant women in clinical trials in the near future, a spokesman told STAT.

Storage requirements

The mRNA vaccines require an elaborate cold chain, the term used to describe the conditions under which vaccines must be stored during distribution and when they are in the doctors’ offices, pharmacies, or public health clinics where they’ll be administered.

The J&J does not, which means this vaccine can be given easily anywhere, once supplies are adequate. Doctors’ offices, pharmacies, mass vaccination sites, public health clinics — this vaccine will be much easier to use. It can be stored for at least three months at the temperature of a regular refrigerator.

Of the mRNA vaccines, Moderna’s is far easier to use than Pfizer’s. For starters, Moderna’s must be shipped at -4 Fahrenheit; Pfizer’s must be shipped and stored at -94 Fahrenheit. The former is the temperature of a regular refrigerator freezer; the latter requires special ultracold freezers. Doctors’ offices do not have ultracold freezers; neighborhood pharmacies don’t either.

After thawing, a vial of the Pfizer vaccine must be used within five days; Moderna’s is stable at fridge temperature for 30 days and at room temperature for 12 hours. STAT asked J&J how long its vaccine will last once a vial has begun to be used, but so far the company has not provided that information.

Minimum purchase order

The ultracold storage requirement is not the only challenging aspect of the Pfizer vaccine. The minimum amount of vaccine a location can order is 975 doses. A large teaching hospital might need several of those. But there are plenty of places across the country that don’t need 975 doses to vaccinate the people currently eligible for vaccination — health workers and nursing home residents. This is the vaccine that needs to be kept at -94 F. The minimum order size will limit the locations in which this vaccine can be used.

The Moderna vaccine’s minimum order is 100 doses, a much more manageable number.

STAT asked J&J what its minimum order will be; it declined to say.

The Pfizer vaccine is shipped in six-dose vials. Moderna’s vaccine comes in 10-dose vials. J&J’s vaccine will be packaged in five-dose vials.

Durability of protection

Figuring out how long the protection provided by any of these vaccines will last will take time. It’s going to involve periodic blood draws from some volunteers to see what their antibody levels look like, though a decline in antibody levels doesn’t necessarily equate to loss of protection.

But a large part of this work will involve watching for reports that people who were immunized are starting to contract Covid in larger numbers, a development that would probably lead to recommendations to give people booster shots at some yet-to-be-determined interval.

Correction: An earlier version of this story mischaracterized the way in which viral vectored vaccines work. 


Helen Branswell

Helen Branswell Senior Writer, Infectious Disease - Helen covers issues broadly related to infectious diseases, including outbreaks, preparedness, research, and vaccine development. @HelenBranswell



First published on BITCHUTE February 1st, 2021.

channel image


How COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ May Destroy the Lives of Millions 31/01/2021

COVID-19 Vaccination: Experimental Gene Therapy Under the Guise of Immunity?

A Special Interview With Judy Mikovits, Ph.D.By Dr. Joseph Mercola

The COVID-19 vaccine really isn’t a vaccine in the medical definition of a vaccine. It’s more accurately an experimental gene therapy that could prematurely kill large amounts of the population and disable exponentially more.


FULL TRANSCRIPT (pdf): COVID-19 Vaccination: Experimental Gene Therapy Under the Guise of Immunity? A Special Interview With Judy Mikovits, Ph.D. By Dr. Joseph Mercola


S01 1/3: Special event roundtable with Dr Judy Mikovits discussing the magic virus and mRNA vaccines https://is.gd/yrVOAt

S01 2/3: Drs Andrew Kaufman and Thomas Cowan discussing Judy Mikovits claims on The Myth is Canada [show more]

S01 3/3: TMT Roundtable 5: Dr Judy Mikovits & Dr Andrew Kaufman take a COVID-1984 deep science dive https://is.gd/cwwV83


More on "Vaccines" and Contract Law

By Arlene Johnson - 31. January 2021

My experience with the local medical facility here where I live, is that they don't have the ingredients of the mRNA "vaccine" to send me in an Email message. 

This is what I was told when I asked for the ingredients to be sent to me by Email when they called me up on the phone on January 21, 2021. 

But what if the medical facility where you live deceives you? Do you have the right to object to something that you know will harm you at the very least, if not kill you which has happened to well over 150 people around the world who have accepted it, because they believed the lies that they have been fed by their government and mainstream media which continue to lie to us because they want us to believe that something else killed the recipient of this mRNA "vaccine"? 

According to Moderna what they are injecting is an operating system. See from Sherry S. in Kentucky: 

That's why I hesitate to advise people to say that they will accept the "vaccine" if the authority with which they're dealing gives them the ingredients of it, because these facilities are getting paid by government to give you the injection that could easily kill you. So their goal is to benefit financially instead of help you.

Here where I live, if you are going to have surgery, they have you sign a contract, but they are not offering a contract to the recipients of the COVID-19 "vaccine" which is also invasion, so people have no way to decline unless they know contract law, because with no contract the providers of this "vaccine" are not responsible for what happens to you.

Now, see below how contract law will help you to avoid this mRNA substance destroying your DNA, and no amount of coercion by the government should cause you to feel guilty to the extent that you change your mind to accept this "vaccine":

From Ronald F. in Florida

Whether it is Canadians or U.S. citizens or any other living soul on Earth, all of this comes down to contract law which is the highest form of law under the Uniform Commercial Code. This is about offers and acceptance. In order for a contract to be valid, both sides have to agree to the terms of the contract and the conditions of the contract. If an offer is made such as take the vaccine then a counter offer can be made by the offeree, which is you. And so a fair and equitable contract can be concluded. If the offeror, which is the one who is offering the "vaccine" to you, does not accept the conditions by the offeree then there is no contract, and the situation evaporates with no injection and no agreement by both sides. It's simple contract law.

Arlene's note: Bear in mind that this injection would penetrate your body which is an assault unless you consent to it. This is assault law instead of contract law just so you know.

From Franklin P. in British Columbia, Canada:

If I take a "vaccine" I do so as an agreement and contract. When that transaction is engulfed in quasi-religious idiocy as is the case with these "vaccinations" there is no contract. It "evaporates".

Now, here are some very brave medical doctors who categorically state not to get the COVID "vaccine":
Dr Andrew Kaufman USA
Dr Hilde De Smet Belgium
Dr Mohammad Adil United Kingdom
Dr Barre Lando USA
Dr Carrie Madej USA
Dr Delores Cahill Republic of Ireland
Dr Piotr Rubas Poland 
Dr Natalia Prego Cancelo Spain
Dr Elke F. de Klerk Holland
See https://altnews.org/2020/12/21/doctors-around-the-world-issue-dire-warning-do-not-get-the-covid-vaccine/

God bless,

Arlene Johnson


Dr. Simone Gold Blows The Lid Off The COVID Lie and Sounds The Alarm About the Vaccines! [Must See]

By  - 30. January 2021

I have seen this video now. One word:  WOW. Another word:  post this everywhere!

All I know is I’m going to keep doing what I’ve done since 2015 which is broadcasting the TRUTH as loudly as I can.

And that brings me to the wonderful Dr. Simone Gold who is doing the exact same thing, exposing the COVID lie and sounding the alarm on the vaccines!

See this:

MUST WATCH: Dr. Simone Gold, “The Covid-19 Vaccine, Explained”.

Please view the video on our website – then share widely. Everyone needs the truth in order to make informed decisions.

Video link:https://t.co/AWdCykdw27 pic.twitter.com/G1qrWZuMjj

— Dr. Simone Gold (@drsimonegold) January 26, 2021

And check this out:

Facebook just announced it “made a mistake” when it censored studies showing HCQ saves lives. Censorship is never “a mistake.”  Tech executives repeatedly made a calculated decision, month after month, silencing physicians worldwide.

Censorship kills.https://t.co/TX0g8lPxUx pic.twitter.com/nh1f9lwDNc

— Dr. Simone Gold (@drsimonegold) January 28, 2021

So-called “normies” are waking up everywhere:

Incredibly sad 😢. Treatments that include HCQ could change the path of this pandemic.

— Rich Greiner (@rgreinerjr) January 29, 2021

Find out what Dr. Simone Gold says about the COVID agenda. https://t.co/TDVI4cwNIa

— Dr. Joseph Mercola (@mercola) January 26, 2021

Watch the FULL video here, safely from Rumble:


Here’s more history from LifeSite:

Last week’s explosively successful conference by America’s Frontline Doctors’ group, that exposed a “massive disinformation campaign” against the life-saving ability of Hydroxychloroquine to cure the Chinese coronavirus, was totally shut off the Internet by the tech giants. The group was in D.C. July 27 for its “White Coat Summit” event, which was organized and sponsored by the Tea Party Patriots and Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.). It kicked off with a full-day agenda and finished up the next day with a second press conference and congressional lobbying.

A Facebook representative gave as a vague excuse that the event was taken down for allegedly “sharing false information about cures and treatments for COVID-19.” As usual, Facebook refused to give any specifics. In reality, the tech companies themselves may be guilty of a “crime against humanity” and “criminal” spreading of false information that could be resulting in numerous deaths because infected patients and their physicians are being denied crucial life-saving information provided during that event.

You will understand the severity of what the tech giants did as you read below some excerpts from Conference organizer Dr. Simone Gold’s White Paper on Hydroxychloroquine.

All of the talks given during the day-long full conference can be seen here. (Note: The videos play better when viewed on a computer as opposed to a smartphone) I would strongly recommend viewing what these experts had to say that credibly contradicts the lies and misinformation that the public has been fed for months about hydroxychloroquine and other issues related to the Wuhan virus.

This is incredible material and you will likely be quite angry after watching these when you realize how badly the public has been deliberately misled about the issues covered in the talks so that the pharma giants can make billions on their alternative, far more costly, much less effective meds and vaccines. They would not even be necessary if hydroxychloroquine had not been so badly misrepresented and withheld from doctors and patients since the beginning of the pandemic.

The America’s Frontline Doctors (AFD) website has been restored after also being suddenly and arbitrarily shut down by the organization’s web hosting company @Squarespace to conform with the social media censoring. In addition, after the Doctors’ website was removed, someone bought the domain name with a .org ending and redirected it to the CDC website on COVID-19. This was an astounding, coordinated, wide level of total censorship that we have never encountered before. What the doctors exposed was obviously considered the biggest threat to date by the powerful elites behind the international disinformation campaign.

A crucial part of the AFD website is the References page with two exceptional documents. Among other things, they present well-documented evidence that a hydroxychloroquine protocol, given at the right time and with the right dosage, will dramatically help most COVID-infected patients to rapidly recover from what too many mistakenly think, thanks to media-generated hysteria, is a death sentence.

The AFD website also presents the video of the second, short press conference that was held in front of the Supreme Court on July 28. However, the full, original press conference, held at the end of the first day, and the one that has now been seen by over 20 million as a Facebook live-stream, is much better to watch and can still be seen here, thanks to the OANN network.

Even today, when Facebook users attempt to share the video of the AFD press conference, they are confronted with a pop-up such as seen here when a Latin American reader tried to share the video with friends. It falsely claims there is information in the post from the board-certified physicians – who have been treating covid patients – that is “misinformation that could cause harm” and that they don’t allow “false information about covid-19 that could contribute to physical harm”. Facebook has not provided any evidence whatsoever to substantiate these serious, false charges.

Even world-famous pop star Madonna was censored by Instagram for posting a video of the Frontline Doctors. In her post, Madonna praised Dr. Stella Immanuel, the Houston physician who stated that she has successfully treated 350 coronavirus patients with hydroxychloroquine. Dr. Emmanuel’s animated talk was a very popular highlight of the press conference as she very passionately called to account all those who have been suppressing the use of HCQ to the detriment of the lives of infected patients.

SO unbelievably frustrating.

I was on FB trying to spread the good news about HCQ + zinc in the face of growing fears way back in March 2020.

I has SOO many people argue, dismiss evidence, and eventually FB removed or labeled my posts

They should be held criminally responsible

— JohnT (@CubbyCreative) January 28, 2021

Thank you Dr. Gold for your due diligence in this fight against this BEAST SYSTEM!

— Carol Hoskins-Burks (@CrazyCarolHB) January 26, 2021

For me I see how things are unraveling quickly, masks & soon travel. I have issues when something is being “forced” on me or anyone. It’s another form of control & I’m not the brightest but I know when things don’t feel right. we should all have the freedom to accept or refuse it

— Gilbert (@spltn83) January 27, 2021

Long Prison time for every entity that censored this would be appropriate …

— 6lisab2 (@6lisab2) January 29, 2021

Facebook censored information that would have saved lives. That is a lot more than just an f'ing mistake.

— Von Böhm Bawerk (@ralph_pittman) January 29, 2021

The expert fact-checkers over at Reuters have already declared all of her statements as totally-false, 100% not true….which probably tells you all you need to know, right?  I think you know what I mean:

A 56-minute video in which a doctor claims to tell “the truth about CV19 vaccine” contains various misleading claims, including that vaccines will make people test positive for COVID-19, thereby artificially increasing the number of new cases; that the disease was renamed as part of a cover-up; and that there are proven effective treatments for COVID-19 that the media is ignoring. There are numerous other claims in the video that are outside the scope of this fact check.

The video features a speech by Dr Simone Gold at an event called “The Stand,” which describes itself as a series of “Open Air Mass Healing & Miracle Services.” Gold is the founder of America’s Frontline Doctors (here), an organisation that has previously been criticised for sharing misinformation (USA Today: here and here, AP: here, BBC: www.bbc.com/news/53559938, Politifact: here). The American Academy of Family Physicians has described the organisation’s claims as “outrageous” and said that it was “in no way affiliated with this group” (here).

America’s Frontline Doctors and Simone Gold did not respond to Reuters’ requests for comment.

In the video (here timestamp 32.00), Gold says: “You may have started to see some news stories now: people taking the vaccine and now they’re testing positive for COVID-19. It’s kind of funny. Are they going to test positive forever, like, what does that mean? You know, they’ve been selling us this bill of goods that there’s this asymptomatic transmission, and that seems to be moot. But If you’re going to have tens or hundreds of millions running around, just kind of positive low-level, like, what does that mean? Like, why are we doing that? Another problem with doing that is, I think they’re going to game the numbers, right? All these people, let’s say you give this vaccine to a hundred million people, and now all hundred million people are ‘testing positive for COVID-19.’ They’re going to tell us that the cases have risen and, you know, we can never relax. It’s unbelievable.”

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and academic institutes say COVID-19 vaccines do not cause people to test positive on the tests used to measure the number of COVID-19 cases in the community (here and here).

A Moderna vaccine trial which gave RT-PCR tests for COVID-19 to asymptomatic participants before a second dose found that fewer people who had received one dose of the vaccine tested positive for the disease, compared with the control group (here). If everyone who received the vaccine became an asymptomatic carrier, this would have been detected in the trial and would have resulted in dramatically different results.


At another point in the video, Gold claims the name of COVID-19 was changed from “The Wuhan Virus” for political reasons. (here timestamp 3.19).

She said: “The disinformation was apparent since the beginning. We call this illness COVID-19, but its real name should be after the location from where it arose, which is Wuhan, China. And if you remember: It was called the Wuhan Virus for a while, I don’t know, a month or so. Before we discovered that the Chinese Communist Party didn’t like that name. They set about putting a lot of pressure on media and other — politicians, let’s say, to change it, and they started calling it the Coronavirus.”

The World Health Organization (WHO), which named the disease COVID-19 (here), has avoided the use of cities, countries, regions and continents in disease names in guidelines published since 2015 (here). Dr Keiji Fukuda, the WHO Assistant Director-General for Health Security, said of the guidelines in an online statement released by the WHO in 2015: “We’ve seen certain disease names provoke a backlash against members of particular religious or ethnic communities, create unjustified barriers to travel, commerce and trade, and trigger needless slaughtering of food animals.” (here). The WHO told Reuters by email that it had never referred to the illness as the “Wuhan virus”. Further details on its naming can be seen here .

Throughout the video, Gold also regularly endorses unproven treatments for COVID-19. At one point (here timestamp 1.38), she says: “The National Institute of Health right now has as its policy recommendation for patients with COVID-19, stating that unless you’re in the hospital requiring oxygen, there’s no actual treatment available for you. That is a complete falsehood, completely false. In most of the world, non-First World countries, there’s plenty of treatment easily available: Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin. Here in America, if you can get a doctor to prescribe it, you get these medicines.”

The National Institute of Health COVID-19 treatment guidelines can be seen here . Figure 1 on this page shows recommendations by the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel for patients with varying levels of disease severity. For those not hospitalized, it says: “There are insufficient data to recommend either for or against any specific antiviral or antibody therapy”. For patients hospitalized but not requiring supplemental oxygen, it says: “There are insufficient data to recommend either for or against the routine use of remdesivir. For patients at high risk of disease progression, the use of remdesivir may be appropriate.”

Reuters has already addressed claims about Ivermectin (here). While there are theoretical reasons (here) to believe that Ivermectin may treat COVID-19, and there have been some promising results (here and here), these papers advise that more studies are needed before it can be recommended as a treatment, or are based on incomplete trials (here). There are more ongoing trials that might prove or disprove the efficacy of Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19 (here, here, here, here, here). Proof that it is effective as a treatment has not been published.

The National Institute of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel has published a statement on the use of Ivermectin, stating that: “most of the studies reported to date had incomplete information and significant methodological limitations” and that “there are insufficient data to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19. Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and well-conducted clinical trials are needed” (here).

Gold praises Hydroxychloroquine as a treatment against COVID-19 numerous times, insisting that it is safe (timestamp 4.55), giving an anecdote about a patient who quickly recovered from COVID-19 on the treatment (timestamp 7.03), and ascribing low death rates from COVID-19 in sub-saharan Africa due to the drug being widely-available (timestamp 46.50).

She also tells the story (timestamp 20.50) of how the Lancet published a study that found Hydroxychloroquine wasn’t safe, leading to treatment being stopped and trials on the drug being halted, only for the paper to later be retracted. She repeatedly describes the publishing of the paper as “fraud” (timestamp 22.06).

Gold is correct in saying that the Lancet retracted an article on Hydroxychloroquine in June , 2020 (here), however trials for the drug continued and the Lancet later published papers which found that “no difference was seen in non-COVID-19 mortality associated with hydroxychloroquine use” (here) and that the drug had no “preventive effect” against the disease (here).

The National Institute of Health COVID-19 treatment guidelines say: “Compared to placebo, hydroxychloroquine was associated with an increased risk of mostly mild adverse events” and recommend against its use (here).

Gold accuses the media of lying about the paper on Hydroxychloroquine, saying: “when it was retracted, they buried the story of it being retracted. You have to really struggle to find that information. That’s very dishonest.” (timestamp 22.32). The retraction of the Lancet article in June was extensively covered in the media. Stories on the retraction were published by Reuters (here), The New York Times (here and here Washington Post (here), Bloomberg (here) CNN (here here), Voice of America (here), The Economist (here) and The Guardian (here).

This long video contains various claims which are false or misleading, along with expressions of opinion which are not in the scope of this check.Vaccines against COVID-19 do not cause recipients to test positive for the disease. The World Health Organization named the disease COVID-19, did not refer to the “Wuhan virus” and has recommended against naming diseases after places since 2015. There is no proof that Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine are effective treatments against COVID-19.

Here’s one more great one:


EMA recommends COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca for authorisation in the EU


Update: COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca is now authorised across the EU. This follows the granting of a conditional marketing authorisation by the European Commission on 29 January 2021. 

EMA has recommended granting a conditional marketing authorisation for COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in people from 18 years of age. This is the third COVID-19 vaccine that EMA has recommended for authorisation.


Dr Andrew Wakefield: This Is Not A Vaccine It Is An Irreversible Genetic Modification - PLEASE SHARE

First published on BITCHUTE January 29th, 2021.

channel image



Original content - https://newtube.app/user/Darek/rjkE32b?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=1877ac7adf3137eebf686c28621964b87a262965-1611905934-0-ASFVlxxyxLu-izcDA-w4wJrPvRlGVWW5LiNbOp4_pG2okoubYhePBPf76ByoPOBUdF2M8fuIwL-x0mEOMaUXtcSFWKae0EWmGMeuvEmJEBioqmEq8kmgU9TBc4aeLnK_7q78a5kknCq_uDi2CHpZGVWD3Db4k0XU4DFFi0yhdQBE2UcBLRrxpJaKfZC5pSyu7ftNhJM0bcnZxuMpNhYJ9TGuRWzjBcgesLe7laL6p9AgUj0lB__cOIPTA9IPaSa-SV1YPBYOEBMFnQL6V2AHxSczEFpoXmV596k_BveHduNY9SvUAwGSmnrrOy6mRcp88TA75Vo9qvIwWcqdj1nY_qU


Link to UK Governments Website confirming the downgrading of Covid19 on 19th March 2020 - https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid

Learn The Risk (Brandy Vaughan) - https://learntherisk.org/

The 'Independent' governing body overseeing the Pfizer Vaccine.....funded by.........you guessed it - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/mhra-awarded-over-980000-for-collaboration-with-the-bill-and-melinda-gates-foundation-and-the-world-health-organisation

Global Report: There Is NO Deadly Virus - https://online.anyflip.com/inblw/ufbs/mobile/index.html?s=08

Rockefeller Operation Lockstep (2010) - https://thealterofdeceit.net/2020/05/09/rockefeller-foundation-paper-published-in-2010-lockstep/

Expose the Great Reset - www.exposethegreatreset.com

Stop New Normal - https://www.stopnewnormal.net/


24 Residents Dead in 3 Weeks as One Third of UK Nursing Home Residents Die After Experimental mRNA COVID Injections

By Brian Shilhavy - 18. January 2021

In what is becoming almost a daily report of massive nursing home deaths following injections of experimental mRNA COVID shots, a nursing home in the U.K. is reporting over one third of their residents have died after receiving the mRNA experimental COVID injections.

We are now seeing a very predictable pattern as we are reporting all over the world where the elderly are dying at a very alarming rate following mass vaccinations of the experimental mRNA injections.

And in all of these cases, the local media is quoting local officials as saying that the “vaccines” have nothing to do with the deaths. They are also stating that deaths following the experimental mRNA injections are “expected.”

How can people keep believing this is true? This is now happening all over the world, in many locations, and we are just supposed to accept by faith that COVID outbreaks happened simultaneously with the mass vaccinations, but that there is no connection to the injections?

Here is what the Daily Echo is reporting about the nursing home deaths in Basingstoke in the UK:

At least twenty-two people have died at a Hampshire care home (Daily Mail is reporting 24 deaths) in one of the worst known outbreaks of the coronavirus pandemic to date.

The deaths occurred at Pemberley House Care Home in Basingstoke, operated by private firm Avery Healthcare.

The outbreak was first declared on Tuesday, January 5, with 60 per cent of its residents testing positive for the disease, according to sources.

Within three weeks, 22 people had died – over one-third of the home’s residents.

It is understood the outbreak started as residents began to have their first coronavirus vaccines. The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulation Agency (MHRA) said there was no suggestion the vaccine was responsible for the deaths.

Government advice states that one “can not catch Covid-19 from the vaccine but it is possible to have caught Covid-19 and not realise you have the symptoms until after your vaccination appointment”, adding that it may take “a week or two” after the first dose to build up protection.

A spokesperson for the MHRA said they were saddened by the deaths but said they were not linked to the vaccine patients might have received, saying: “We are saddened to hear about any deaths which have occurred since receiving COVID-19 vaccination. However, our surveillance does not suggest that the COVID-19 vaccines have contributed to any deaths.

It is not unexpected that some of these people may naturally fall ill due to their age or underlying conditions shortly after being vaccinated, without the vaccine playing any role in that.” Full Article.

However, many healthcare workers who work in these assisted living centers are now challenging this narrative, that these deaths are due to “natural illnesses” among the elderly that have nothing to do with the shots, including a whistleblower who is a Certified Nursing Assistant and went public with what he was seeing in his nursing home. He reported that:

after being injected with the mRNA shot, residents who used to walk on their own can no longer walk. Residents who used to carry on an intelligent conversation with him could no longer talk.

And now they are dying. “They’re dropping like flies.” (Full article with video.)

The basic premise being used to justify saying that none of these deaths are linked to the experimental COVID injections is that “one can not catch Covid-19 from the vaccine,” which is the position of the FDA as well.

From the Daily Echo:

Government advice states that one “can not catch Covid-19 from the vaccine but it is possible to have caught Covid-19 and not realise you have the symptoms until after your vaccination appointment”, adding that it may take “a week or two” after the first dose to build up protection.

From the FDA:

No. The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine does not contain SARS-CoV-2 and cannot give you COVID-19.

Therefore, the reasoning continues, if these residents who died are all tested as positive for COVID-19, then, according to “Government sources,” they could not have died from the vaccines.

Do you see how this whole argument falls apart if the premise that the “vaccine” cannot give someone COVID-19 turns out to actually be false?

And the evidence so far points to the fact that this belief about a new product that has only been in the market for a few weeks and was fast-tracked to get it into the market, and supposedly cannot give someone COVID-19, is not true.

The largest mass injection campaign that has happened so far has occurred in Israel, and their data shows that over 12,000 people became infected with COVID-19 AFTER the injections. See:

12,400 People in Israel Tested Positive for Coronavirus AFTER Being Injected with the Experimental Pfizer COVID Shot

The correlations between the roll outs of these experimental mRNA injections and nursing home deaths is very clear.

The Daily Mail, while reporting on the tragedy at the Pemberley House Care Home in Basingstoke, also reported that similar rates of deaths are being seen throughout the UK in “care homes,” which they are blaming on the COVID virus. They produced this chart:

The UK’s national statistics body found 1,705 care home residents died from the virus in the week ending January 22, up from 661 a fortnight ago. Source.

And while the government keeps blaming these deaths on the virus, what else happened in December when numbers of deaths were actually on the decline, until rapidly spiking upwards in January?

The roll out of the Pfizer, and later Moderna, experimental mRNA COVID injections began in December.

It is time to challenge the “official” position that because these injections do not contain a COVID19 virus, they cannot give someone the virus, because something is clearly causing these people who are dying “from COVID” to test positive.

Perhaps we should have a better understanding of just how these mRNA injections work.

Dr. Lee Merritt, MD, recently was interviewed by Alex Newman of The New America.

Dr. Lee Merritt began her medical career at the age of four, carrying her  father’s “black bag” on housecalls, along the back roads of Iowa.  In 1980 she graduated from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in New York, where she was elected to life membership in the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society.

Dr. Merritt completed an Orthopaedic Surgery Residency in the United States Navy and served 9 years as a Navy physician and surgeon where she also studied bioweapons before returning to Rochester, where she was the only woman to be appointed as the Louis A. Goldstein Fellow of Spinal Surgery.

Dr. Merritt has been in the private practice of Orthopaedic and Spinal Surgery since 1995, has served on the Board of the Arizona Medical Association, and is past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. (Source.)

We have copied the section of her interview with Alex Newman where she discusses the mRNA “vaccines.” This is from our Bitchute Channel (it is also available on Rumble):

A partial transcript:

Well I have lots of concerns. Not the least of which is for the integrity and the moral turpitude of the medical profession.

If you look at the history of these vaccines, just real quickly, these are experimental biologics. I don’t even like to call them “vaccines,” because classically how a vaccine works is this: You grow a bunch of the pathogens, so let’s say its measles. You grow the measles in a vat or in eggs, and then you take a portion of that, and you make it less strong.

You attenuate it. You make it weaker, and there are different ways of doing that, and then you inject it into people, and their own immune system sees that weakened pathogen. And then they react to it just enough that it puts it in their immulogic memory.

And then when they’re exposed to it the next time, they memorize it and theoretically they can better respond.

That’s what your real body does when it gets sick. Without all this vaccination stuff, you get sick with a virus, you get perfect life-long immunity, for the most part, and it’s over.

So how is this (mRNA injections) different?

Well, they’re not giving you a pathogen, or a piece of a pathogen, or a small piece with an adjuvant.

What they’re doing is programming mRNA. And mRNA has a little piece of, it’s like DNA, but it’s the messenger RNA.

It’s what makes proteins in the body. It’s kind of  like a computer chip that you put into a 3D printer and then you tell it what you want it to make, and it prints it out.

We have that in engineering, and this is the biological equivalent. I make some mRNA, and it tells your body to do certain things.

Well, in this case what they’ve done, they’ve made a piece of this mRNA to create in every cell in your body that spike protein. Or at least part of it.

And that spike protein, you’re actually creating the pathogen in your body.

This is where it gets a little wishy about how much of that spike protein is actually being created, and I don’t know how to find that out, I can’t find that, but I’m sure somebody knows.

What happens is, and this is the problem. I’ll tell you what happened in the animal studies. There’s been four different vaccines and three different animal studies that I know about.

They started after SARS, and they did cats. And then after that MERS, which were all coronavirus pathogens that are more deadly (then COVID-19), and after MERS they tried it in ferrets.

So what happened was all animals died.

Let me just point out. We have never made it through an animal study successfully for this type of virus.

We have never done this in humans before. At least we haven’t. Maybe the Chinese have.

We don’t really have a track record of success. This vaccine was rolled out to distribution centers before they even made a show of caring about the FDA approving it. Do you realize that?

I’ve never seen that happen before.

And the longest they’ve really followed people after the vaccine is two months.

That’s not enough time to know we won’t have that antibody enhancement problem.

On potential for military use:

I will make this military point. This is a perfect binary weapon.

There’s no way I know exactly what that mRNA is programmed to do, and neither do you and neither do most doctors.

The doctors can’t get at that data. The guys at the very top of this project, they know. But we don’t know.

So, do you still trust your government saying that these mRNA injections cannot cause someone to get COVID?

Or do the facts speak for themselves?

Because the data, the REAL facts, show that seniors are dying very suddenly just after the mRNA vaccination programs are started in these assisted living centers.

Who are the “guys at the top” of “this project” that truly know what these mRNA injections are programmed to do whom Dr. Merritt referred to?

The rich get richer. The global vaccine leaders who all worked together in the past trying to develop an mRNA vaccine for HIV/AIDS are now all on the U.S. Government payroll (Except Bill Gates – at least not directly.) Top row left to right: CDC Director Robert Redfield, Bill Gates, Operation Warp Speed Director Dr. Moncef Slaoui. Bottom row next to President Trump: Dr. Anthony Fauci, and Dr. Deborah Birx.

See Also:

URGENT! 5 Doctors Agree that COVID-19 Injections are Bioweapons and Discuss What to do About It

Doctors Around the World Issue Dire WARNING: DO NOT GET THE COVID VACCINE!!

More Ruined Lives Following COVID-19 Bioweapon Injections


SARS-CoV-2 has not been proven to exist: the shocking research of Christine Massey

By Jon Rappoport - 26. January 2021

You can view the work of Christine Massey at her site, fluoridefreepeel.ca (also, twitter: [1]). She deserves the thanks of every thinking person.

Quoting Massey [2]: “I (CM), along with some anonymous helpers, have submitted Freedom of Information requests to various Canadian institutions seeking records that describe the isolation of ‘SARS-COV-2’ (the alleged ‘COVID-19 virus’) from an unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

“My requests were intentionally worded to weed out the fraudulent, illogical and unscientific claims of having ‘isolated SARS-COV-2’, of which there are many…”

“My requests were not limited to records of isolation performed by the respective institution, and not limited to records authored by the respective institution, rather they were open to records of isolation performed by anyone, anywhere on the planet.”

“Colleagues in numerous other countries have obtained responses to the same and similar information requests from dozens of additional institutions.”

“As of January 22, 2021 46 institutions and offices have responded to said requests. Every institution has failed to provide, or cite, even 1 record describing the actual isolation of any ‘SARS-COV-2’ from a patient sample by anyone, anywhere on the planet, ever.”

Here is a typical response to a Massey request, from the Ontario Ministry of Health. The response arrived after four months: “This is to inform you that no responsive records were located. A reasonable search of the ministry was conducted, and no responsive records were found. Dr. David C. Williams, Chief Medical Officer of Health, is responsible for this decision.”

NO records indicating SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated. “Isolated” means “separated from other material.” It means “we actually found the virus and could identify it.”


When, as Massey indicates, 46 separate agencies say the same thing—“no records of isolation available”—we are past wondering what is going on. We’re firmly in the territory of FRAUD.

As I’ve stated many times [3] [4], virologists are twisting and torturing the meaning of the word “isolated.” They claim they have the virus in a soup in a dish in the lab. “In a soup” is the very opposite of “isolated.”

The soup contains animal and human cells, toxic chemicals and toxic drugs, and other genetic material. Some of the cells are dying. The researchers preposterously state the dying must be the result of the virus attacking these cells.

However, the chemicals and drugs could be doing the killing. And the human and animal cells are being starved of nutrients—which fact alone is enough to cause them to die.

Therefore, there is no evidence that the purported (and un-isolated) virus is in the soup in the dish in the lab.

This “proof of isolation” is on the level of claiming the sun is the moon, Alaska is a small town on Saturn, and a rabbit is a spaceship.

It’s no accident that Christine Massey’s relentless investigation has turned up zero records of actual isolation.


[1] https://twitter.com/ChrisMasseyFOIs

[2] https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/foi-reveals-ontario-ministry-of-health-has-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-by-anyone-anywhere-ever/

[3] https://twitter.com/jonrappoport/status/1339769925402038273

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6-8VRGvNtQ

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealedclick here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALEDEXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his freeOutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.


Why Would Anyone Choose to Receive an Experimental COVID mRNA Injection?

By Brian Shilhavy - 27. January 2021

The headlines and subject matter of our articles the past couple of weeks have been very somber, documenting how serious injuries and deaths are happening just shortly after people have been injected with one of the two experimental mRNA COVID injections by either Pfizer, or Moderna.

Big Pharma, the U.S. Government, and the Pharma-controlled media continue to try and downplay these deaths and injuries, denying that they have any relationship to receiving these COVID injections.

However, the evidence that we have presented here at Health Impact News, paints a very different picture, suggesting that this issue is far more serious than the corporate media, and even most in the alternative media, are reporting.

So this begs the question: Why would anyone choose to receive one of these injections in the first place?

Most people who have received one of these injections, or plan to receive one, would probably answer something like: “To prevent me from getting the COVID-19 virus, or prevent me from spreading it to others.”

For those of us trying to shine truth and light into darkness and deception, I really think this is where the conversation needs to begin.

For those who are less informed and simply have a religious-like faith in vaccines in general, and the experimental COVID injections specifically, without ever having spent much time actually researching them, we need to stop defending what we have learned, and instead ask them to defend their faith in these shots, and then be prepared to answer their positive beliefs in these shots with verifiable facts that they can look up and research themselves.

What Does the FDA Say About the Experimental COVID Shots?

So let’s begin with what the official FDA guidelines, published on the FDA government website, state as facts regarding these injections.

For the “Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine” you can find the FDA’s Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine and the Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers on the FDA website here.

For the “Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine” you can find the FDA’s Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine and the Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers on the FDA website here.

Fact #1 – These “vaccines” are NOT approved by the FDA.

FDA Pfizer Fact Sheet:

There is no U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19.

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine that may prevent COVID-19. There is no FDA-approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19.

HAS THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE BEEN USED BEFORE? The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine.

FDA Moderna Fact Sheet:

There is no U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19.

The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine that may prevent COVID-19. There is no FDA-approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19.

HAS THE MODERNA COVID-19 VACCINE BEEN USED BEFORE? The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine.

Fact #2 – Risks to these Unapproved Vaccines are UNKNOWN

FDA Pfizer Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers, after giving a list of possible side effects, then states:

These may not be all the possible side effects of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. Serious and unexpected side effects may occur. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is still being studied in clinical trials.

FDA Pfizer Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine gives a more comprehensive list of Serious Adverse Events:

Serious adverse events are defined as:
• Death;
• A life-threatening adverse event;
• Inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization;
• A persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal life functions;
• A congenital anomaly/birth defect;
• An important medical event that based on appropriate medical judgement may jeopardize the individual and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above

FDA Moderna Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers, after giving a list of possible side effects, then states:

These may not be all the possible side effects of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine. Serious and unexpected side effects may occur. The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine is still being studied in clinical trials.

FDA Moderna Fact Sheet Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine gives a more comprehensive list of Serious Adverse Events:

*Serious adverse events are defined as:
• Death;
• A life-threatening adverse event;
• Inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization;
• A persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal life functions;
• A congenital anomaly/birth defect;
• An important medical event that based on appropriate medical judgement may jeopardize the individual and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.

Fact #3 – Efficacy in preventing COVID-19 is UNKNOWN

FDA Pfizer Fact Sheet:

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine that may prevent COVID-19.

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine may not protect everyone.

In an ongoing clinical trial, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine has been shown to prevent COVID-19 following 2 doses given 3 weeks apart. The duration of protection against COVID-19 is currently unknown.

FDA Moderna Fact Sheet:

The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine that may prevent COVID-19.

The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine may not protect everyone.

In an ongoing clinical trial, the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine has been shown to prevent COVID-19 following 2 doses given 1 month apart. The duration of protection against COVID-19 is currently unknown.

What do Dissenting Doctors and Scientists Say about the Experimental, Non-FDA Approved COVID mRNA “Vaccines”?

When you purchase something online, do you read reviews of the product first, to find out what people say about that product, both positive and negative?

If you make a major purchase, such as purchasing a home or car, do you research all the positive and potential negative data that is available about this major purchase, prior to making a decision?

Or do you just accept the marketing sales data about that product at face value without researching to see if their claims are accurate, including possibly searching to see if any complaints have been logged against the manufacturer with places like the Better Business Bureau, etc.?

When dealing with a biological agent that is injected into your body with potential far-reaching effects on your health, would you not want to do the same thing, and to hear dissenting views as well as the “marketing sales data” that Big Pharma is presenting?

When it comes to vaccines in general, and the experimental mRNA COVID injections in particular, Big Pharma, the U.S. Government health agencies, and their corporate media outlets, do not believe that you have a right to hear dissenting views, because they believe they are the only authority when it comes to matters of “public health.”

As a result, those with dissenting views, which many times include whistleblowers who used to work for Big Pharma, are heavily censored, and if the information gets out past their censorship, then those doctors and scientists are slandered and called “quacks” or “fringe doctors,” etc.

Any product that cannot handle criticism to the point that significant finances and resources are spent trying to censor any negative information about those products, should raise red flags.

The facts I am presenting here are the facts that highly credentialed and intelligent doctors and scientists do not believe that these experimental mRNA injections should be tested on the public.

What they actually say is their opinion. But the doctors and scientists who work for the FDA, almost all of whom are financially connected to Big Pharma, also are offering their opinions when they recommend that a non-FDA approved biological injection should be given “emergency use authorization” due to a “pandemic” that is now over a year old, with no end in sight.

Dr. Sin Hang Lee, Dr. Michael Yeadon, and Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg

Dr. Sin Hang Lee is a pathologist and founder of Milford Molecular Diagnostics, a CLIA-certified diagnostic laboratory in Milford, Connecticut.

Dr. Lee is a world-renowned expert on DNA sequencing-based diagnostics. He has trained and taught in some of the world’s most prestigious institutions and has published scores of scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals.

He recognized very early on that the PCR tests and other tests fast-tracked by the FDA were not accurate in identifying SARSCoV-2 RNA, and even sent a letter, back in March, to Dr. Margaret Harris and Dr. Eduardo Guerrero of the World Health Organization, and Dr. Anthony Fauci at the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), explaining why the tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA were generating false positives and negatives.

You can read his March 22, 2020 letter here. He explained that a two-phased test would “guarantee no-false positive results” based on his research and published work from Japan.

He never received a response to his letter.

As 2020 was drawing to a close and it was well-known that the FDA was preparing to issue emergency use authorizations to Pfizer and Moderna for the experimental mRNA injections, Dr. Lee filed an ADMINISTRATIVE STAY OF ACTION with the Department of Health and Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

The STAY OF ACTION was a Petition for Administrative Action Regarding Confirmation of Efficacy End Points of Phase III Clinical Trials of COVID19 Vaccines.

The STAY OF ACTION is based upon the faulty PCR tests that were used in the vaccine trials:

Before an EUA or unrestricted license is issued for the Pfizer vaccine, or for other vaccines for which PCR results are the primary evidence of infection, all “endpoints” or COVID-19 cases used to determine vaccine efficacy in the Phase 3 or 2/3 trials should have their infection status confirmed by Sanger sequencing, given the high cycle thresholds used in some trials. High cycle thresholds, or Ct values, in RT-qPCR test results have been widely acknowledged to lead to false positives.

Read the full Stay of Action here.

The FDA never even replied to this filing, let alone have their attorneys try to defend their actions.

Similar to Dr. Lee’s Stay of Action filed with the FDA, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and Dr. Michael Yeadon filed an emergency STAY OF ACTION with the European Medicines Agency.

This STAY OF ACTION was very similar to the one filed with the FDA in the U.S. by Dr. Sin Hang Lee, and demanded that clinical trials be STOPPED until there was an accurate testing mechanism in place to correctly identify SARS-CoV-2, since the PCR test is very inaccurate.

Dr. Yeadon, the former head of Pfizer research, also went public in a viral video recording where he stated that the COVID Pandemic is over, and that it is being kept alive by false narratives using the faulty PCR tests. See:

“Pandemic is Over” – Former Pfizer Chief Science Officer Says “Second Wave” Faked On False-Positive COVID Tests

In their STAY OF ACTION filed in Europe, one day BEFORE the U.K. issued emergency use authorization, Dr. Yeadon stated that this experimental vaccine can make females infertile.

He writes that the Pfizer COVID vaccine as well as other COVID vaccines currently in Phase III trials are:

expected to induce the formation of humoral antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. Syncytin-1 (see Gallaher, B., “Response to nCoV2019 Against Backdrop of Endogenous Retroviruses” – https://virological.org/t/response-to-ncov2019-against-backdrop-of-endogenous-retroviruses/396), which is derived from human endogenous retroviruses (HERV) and is responsible for the development of a placenta in mammals and humans and is therefore an essential prerequisite for a successful pregnancy, is also found in homologous form in the spike proteins of SARS viruses.

There is no indication whether antibodies against spike proteins of SARS viruses would also act like anti-Syncytin-1 antibodies. However, if this were to be the case this would then also prevent the formation of a placenta which would result in vaccinated women essentially becoming infertile.

To my knowledge, Pfizer/BioNTech has yet to release any samples of written materials provided to patients, so it is unclear what, if any, information regarding (potential) fertility-specific risks caused by antibodies is included.

According to section 10.4.2 of the Pfizer/BioNTech trial protocol, a woman of childbearing potential (WOCBP) is eligible to participate if she is not pregnant or breastfeeding, and is using an acceptable contraceptive method as described in the trial protocol during the intervention period (for a minimum of 28 days after the last dose of study intervention).

This means that it could take a relatively long time before a noticeable number of cases of postvaccination infertility could be observed. (Source.)

Dr. David Martin, Dr. Judy Mikovits, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, and others: These are NOT vaccines

Dr. David Martin, Dr. Judy Mikovits, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, and many other doctors and scientists claim that the mRNA experimental COVID injections do NOT meet the legal definition of a “vaccine,” and that the FDA is calling these injections “vaccines” to cover themselves legally.

These are NOT fringe doctors and scientists. While I have never met Dr. Martin, I have known Dr. Tenpenny for more than a decade, and Dr. Mikovits for several years now, and have published much of their work here on Health Impact News.

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny is a doctor of Osteopathy, and one of the world’s most articulate researchers when it comes to vaccines. She is a highly sought expert to speak on the issue, and a well-published author.

Dr. Judy Mikovits has years of government research experience working directly with Dr. Anthony Fauci and others, and has suffered greatly in her life for blowing the whistle on government fraud in research. Along with Dr. David Martin, she was featured in the film produced by filmmaker Mikki Willis, Plandemic. See:

PLANDEMIC: Full Feature Film Released Online Amidst Tremendous Opposition and Attempts to Censor it

In a recent 2-hour live stream event called “Focus on Fauci,” Dr. David Martin explained that the current experimental mRNA COVID injections are not vaccines, but medical devices.

This is not a vaccine.

We need to be really clear. We’re using the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions.

This is not a vaccine. This is an mRNA packaged in a fat envelope, that is delivered to a cell.

It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator.

It is not a vaccine. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term, and they’re a legally defined term under public health law, they’re legally defined term under the CDC and FDA standards.

And a vaccine specifically has to stimulate both an immunity within the person who is receiving it, but it also has to disrupt transmission.

And that is not what this is. They have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell, it is not to stop transmission. It is a treatment.

But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of the public health authorities, because then people would say, well what other treatments are there? (Full article.)

See also:

The New mRNA COVID Vaccines Inject an Operating System into Your Body – Not a Conspiracy Theory, Moderna Admits It

Dr. Mikovits and Dr. Tenpenny have previously stated, prior to the FDA issuing EUAs for these experimental injections, that if these experimental “vaccines” were administered to the U.S. population, that there would be at least 50 million people murdered by lethal injection. See:

Dr. Judy Mikovits and Dr. Sherri Tenpenny: A New COVID Vaccine Could Kill 50 Million People in the U.S.

Hundreds of Doctors Worldwide Warn Against the Experimental mRNA Injections

Dozens of doctors from around the world came together to issue a dire warning about the experimental mRNA injections, and created a video where they all testified.

Since publishing this video on our Bitchute Channel about 6 weeks ago, it has been viewed by over 375,000 people.

Can we Trust the Pharmaceutical Companies Making these “Vaccines”?

Short answer: no!

These are criminal organizations, and you can verify this for yourself by searching the Department of Justice (DOJ) website and see which group of businesses has the most cases of criminal fraud settled each year.

Here is a report I have used in the past covering the years 2009 through 2016, but there may be a more recent report:


Health Care Fraud led the pack, with over $19 BILLION in settlements, and no serious close competitors.

As we have previously reported, Pfizer is one of the largest criminal organizations in the world, having repeatedly paid out BILLIONS of dollars in settlements for fraud, including a 2009 settlement for fraud that they reached with the U.S. Department of Justice for $2.3 BILLION, the largest ever fraud settlement in the history of the DOJ at that time. (Source.).


Criminal Pfizer Inc. Wins COVID Vaccine Race? Hundreds of Millions of Doses Expected to be Ready Within Weeks

These are verifiable facts from the DOJ website, and these are the companies you are trusting when you get an experimental mRNA COVID injection.

Can We Trust the FDA and the CDC?

Can you trust a fox to watch your hen house?

The CDC is the largest purchaser of vaccines in the world, allocating over $5 BILLION in their budget (supplied by American taxpayers) each year to purchase and distribute vaccines from Big Pharma. See:

Should the CDC Oversee Vaccine Safety When They Purchase Over $5 Billion of Vaccines from Big Pharma?

Do you think this might be a conflict of interest??

Secondly, the CDC owns over 56 patents on vaccines, and many of their scientists earn royalties from the sale of vaccines. (Source.)

Do you think this might be a conflict of interest??

CDC Fraud Corruption

The CDC has a long history of corruption, and over the years many of their own scientists have tried to blow the whistle on this corruption only to be silenced. See some of our previous coverage on CDC corruption:

CDC Scientist Whisteblowers Confirm Corruption Within the CDC

CDC Whistleblower: CDC Covered Up MMR Vaccine Link to Autism in African American Boys

The CDC’s History of Research Fraud Regarding Vaccines and Autism

Can We Trust the CDC? British Medical Journal Reveals CDC Lies About Ties to Big Pharma

In addition, many of the directors running the CDC go on to work for Big Pharma after they complete their term at the CDC. See:

Former CDC Director that Approved Gardasil Vaccine and Became Head of Merck’s Vaccine Division Named “Woman of the Year”

Dr. Scott Gottlieb was the former Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner. He joined the board of directors of Pfizer, Inc.—the world’s largest pharmaceutical company and second largest manufacturer of vaccines, in 2019 just shortly after he left the FDA. Pfizer, which posted total revenues of $53.7 billion in 2018, announced Dr. Gottlieb’s election to the board on June 27, 2019.

On July 22, 2020 President Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed” project awarded $1.95 BILLION to Pfizer and BioNTech for 100 million doses of their mRNA-based COVID-19.

So what do you think? Can we trust the CDC and the FDA?

And tell me again why you want to get injected with one of these non-FDA approved experimental injections?

Memorize this information. Copy it, print it, save it, share it.

Start your conversations with anyone thinking about getting one of these injections with a question:

Why do you want to receive a non-FDA approved experimental mRNA COVID injection?

Put THEM on the defensive. Listen to their answer, and then quietly, in gentleness and hopefully in love, share some REAL FACTS with them, starting with what the FDA has published regarding these injections.

They probably truly believe they are doing something good for themselves and public heath, but in fact they are doing something that only benefits Big Pharma and the Globalists’ agenda, which is now led by a former computer nerd and college drop-out, Bill Gates.

We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to learn.

In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again.

You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness.

But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. (Hebrews 5:11-14) (Why you should be reading the Bible to combat propaganda and mind control.)

Comment on this article at HealthImpactNews.com.


See Also:

Doctors Around the World Issue Dire WARNING: DO NOT GET THE COVID VACCINE!!

People Now Dying Following the Experimental Johnson and Johnson COVID Injections

27-Year-Old Georgian Nurse DEAD One Day after AstraZeneca Experimental COVID Shot

Ireland: Nine Nursing Home Residents Die of COVID-19 Despite Being mRNA “Vaccinated”

1,739 DEAD as CDC Adds Another 200+ Recorded Deaths this Week Following COVID Experimental “Vaccines”

534 Dead 330,063 Reported Injured following COVID19 Experimental Vaccine Injections in the U.K.

Teacher Dies Hours After Getting AstraZeneca COVID Shot in Italy – Manslaughter Investigation Launched

Pediatric Nurse Brags About Getting COVID Vaccine While Pregnant – Baby is Stillborn 8 Days Later

Boxing Champion Marvin Hagler DEAD at Age 66 After Receiving an Experimental COVID “Vaccine”

39-Year-Old Surgical Technician and Mother Dies 4 Days After Second Experimental Moderna COVID mRNA Shot

UK Government Changes Recommendations on Pregnant Women Getting Experimental COVID Injections Causing at Least 20 Miscarriages So Far

First Week of COVID Experimental Vaccines in South Korea: 7 DEAD and More than 2,800 Injured

Whistleblower Reveals Many Pregnancy Complications following Experimental COVID Injections – “Vaccine Leaving a Trail of Devastated Mothers”

12 Residents Die After First COVID Vaccine in Wales Nursing and Dementia Care Centre

Death Rates Skyrocket in Israel Following Pfizer Experimental COVID “Vaccines”

28-Year-Old PhD Physical Therapist DEAD 2 Days After Being Injected with COVID Experimental mRNA Vaccine

22 Elderly with Dementia Dead in 1 Week After the Experimental mRNA COVID Injection in the Netherlands

Two Nuns Dead and 28 COVID Positive 2 Days After Experimental COVID mRNA Injections

Formerly Healthy American Serviceman Now has Heart Disease Following the Moderna COVID Shots

Whistleblower Video Footage of Forced COVID Vaccines in German Nursing Homes Goes Public – Attorney: “We’re Dealing with Homicide, Maybe Even Murder”

Second Pfizer COVID Shot Halted in Spain After 46 Deaths in One Nursing Home Following the First Shot

Former Detroit TV Anchor Karen Hudson-Samuels Suddenly Dies One Day After Being Injected with Experimental mRNA COVID Shot

Whistleblower: 8 of 31 Residents Dead in German Nursing Home After They Were Forcibly Injected with Pfizer Experimental mRNA COVID Shots Against Their Will

28-Year-old Wisconsin Healthcare Worker has Aneurysm – Brain Dead Five Days After Second Experimental Pfizer mRNA COVID Injection

Another Medical Professional in the Prime of Life DEAD Weeks After Receiving the mRNA Experimental Injection as Memphis Mourns Loss of 36-Year-Old Doctor

Wisconsin Resident Doctor has Miscarriage 3 Days After Being Injected with Experimental COVID mRNA Shot

39-Year-Old Medical Doctor and Son of Former Chief Justice of Trinidad Found Dead After COVID Injection in Ireland

TRAGEDY! 9 Dead in Spanish Nursing Home Shortly After First Pfizer Shots but Second Doses Given Anyway – Religious Beliefs in Vaccines Causing Massive Senior Deaths?

Another Jewish Holocaust? Local Talk Radio Reports “Many Dying” in Israel Following Pfizer Experimental mRNA Injections

45-Year-Old Italian Doctor “In the Prime of Life and in Perfect Health” Drops Dead After the Pfizer mRNA COVID Shot: 39-Year-Old Nurse, 42-Year-Old Surgical Technician Also Dead

58-Year-Old Mother and Grandmother of Six in Virginia Dies Within Hours of Receiving Experimental Pfizer mRNA Injection

Israeli Teenager Hospitalized in ICU for “Inflammation of the Heart” Days after Receiving Second Pfizer Vaccine

24 Residents Dead in 3 Weeks as One Third of UK Nursing Home Residents Die After Experimental mRNA COVID Injections

CNA Nursing Home Whistleblower: Seniors Are DYING LIKE FLIES After COVID Injections! SPEAK OUT!!!

Did Larry King Receive an Experimental COVID Shot Just Before His Death?

53 Dead in Gibraltar in 10 Days After Experimental Pfizer mRNA COVID Injections Started

Baseball Legend Hank Aaron Dead After Receiving the Experimental Moderna mRNA COVID Injection

10 Dead with 51 Severe Side-Effects Among Germany’s Elderly after Experimental Pfizer COVID Injections

55 Americans Have Died Following mRNA COVID Injections as Norway Death Toll Rises To 29

23 Seniors Have Died in Norway After Receiving the Pfizer Experimental COVID mRNA Injection

Louisiana Woman Convulses Uncontrollably after Being Injected with the Experimental Pfizer COVID Shot – “I can’t stand to see my mom this way it makes me want to cry knowing I can’t do anything to help her.”

24 Dead and 137 Infected at NY Nursing Home After Experimental COVID Injections

“Very Healthy 56-Year-Old” Miami Obstetrician Dies after Being Injected with the Experimental Pfizer COVID Vaccine

“Perfectly Healthy” 41-year-old Pediatric Assistant Dies Suddenly After Injected with Experimental Pfizer COVID Vaccine

Is the Tennessee Nurse Who Passed Out on Live Camera After the COVID Vaccine Still Alive?

32-Year-Old Mexican Doctor Suffers Seizures and is Paralyzed After Receiving the Pfizer Experimental Vaccine


Brian Shilhavy - Editor, Health Impact News



No deaths arising from vaccinations in Gibraltar - 93/2021

JANUARY 27, 2021

Her Majesty’s Government (LOL) of Gibraltar can confirm that, as at close of business on 26th January 2021, 11,073 persons had received a first dose of the Pfizer vaccine in Gibraltar.

The Gibraltar Health Authority can confirm that there is no evidence that any of those 11,073 who have been vaccinated in Gibraltar have died as a result of any reaction to the vaccine.  Statements to the contrary on social media are entirely untrue. Such statements originate from discredited individuals and organisations.

Of the over 11,000 who have been vaccinated, 6 persons have since died for reasons unrelated to the vaccination and there is no evidence to link these to the vaccination in any way. 

These 6 persons appear to have contracted COVID-19 before they were vaccinated but, despite testing for COVID-19 before vaccination, the infection had not been detected in them at the time they were vaccinated, but in the days immediately after. 

All of these persons were in the age range 70 to 100.  All but one was a resident of the Government of Gibraltar Elderly Residential Services facilities. 

The Gibraltar Health Authority can confirm that there is no evidence at all of any causal link between these six deaths and the inoculation with the Pfizer vaccine. 

95% of all those over 70 contacted for vaccination in Gibraltar have agreed to the inoculation  and have already had a first dose of the Pfizer vaccine.  The second dose will start to be administered to them as from Monday.

The Chief Minister of Gibraltar, the Hon Fabian Picardo QC MP, said: “There is no evidence of any deaths in Gibraltar arising from inoculations with the Pfizer vaccine.  It is untrue to suggest otherwise and people should not believe the dangerous nonsense being put out on social media by discredited individuals that suggests the opposite.  We are continuing to work with the United Kingdom Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office and the Department of Health and Social Care in rolling out the vaccine in Gibraltar and ensuring that we have in place systems to use all the doses that become available as quickly as possible.  Immunisation is the best and only strategy to safely emerge from the difficulties that the pandemic has created for nations and communities around the world.  In partnership with the United Kingdom, we will turn the corner against the virus.



An article of November 19, titled Gibraltar Government given £500 million UK loan guarantee, cheerfully notes how massively indebted to the UK Gibraltar will be because of the ‘pandemic’. Meanwhile, note how many people had died up to this point (Covid is NOT directly stated as the cause, just implied):

The Covid-19 pandemic has had its toll on the Gibraltar economy and although there were no deaths during the initial outbreak three residents on the Rock have now died during this second spike and many children have caught coronavirus as well.

That’s 3. THREE. Three people are likely to have died from various causes in any case. And it is highly unlikely that ‘many children have caught coronavirus as well’ since, according to Dr. Gary Sidley, a former NHS consultant (and many other doctors we’ve come across besides, as well as official statistics),

For healthy people under the age of 35 the additional fatality risk of contracting SARS-COV-2 is almost zero. Meanwhile, children are as good as bullet proof, with seasonal influenza presenting a much greater risk of mortality to under-15-year-olds.


From the article below, we find that the second round of the Pfizer vaccine is due to be given on February 1What could go wrong? 


53 Dead in Gibraltar in 10 Days After Experimental Pfizer mRNA COVID Injections Started

By Brian Shilhavy - 24. January 2021

Gibraltar is a British Colony at the southern tip of the Iberian Peninsula attached to the country of Spain. It’s population is just over 30,000 people, and it is best known for its huge “rock,” the “Rock of Gibraltar.”

I have been contacted by residents in Gibraltar stating that 53 people have died in 10 days immediately following the roll out of injections of the Pfizer mRNA COVID injections, and calling it a “massacre.”

Local media reports confirm the deaths, but blame them on COVID, and not the COVID injections.

However, prior to the roll out of the injections, it is reported that only 16 people in total died “from COVID” since the beginning of the “pandemic” about a year ago.

A Kevin Rushworth reported:

Tiny Gibraltar Shines Huge Light on Vaccine Deaths

Ever since the epidemic began, sorting genuine Covid deaths from others has been a major issue. Now we have the added problem of vaccines in the mix. The UK now allegedly has the highest daily “Covid death” rate ever. Even higher than the “First Wave,” in spite of the substantial degree of herd immunity that has inevitably accrued since the beginning. This atypical “Second Wave” coincides with the vaccine roll-out. Are the two connected?

Gibraltar, normally called simply “Gib,” provides a very clear picture. This tiny British Colony, barely three miles long, appended to the South coast of Spain, has only 32,000 residents. It had suffered relatively little from the epidemic before the 9th January this year, with only seventeen deaths for the whole period. The death rate was well down the Deaths per Million League Table. This was not due to isolation, since Spanish workers have continued to pour into Gib every morning, and back out every evening.

Since the 9th January “Covid deaths” per million have rocketed to Third Place on the Worldometer site. Thirty-six more deaths in little over a week. What changed on the Ninth? The RAF flew in nearly 6,000 Pfizer vaccines, cooled to -70C by dry ice. They were put to use quickly to avoid the risk of degradation. Tiny Gibraltar is like a petri dish; in no other place has there been such a brutally clear relationship between vaccine roll-out and increased “Covid deaths.” Local media and Government have not even referred to the obvious connection. And media elsewhere has conveniently not noticed. Yet failing to recognise that these deaths demand, at the very least, immediate investigation, requires a criminal failure of judgement.

I cannot find the original source of this quote, but local media reports seem to confirm that the deaths occurred after the experimental Pfizer mRNA injection program started.

13 people died the first weekend, most of them elderly, and 27 the first week, as per local media sources.

From The Gibraltar Chronicle on January 17, 2021:

Gibraltar recorded another 13 Covid-related deaths over a “devastating” weekend that drove the death toll to 43 since the start of the pandemic.

During the past week alone, 27 people have passed away either as a direct result of the virus or while infected with it.

Nine Covid-related deaths were recorded on Sunday, the worst in a single day since the public health crisis almost a year ago.

The stark data was confirmed by the Gibraltar Government in its latest Covid update on Sunday, as Chief Minister Fabian Picardo confirmed he would address the community in a live press conference from No.6 Convent Place at 4pm on Monday.

Mr Picardo described the latest developments as “harrowing”, adding he himself lost a relative and friends in recent days.

All but three of those who died this weekend were in the care of the Elderly Residential Services, where there were still 130 active cases of Covid-19 on Sunday.

Those who died included six women and four men, the youngest in their early 70s, the eldest in their late 90s. All were recorded as being deaths from Covid-19.

Two men and woman who were not in the care of ERS also died this weekend from complications arising from Covid-19, including a man in his late 60s.

The first batch of the experimental Pfizer mRNA COVID injections were delivered by the military on January 9th, according to the UK Defense Journal:

A British A400M Atlas transport aircraft has delivered the first doses of the Pfizer COVID19 vaccine to Gibraltar.

According to a statement from the Government of Gibraltar:

“Her Majesty’s Government of Gibraltar is delighted to announce that the first delivery of the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine on Saturday 9 January 2021. Upon arrival, the vaccine will be immediately be taken directly to dedicated freezers in the basement of St Bernard’s Hospital and kept at -75 degrees centigrade.

This first delivery is being provided to Gibraltar by the UK Government as part of its programme to supply the Overseas Territories, as such the methodology of delivery is the same as it is in the UK.

A 5850 doses of the vaccine will be received in this first delivery. The second delivery of the vaccine is expected by the end of January. The aim to have vaccinated all over 70s with at least one dose by mid February, assuming that the vaccines arrive as planned.”

The vaccination programme for the public in Gibraltar will commence on Monday 11th January and will be at the former Primary Care Centre at the ICC.

Expatica.com reported that the injections started on January 9th, and that by Sunday night January 10th, 5,847 doses had been administered.

Gibraltar began rolling out its vaccination programme on January 9 using the Pfizer vaccine and by Sunday night had administered 5,847 doses — covering around 17 percent of the population. (Full Article.)

The Government of Gibraltar reported that as of January 10th, just one day after the injections started, 4 people immediately died:

It is with deep regret that the Government confirms the deaths of four residents of Gibraltar from COVID-19. This brings the total number of deaths related to COVID-19 in Gibraltar to 16.

The first was a male resident of Elderly Residential Services, aged 90 – 95 years old, who died last night of COVID-19 pneumonia with septicemia. This will be recorded in today’s statistics as a death from COVID-19.

The second was a man, aged 70 – 75 years old, who was also a cancer patient at the time of their death. The patient died today of COVID-19 pneumonitis. This will be recorded in today’s statistics as a death from COVID-19.

The third was a female resident of Elderly Residential Services, aged 90 – 95 years old, who died today from septicemia due to COVID-19. This will be recorded in today’s statistics as a death from COVID-19.

The fourth was a woman aged 95 – 100 years old, who died today of COVID-19 pneumonitis. This will be recorded in today’s statistics as a death from COVID-19.

Instead of immediately halting the COVID “vaccination” program, The Chief Minister, Fabian Picardo, stated that the “vaccines” brought “genuine relief and hope for a brighter tomorrow.”

The Chief Minister, Fabian Picardo, said: ‘I am extremely saddened by today’s news of the loss of four members of our community to COVID-19. My thoughts and deepest sympathies are with the families and friends of the deceased.

The poignancy of their deaths on the same day as Gibraltar’s vaccination programme has begun is particularly painful.

‘We are not out of the woods yet. The rollout of the vaccine brings us genuine relief and hope for a brighter tomorrow. But until we can vaccinate everyone, the best way to protect your loved ones is to stay at home. Remember also that it takes a few weeks for the vaccine to begin to offer protection against COVID-19, so even when you are vaccinated you should still take the greatest of care.

‘That means, for now, continuing to stay at home, wearing a mask if you do have to go out for essential reasons and washing your hands well and often.

‘I urge everyone to register their interest to receive the vaccine using the GHA’s dedicated online form, available at https://www.gha.gi/covid-19-vaccination-interest-form/. I already have done, and eagerly await my turn in line. For now, we will rightly focus on protecting our most vulnerable and our valued frontline workers, whose continued tireless efforts have brought us to this point where we can look to the future with hope.’ (Source.)

Yes, “massacre” is the correct term here, and another government official seemingly guilty of mass murder.

Do you see the pattern developing here? Inject the elderly first, watch them die by lethal injection, and then blame it on the virus, while encouraging everyone else to get the “vaccine” to protect themselves.

The sad thing is that, this is actually working. People are not resisting. Crowds are not rising up to protect the helpless, and imprison the murderous tyrants.

They’re obeying their government by being “good citizens” and wearing their masks, practicing social distancing, and staying home – just as they’re told to do.

Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter.

If you say, “But we knew nothing about this,” does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who guards your life know it? Will he not repay each person according to what he has done? (Proverbs 24:11-12)


Brian Shilhavy - Editor, Health Impact News

Comment on this article at HealthImpactNews.com.


AstraZeneca rejects ‘completely incorrect’ claim that Covid vaccine is less than 10 percent effective among elderly

By RT - 26. January 2021

AstraZeneca rejects ‘completely incorrect’ claim that Covid vaccine is less than 10 percent effective among elderly

A person receives a dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine at the Winter Gardens in Blackpool, Britain January 25, 2021. ©  Peter Byrne/Pool via REUTERS

AstraZeneca has denied claims circulating in German media that its Covid-19 vaccine has low efficacy among people 65 and over. The sensational reports have emerged as the EU mulls approval for the drug.

Two German outlets, Handelsblatt and Bild, cited government sources alleging that the AstraZeneca/Oxford drug has a poor performance record with senior citizens. Bild reported that among adults 65 and older, efficacy was “less than 10 percent,” while Handelsblatt put the figure at eight percent. The papers claimed that due to the worrying data, German officials did not expect the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to approve the drug for use on over-65s. 

In a written response to the reports, AstraZeneca said the claims about lackluster efficacy were “completely incorrect,” noting that in the UK the drug received emergency approval for the age group in question. The British-Swedish pharmaceutical company also pointed to data published in The Lancet in November, which demonstrated that “older adults showed strong immune responses to the vaccine, with 100 percent of older adults generating spike-specific antibodies after the second dose.”

AstraZeneca sought EU regulatory approval for its vaccine last month, and a final decision is anticipated by the EMA as early as this week. German Health Minister Jens Spahn stressed on Tuesday that European authorities would closely examine all available data before making a determination, but declined to comment on the reports about the vaccine’s alleged poor results among the elderly.

AstraZeneca has already found itself in hot water with Brussels, after the firm announced that there would likely be delays in delivering doses of the vaccine to member states once the vaccine receives approval, due to reduced yields at a manufacturing site used to supply the EU. 

In August, the EU paid the pharmaceutical €336 million ($409 million) in order to secure 300 million doses of the drug. Production issues could result in as few as 31 million doses being initially delivered to the bloc, according to EU officials speaking to the media. 

EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told AstraZeneca CEO Pascal Soriot on Monday that the bloc expects its contractual agreements to be honored.

The EU has already given the green light to two other vaccines, developed by Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech.


Merck ends COVID vaccine program, cites inferior immune responses

By Deena Beasley - 25. January 2021

(Reuters) - Drugmaker Merck & Co said on Monday it would stop development of its two COVID-19 vaccines and focus pandemic research on treatments, with initial data on an experimental oral antiviral expected by the end of March.

Merck was late to join the race to develop a vaccine to protect against the coronavirus, which has so far killed more than 2 million people and continues to surge in many parts of the world including the United States.

The company will record a pre-tax discontinuation charge in the fourth quarter for vaccine candidate V591, which it acquired with the purchase of Austrian vaccine maker Themis Bioscience, and V590, developed with nonprofit research organization IAVI, Merck said in a statement.

Merck said on Monday it’ll scrap development of its two COVID-19 vaccines. The drugmaker said early trials showed both vaccines produced immune responses that were inferior to those seen in people who had recovered from COVID-19 and those reported for other coronavirus vaccines. Merck will record a pre-tax charge for the two vaccines in the fourth quarter. The news sent its shares down about 1% in early trading Monday. Merck was a latecomer in the race to begin with. It acquired one vaccine candidate by buying Austrian vaccine maker Themis Bioscience. It developed the other one with a nonprofit research organization. Rivals Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech as well as Moderna have already produced tens of millions of doses that have been administered globally. Others like Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca are racing to develop safe and effective vaccines to protect against the virus. Merck says it will now focus pandemic research on treatments. It expects to produce early data on an experimental oral antiviral by the end of March. It also plans to soon post results from a Phase 3 study of an immune modulator aimed at treating patients with severe COVID-19.

In early trials, both vaccines generated immune responses that were inferior to those seen in people who had recovered from COVID-19 as well as those reported for other COVID-19 vaccines, the company said.

The announcement is a setback to the fight against the pandemic and comes a month after Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline delayed launch of their shot to late 2021, underscoring the challenges of developing vaccines at record speed.

Moderna says its vaccine works against new variants

Moderna said on Monday it believes its COVID-19 vaccine protects against new variants found in Britain and South Africa. The new variants have created some concern that mutations in the virus may make the vaccines less effective. The company said it found no reduction in the antibody response against the variant found in Britain but the South Africa variant caused a reduced response. Moderna is testing a third booster shot to be sure but believes its two-doses provide protection for at least a year. Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College said he was only mildly concerned that the vaccine wouldn't be protective: "Because the level of virus neutralizing antibody is still quite high, that six-fold reduction should not interfere with protection, although potentially it could cause a slight reduction." Moderna said the new booster shot could be made available in the future if evidence were to emerge that protection declined. Meanwhile, Pfizer and BioNTech have also said tests showed their vaccine is effective against the variant found in Britain, but have not yet disclosed results against the South Africa variant. The variant that was first found in Britain in September has caused a massive surge in cases there and elsewhere. It's been found in more than a dozen U.S. states. and is expected to be the dominant variant there within six weeks.

Tens of millions of doses of vaccines from rivals Pfizer Inc and German partner BioNTech as well as from Moderna Inc have so far been administered globally.

Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca Plc and others are also racing to develop safe and effective vaccines to protect against the virus.

Merck said it would focus COVID-19 research and manufacturing efforts on two investigational medicines: MK-7110 and MK-4482, which it now calls molnupiravir.

Molnupiravir, which is being developed in collaboration with Ridgeback Bio, is an oral antiviral being studied in both hospital and outpatient settings.

Merck said a Phase 2/3 trial of the drug was set to finish in May, but initial efficacy results were due in the first quarter and would be made public if clinically meaningful.

Merck said results from a Phase 3 study of MK-7110, an immune modulator being studied as a treatment for patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19, were expected in the first quarter.

Shares of Merck fell 1% to $80.12 in trading before the bell. (Reporting By Deena Beasley and additional reporting by Manas Mishra in Bengaluru; Editing by Shri Navaratnam and Anil D'Silva)


*URGENT BITCHUTE EXCLUSIVE: Anybody Getting The Experimental Vaccine Must See This

First published on BITCHUTE January 26th, 2021. RECORDED ON 23. JANUARY 2021

channel image

Knowledge And Truth TV

Knowledge And Truth TV

[Mirrored Source]

*UPDATE 1-25-2021 @ 8:14pm CST - I've been told that the VAERS system is down. I just confirmed. When you go to the site, it says, " VAERS component is temporarily down for maintenance. “Please bear with us for the next few hours. We apologize for your inconvenience." I wonder if they'll bring it back up.

This is a reporting system that ANYBODY can submit adverse reactions to. Not just heath care professionals. There is a disclaimer at the beginning you should read. Also, if you want more information on each case you can click on the blue "VAERS ID" number in the left hand column.

Here are all the links I talked about in the video:

Moderna site:



Anonymous Aficionado:

Original Source: https://www.bitchute.com/video/KAzUeDrgijM3/


RNA 'Vaccine' are GMO Implants, Not Vaccines

By Arlene Johnson - 22. January 2021

This may be another way to avoid having to accept this shot/jab:

From Robert B in Georgia, USA via Joe P in Ohio: 
RNA ‘Vaccines’ Are GMO Implants, Not Vaccines

15 US Code, § 41  Deceptive labeling law from the Federal Trade Commission Act that relates to advertising requires that a product or service cannot be said to prevent treat or cure human disease without substantiating the claim with scientific evidence. Furthermore, it is illegal to use terms, phrases, or words with an intent to deceive.
The 1905 Supreme Court case, Jacobson v Massachusetts, defines a vaccine as a substance that prevents infection by a pathogen and also prevents spreading it to others. 
Martin says Moderna, the manufacturer of a new Covid-RNA injection, describes its product not as a vaccine, but as “gene-therapy technology” in SEC filings. This is because neither Moderna nor Pfizer (the other manufacturer of the injections) makes any claims about their products creating immunity or preventing transmission. The best they can offer is that it is expected to lessen symptoms. Moderna’s own clinical study says it is “impractical to measure infection.” 
The New England Journal of Medicine and Lancet reported that “no correlate of protection from SARS-CoV-2 has been established,” which means that there is no evidence that the injections protect against anything.  Martin concludes that Moderna and Pfizer are in violation of the Federal Trade Commission’s Act, which prohibits deceptive practices.

Martin believes that gene-therapy technology is called vaccine technology in order to qualify for the 1986 liability exclusion for vaccine manufacturers. This allows drug companies to make billions without any liability or consequences when their products cause injury or death.  -GEG

David Martin said that Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services Alex Azar has kept the state of emergency going, along with governors, mayors and unelected officials, in order to maintain the liability shield under the emergency use authorization rule.


Arlene Johnson

David Martin, Bitchute

Watch the video on Bitchute at this link:  https://www.bitchute.com/video/FDpGljkivjVm/

Transcript summary:  https://www.davidmartin.world/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/BotW_transcript_01112021.pdf


W.H.O. Comes Clean, Pandemic Over!

From BIN - Friday, January 22, 2021 23:02

The Plot to Steal America


World Health Organization (WHO) Comes Clean, Pandemic Over 

We expose the lies from the WHO and how they and congress used the crisis as a political weapon to unseat a duly elected president and push an earth-shattering agenda. Experimental genome therapy injection on an unsuspecting public. Grab a pen and notebook and enjoy the report.

King Of Vaccines Comes Clean! Aborted Babies In Vaccines… 

King Of Vaccines Comes Clean!

Dr. Stanley Plotkin, MD – The world’s leading authority on vaccines details the use of aborted babies in vaccines while under oath. Leaked Video! Head U.N. Scientist Admits Vaccines Are Killing People – Soumya Swaminathan, the Chief Scientist of the WHO, admitting in a secret meeting that vaccines kill people and they do not know why.

On Dec 2nd and 3rd 2019 the UN funded WHO held a Global Vaccine Safety Summit where scientists admitted that vaccines are killing people, adjuvants in the vaccines are part of the problem, they have not conducted adequate safety studies.
Original video https://www.brighteon.com/283a0f6a-e109-42bb-867a-1c6bf646d330  

The Alex Jones Show
January 12 2020
On Dec 2nd and 3rd the UN funded WHO held a Global Vaccine Safety Summit where scientists admitted that vaccines are killing people, adjuvants in the vaccines are part of the problem, they have not conducted adequate safety studies. This is a bombshell report. See the links below for more videos.



Original Videos courtesy of Del BigTree

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPSpyEi01VI&feature=emb_logo (VIDEO CENSORED by GooTube!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2IujhTdCLE&feature=emb_logo (VIDEO CENSORED by GooTube!)

This other link will lead you to the first infowars report where they put out this news for the very first time: https://www.brighteon.com/44062308-e212-4182-84b1-cd658761d2b2


These are the first 329 cases where mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the USA in December 2020 and the patients died as a result.

From the 1/22/2021 release of VAERS data:

Found 329 cases where Vaccine targets COVID-19 (COVID19) and Patient Died



Age Count Percent
< 3 Years 1 0.3%
17-44 Years 7 2.13%
44-65 Years 49 14.89%
65-75 Years 43 13.07%
75+ Years 170 51.67%
Unknown 59 17.93%
TOTAL 329 100%


Case Details


Continue reading at:


Vaccine skeptics now being labeled part of “extremist” groups in latest merger of Big Pharma and the police state government

By  - 21. January 2021

Image: Vaccine skeptics now being labeled part of “extremist” groups in latest merger of Big Pharma and the police state government

(Natural News) The rise (and success) of President Donald Trump and the threat his tens of millions of supporters pose to the existing establishment order (the deep state) is so immense there is a movement afoot by the powers that be to eliminate them before they grow strong and organized enough to take America back.

One of the ways this effort is taking shape is to simply designate Trump’s supporters, among them Americans who remain skeptical of vaccines, as “extremist” groups, enemies of the state and terrorists.

As Big Pharma — bolstered by the former president’s COVID-19 vaccine push — grows in wealth and power, the industry is emulating Corporate America and Big Tech by growing closer to the leviathan federal government.

As noted by Technocracy News, last month The Hill claimed the “anti-vaccination movement sees COVID-19 as an opportunity” to shore up its opposition, adding: As public health officials seek to reassure Americans on the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine, anti-vaccine efforts could prevent the country from reaching herd immunity.”

Meanwhile, a separate report in The Times said the British “government regards tackling false information about COVID-19 vaccination as a rising priority,” likely for the very same concern.

And yet, how do ‘democracies’ justify utilizing cyber warfare against citizens just to implement public health policies that not all may agree with (and certainly policies that ‘the science’ doesn’t always prove)?

Aren’t concerns over the safety of vaccines legitimate? Should they not be part of the policy debate and discussion? Since when is it okay to impose uncertain healthy policies on supposedly free people the same way a dictatorial leader would? (Related: After abandoning objective science and endorsing left-wing political agendas, how is the Lancet still considered a medical journal?)

Not if the objective, the real objective, is control over the population; when control is the overriding goal, then discussion is an impediment.

And along those lines, ‘opponents’ to government policy — in this case, when governments have decided that ‘vaccines are good’ and ‘dissent to vaccines is bad,’ the powers that be then must not simply disagree with their opponents, they have to demonize, dehumanize and de-legitimize them, even if it means putting their lives in danger with false accusations of “extremism.”

Consider, per Technocracy News: 

In July 2020, Imran Ahmed, a member of the Steering Committee on Countering Extremism Pilot Task Force under the British government’s Commission for Countering Extremism and the chief executive of the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), told The Independent he considers anti-vaxxers “an extremist group that pose a national security risk,” because “once someone has been exposed to one type of conspiracy it’s easy to lead them down a path where they embrace more radical world views that can lead to violent extremism.”

Who thinks like this? Authoritarians do. Dictators. Tyrants. There is absolutely nothing to link concern over vaccines to violent extremism. Nothing.

But the same kind of tyranny is brewing in the ‘land of the free’ — across the pond in America.

Before President Trump even boarded Air Force One out of D.C., Democrats and their sick, twisted media lapdogs began fantasizing about “deprogramming” his 74 million-plus supporters by sending them all to ‘reeducation camps’ so they can indoctrinate them back into the Biden/Democrat/Deep State fold.

Some of them have actually said as much out loud, including Marxist-Anarchist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The New York Post reported:

Ocasio-Cortez said the House subcommittee on civil rights she serves on has held hearings over the prior two years on white supremacy and said there are programs to “de-radicalize” brain-washed adherents.

But she said funding was not a priority for those programs during the Trump years.

“There are people who are radicalized right now. It’s going to take a very long time to de-radicalize these people and a lot of effort,” she said.

Just a few years ago, she would have been run out of Congress for saying things like that. Now, post-Trump, she not only gets away with it, she is celebrated for it and her thoughts are echoed across other platforms — including so-called “news” networks like CNN, whose ‘media watchdog’ doesn’t even push back on calls to censor competitors.


See more at Vaccines.news.

Sources include:





COVID-19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Disease

By J. Bart Classen, MD - 21. January 2021

Volume 5 | Issue 1 | 1 of 3Microbiol Infect Dis, 2021 - Classen -  E-mail: .

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/072/590/019/original/647f91f71f6eada3.jpeg Result: The spike protein encoded by the vaccine binds angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), an enzyme which contains zinc molecules [8]. The binding of spike protein to ACE2 has the potential to release the zinc molecule, an ion that causes TDP-43 to assume its pathologic prion transformation. DOWNLOAD pdf: COVID-19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Disease Also in this scientific publication:Many have raised the warning that the current epidemic of COVID-19 is actually the result of an bioweapons attack released in part by individuals in the United States government [10,11]. Such a theory is not far fetched given that the 2001 anthrax attack in the US originated at Fort Detrick, a US army bioweapon facility. Because the FBI’s anthrax investigation was closed against the advice of the lead FBI agent in the case, there are likely conspirators still working in the US government. In such a scenario the primary focus of stopping a bioweapons attack must be to apprehend the conspirators or the attacks will never cease. Approving a vaccine, utilizing novel RNA technology without extensive testing is extremely dangerous. The vaccine could be a bioweapon and even more dangerous than the original infection.


RNA ‘Vaccines’ Are GMO Implants, Not Vaccines

By David Martin - 19. January 2021


15 US Code, § 41  Deceptive labeling law from the Federal Trade Commission Act that relates to advertising requires that a product or service cannot be said to prevent treat or cure human disease without substantiating the claim with scientific evidence. Furthermore, it is illegal to use terms, phrases, or words with an intent to deceive. 

The 1905 Supreme Court case, Jacobson v Massachusetts, defines a vaccine as a substance that prevents infection by a pathogen and also prevents spreading it to others. Martin says Moderna, the manufacturer of a new Covid-RNA injection, describes its product not as a vaccine, but as “gene-therapy technology” in SEC filings. This is because neither Moderna or Pfizer (the other manufacturer of the injections) makes any claims about their products creating immunity or preventing transmission. The best they can offer is that it is expected to lessen symptoms. Moderna’s own clinical study says it is “impractical to measure infection.” The New England Journal of Medicine and Lancet reported that “no correlate of protection from SARS-CoV-2 has been established,” which means that there is no evidence that the injections protect against anything.  Martin concludes that Moderna and Pfizer are in violation of the Federal Trade Commission’s Act, which prohibits deceptive practices.

Martin believes that gene-therapy technology is called vaccine technology in order to qualify for the 1986 liability exclusion for vaccine manufacturers. This allows drug companies to make billions without any liability or consequences when their products cause injury or death.  -GEG

David Martin said that Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services Alex Azar has kept the state of emergency going, along with governors, mayors and unelected officials, in order to maintain the liability shield under the emergency use authorization rule.

David Martin, Bitchute

Watch the video on Bitchute at this link:  https://www.bitchute.com/video/FDpGljkivjVm/

Transcript summary:  https://www.davidmartin.world/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/BotW_transcript_01112021.pdf


55 Americans Have Died Following COVID Vaccination,

Norway Deaths Rise To 29

By Tyler Durden - 16.January 2021

Amid increasing calls for suspension of the use of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines produced by companies such as Pfizer, especially among elderly people, the situation in Norway has escalated significantly as the Scandi nation has now registered a total of 29 deaths among people over the age of 75 who’ve had their first COVID-19 vaccination shot.

As Bloomberg reports, this adds six to the number of known fatalities in Norway, and also lowers the age group thought to be affected from 80.

Until Friday, Pfizer/BioNTech was the only vaccine available in Norway, and “all deaths are thus linked to this vaccine,” the Norwegian Medicines Agency said in a written response to Bloomberg on Saturday.

“There are 13 deaths that have been assessed, and we are aware of another 16 deaths that are currently being assessed,” the agency said.

All the reported deaths related to “elderly people with serious basic disorders,” it said.

“Most people have experienced the expected side effects of the vaccine, such as nausea and vomiting, fever, local reactions at the injection site, and worsening of their underlying condition.”

Norway’s experience has prompted the country to suggest that Covid-19 vaccines may be too risky for the very old and terminally ill... the exact group that 'the science' shows are actually at risk from this virus.

Pfizer and BioNTech are working with the Norwegian regulator to investigate the deaths in Norway, Pfizer said in an e-mailed statement. The agency found that “the number of incidents so far is not alarming, and in line with expectations,” Pfizer said.

However, it's not just Norway as The Epoch Times' Zachary Stieber reports that fifty-five people in the United States have died after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, according to reports submitted to a federal system.

Deaths have occurred among people receiving both the Moderna and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, according to the reports.

In some cases, patients died within days of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.

One man, a 66-year-old senior home resident in Colorado, was sleepy and stayed in bed a day after getting Moderna’s vaccine. Early the next morning, on Christmas Day, the resident “was observed in bed lying still, pale, eyes half open and foam coming from mouth and unresponsive,” the VAERS report states. “He was not breathing and with no pulse.”

In another case, a 93-year-old South Dakota man was injected with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on Jan. 4 around 11 a.m. About two hours later, he said he was tired and couldn’t continue with the physical therapy he was doing any longer. He was taken back to his room, where he said his legs felt heavy. Soon after, he stopped breathing. A nurse declared a do-not-resuscitate order.

In addition to the deaths, people have reported 96 life-threatening events following COVID-19 vaccinations, as well as 24 permanent disabilities, 225 hospitalizations, and 1,388 emergency room visits.

It's not just the old and frail, in Israel, which proudly lays claim to the greatest vaccination effort in the world (largest percentage of the population inoculated),

As RT reports, at least 13 Israelis have experienced facial paralysis after being administered the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine, a month after the US Food and Drug Administration reported similar issues but said they weren’t linked to the jab.

Israeli outlet Ynet reported, citing the Health Ministry, that officials believe the number of such cases could be higher.

“For at least 28 hours I walked around with it [facial paralysis],” one person who had the side effect told Ynet. 

“I can't say it was completely gone afterwards, but other than that I had no other pains, except a minor pain where the injection was, but there was nothing beyond that.”

Ynet quoted Prof. Galia Rahav, director of the Infectious Diseases Unit at Sheba Medical Center, who said she did not feel “comfortable” with administering the second dose to someone who had received the first jab and subsequently suffered from paralysis.

“No one knows if this is connected to the vaccine or not. That's why I would refrain from giving a second dose to someone who suffered from paralysis after the first dose,” she told the outlet.

Finally, as we noted yesterday following the news of rising post-vaccination deaths in Noway, health experts from Wuhan, China, called on Norway and other countries to suspend the use of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines produced by companies such as Pfizer, especially among elderly people.

China's Global Times reports Chinese experts said the death incident should be assessed cautiously to understand whether the death was caused by vaccines or other preexisting conditions of these individuals.

Yang Zhanqiu, a virologist from Wuhan University, told the Global Times on Friday that the death incident, if proven to be caused by the vaccines, showed that the effect of the Pfizer vaccine and other mRNA vaccines is not as good as expected, as the main purpose of mRNA vaccines is to heal patients.


A Beijing-based immunologist, who requested anonymity, told the Global Times on Friday that the world should suspend the use of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine represented by Pfizer, as this new technology has not proven safety in large-scale use or in preventing any infectious diseases.

Older people, especially those over 80, should not be recommended to receive any COVID-19 vaccine, he said.

All of which is a problem since it is the elderly who are at most risk (quite frankly at any real risk at all) and thus who need the protection the most.

The Chinese health experts instead say that the most elderly and frail should be recommended to take medicines to improve their immune system.

Of course, one cannot help but note the irony of scientists from the source of the plague that has killed millions around the world and destroyed lives/economies almost everywhere, is now calling for the cessation of the process to protect against the plague.


Tyler Durden's Photo

Tyler Durden


COVID-19 vaccine reactions being blamed on PEG, but could it be the body responding to mRNA transhumanist genetic reprogramming?

By  - 15. January 2021

Image: COVID-19 vaccine reactions being blamed on PEG, but could it be the body responding to mRNA transhumanist genetic reprogramming?

(Natural News) The medical establishment is playing dumb concerning the adverse events caused by Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines, blaming their occurrence on a relatively common, yet toxic, vaccine additive known as polyethylene glycol (PEG). However, untested modified RNA (mRNA) technology is more than likely the real culprit.

According to the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “at least six severe allergic reactions” to the Pfizer / BioNTech China virus jab have been reported thus far. At least two cases of anaphylaxis have also been reported in the United Kingdom.

Tiptoeing around the vaccine’s mRNA component, which has never before been used in a vaccine, the mainstream media has pegged PEG as the potential cause – PEG being the petroleum-based industrial additive that surrounds mRNA like a bubble in order to deliver it into cells.

The oily lipid molecules that surround mRNA are stabilized by PEG, allowing the entire sequence to insert itself into human cells for reprogramming. The end result is the cell-based production of synthetic “spike” proteins that the body supposedly recognizes as the WuFlu, prompting it to fight the disease as part of a genetically modified (GMO) immune response.

“Although I think we’re just speculating here … it is known that one of the components that is present in both of the vaccines – polyethylene glycol – can be associated, uncommonly, with allergic reactions,” stated Peter Marks, director of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, at a Dec. 18 press conference.

“What we’re learning now is that those allergic reactions could be somewhat more common than the highly uncommon that we thought they were because people do get exposed to polyethylene glycol in various pharmaceutical preparations,” Marks added, noting that the FDA is planning to also watch the Moderna vaccine rollout “very closely” since both jabs contain PEG.

In its own statement, Pfizer indicated that it, too, plans to “closely monitor all reports suggestive of serious allergic reactions following vaccination.” Pfizer also stated that its prescribing information includes a warning about how “appropriate medical treatment and supervision should always be readily available in case of a rare anaphylactic event following the administration of the vaccine.”

If you take a COVID-19 vaccine, you’ll become a GMO

The assumption, in other words, is that PEG is the problem, and people who are allergic to it should simply avoid the shot – simple enough. But what if PEG is not what is actually causing serious adverse events? What if Chinese virus vaccines are so serious of an affront to the human body and its natural DNA blueprints that these anaphylaxis reactions are a sign of permanent autoimmunity?

To be clear, we know that PEG is harmful and should not be injected into humans. At the same time, it would be remiss to ignore the fact that mRNA technology is a form of genetic engineering that permanently alters the human genome in ways that are still largely unknown.

At the very least, mRNA vaccines are bombarding the bodies of those who receive them with “alien protein” compounds that the immune system does not recognize. As a result, it induces anaphylaxis, which Nobel Prize-winning scientist Charles Richet described as a “universal defence mechanism against the penetration of heterogenous substances in the blood, whence they can not be eliminated.”

Especially when mixed with antigens, the poisonous chemicals used in vaccines are an affront to human immunity, hence why the immune system rejects them, oftentimes violently and sometimes leading to death. And the introduction of mRNA technology only worsens that threat.

According to some, these mRNA “vaccines” are not even vaccines at all. They are a completely different animal that has been designed to recode a person’s genetics and turn him or her into some kind of transhuman.

As one Zero Hedge commenter posed it, perhaps these anaphylactic reactions are simply the “external manifestations of the internal change to transhumanism.” Another wrote that the goal of the globalists is to “change humanity into their imag(e)ination and control them like livestock.”

Still another wrote that one of the unanswered questions about these mRNA vaccines has to do with how the jabs themselves are a type of virus “that takes over the normal functions of healthy cells and reprograms them to produce synthetic spike proteins.”

“Once those cells are reprogrammed, they can not ever go back to the way they were. The cells are now spike protein factories, constantly causing the immune system to neutralize these particles … If the body is now constantly producing antibodies to counteract trillions of inert spike proteins, you have now caused that person to have an autoimmune disorder.”

In the opinion of this writer, these COVID-19 jabs are the start, if not the fulfillment, of the Mark of the Beast written about in the book of Revelation – especially if they become a requirement in order to buy, sell, travel and live.

More of the latest news about Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines can be found at Pandemic.news.

Sources for this article include:






23 Dead In Norway After Taking COVID Vaccine

Government regulator says “We see nothing alarming”

By Steve Watson - 15. Janury 2021

Reports emerging from Norway indicate that at least twenty three people have died after taking the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, yet the government

EMAregulator has said they don’t see anything alarming in the cases.

Norway was one of the first countries to start vaccinating people before the end of last year, beginning in nursing homes with the elderly.

Reports from local media there note that there have been 23 deaths among those who have taken the shot, with 13 so far positively linked to the side effects of the shot.

However, Dr. Steinar Madsen, the medical director of the national drug regulator, the Norwegian Medicines Agency commented “We do not see anything alarming with these figures. All deaths are in elderly and frail people with underlying diseases.”

The reports also indicate that a further 29 people who took the vaccine have developed significant side effects. Nine of those cases are said to be critical.

The developments prompted the Norwegian Public Health Institute to update its Covid-19 vaccination guidelines to suggest that the benefit of the jab to already ill people “may be marginal or negligible.” 

“For those with the most severe frailty, even relatively mild vaccine side effects can have serious consequences,” the Institute noted, adding “For those who have a very short remaining life span anyway, the benefit of the vaccine may be marginal or irrelevant.”

While there are hundreds of deaths in nursing homes every month, this development is sure to be concerning, given that globally the vaccine is being rolled out to elderly people first.

In the UK, the government has announced that more than a third of people over 80 have already received the jab.

The number equates to over a million people in the UK.



- 14. January 2021 


Neuroscientist Chris Shaw PhD shares his concerns about the mRNA #Covid19 vaccines and explains Moderna’s own data demonstrating mRNA can cross the blood-brain barrier.


EMA hacked with BioNtech covid vax files released

By Jim Stone - 13. January 2020

The most important files in the batch are HERE

You will need a picture viewer (like IrfnView) and open office or Microsoft word to get the information.

It was an easy read of only about 20 documents. BioNtech's vax is not as bad as the others, (but still bad) and Polyethelene Glycol has been given the name ALC-0159 so it does not show up on the ingredient label. My opinion: Don't take this crap, since even in THIS DOCUMENT it clearly states that the vax has two ingredients that have never been approved for use in people before. And their labeling is not honest.

The product lingers in tissues for a long time, especially the liver, this is all in the document I linked, which is a lengthy read. From what I managed to get to quickly it is evident only animal testing was done and the date of the document proves there's no way this stuff is safe in humans.

The document was released on November 30 2020 and at that time they did not even have approval for ANY human studies. If any were claimed by them publicly (I have not looked into that,) they lied. Here is one of the many comments in the document regarding testing:

"The pharmacology dossier is based on initial studies of the functionality of the BNT162b2 (V9) RNA-based product and the encoded SARS-CoV-2 P2 S protein as well as on supporting studies of SARS-CoV-2 P2 S protein structure. This is followed by characterization of the humoral and cellular immune response in mouse and nonhuman primate upon immunization with BNT162b2 (V9) and ends up with a SARS-CoV-2 challenge study of BNT162b2 (V9) immunized nonhuman primates. No secondary pharmacodynamic, safety pharmacology or pharmacodynamic drug interaction studies with BNT162b2 have been conducted due to the nature of the RNA-based vaccine product, which is according to applicable guidelines."

I REPEAT: AS OF NOVEMBER 30, "No secondary pharmacodynamic, safety pharmacology or pharmacodynamic drug interaction studies with BNT162b2 have been conducted due to the nature of the RNA-based vaccine product, which is according to applicable guidelines." Let's clarify: As of November 30, NO STUDIES AT ALL with regard to the safety of the product were complete, and their own document says it over and over again, (that is just one example) they focus on studies done with monkeys and rats. Not people. Gotta love that.

Bottom line: BioNtech does not have a marketable product. It could not have been safely analyzed since Nov 30, there would be no way to do human trials that fast, and their own documents say no human trials were done or even scheduled, as of Nov 30. If anyone gets jabbed with that sh*t they are the victim of a con job.


First published on BITCHUTE January 13th, 2021.

channel image


Hackers posted confidential documents regarding Covid-19 medicines and vaccines on the internet after a data breach late last year at the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

Caught up in the hack were some documents submitted by Pfizer and BioNTech during a regulatory review of their vaccine, approved last month.

Download while you can:
Password for locked files is "Moses".


Rate of adverse events caused by coronavirus vaccines 50x higher than flu shots

By  - 12. January 2021

Image: Rate of adverse events caused by coronavirus vaccines 50x higher than flu shots

The number of people suffering serious adverse events following vaccination for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is 50 times higher than the number for seasonal flu shots, new reports indicate.

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is seeing a surge in new cases of COVID-19 vaccine injury that is massively outpacing similar cases for influenza vaccines and other jabs.

Through Dec. 22, with fewer than one million doses of China virus vaccines distributed, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) VAERS platform received 307 reports of emergency room visits, as well as 17 “life threatening” events.

There have also been a number of deaths reported, which is deeply concerning when considering the fact that Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines have only been available to the public for less than a month.

“In 2019-2020, about 175 million flu vaccine doses were given,” tweeted former New York Times reporter and Tell Your Children author Alex Berenson.

“1220 ER visits and 73 ‘life threatening’ events were reported. The data is on the CDC VAERS Website.”

Despite offering a few caveats for why there is this massive disparity, Berenson was basically forced to conclude that something is seriously wrong with COVID-19 vaccines that is causing a much higher share of patients to fall seriously ill or die after getting jabbed.

“… the first Covid vaccine doses have mostly been given to healthy people in settings where problems can be quickly treated,” Berenson notes, further indicting the jabs for affecting healthy people in a profoundly negative way.

“These problems are occurring BEFORE the rollout to older, less healthy people – and before the 2nd dose, which is known to be far more dangerous.”

Put bluntly, only stupid people are getting vaccinated for coronavirus

In the end, all of this simply confirms what Berenson admits was recognizable in the clinical trials – even though we know that clinical trials tend to understate real-world problems rather than overstate them.

“… because any smart drug company will try to bias the trials in its favor,” Berenson says.

All of that to say, getting vaccinated for the WuFlu is an exceptionally dangerous endeavor, especially since Big Pharma holds no liability for injury or death. Vaccine-injured people are completely on their own, in other words.

Considering the risk of getting sick, let alone dying, from the Chinese virus itself is next to nil, it makes no sense whatsoever to get vaccinated for it – especially when the risk of being harmed from the vaccine is higher than the risk of developing symptoms from natural infection.

The medical deep state will continue to push it on the masses, of course, even try to make it mandatory, but stand your ground and just say no, for the protection of you and your family.

And kudos to Berenson for being brave enough to tell the truth about these shots when so many others refuse to do so. Anthony Fauci and everyone else peddling them are guilty of crimes against humanity, and their day will come – hopefully sooner rather than later.

“It’s an experimental vaccine, i.e. not fully tested even according to the manufacturer’s schedule, and therefore must fall under the umbrella of human rights violations if it’s forced upon people,” wrote one Zero Hedge commenter.

“It also violates the Nuremberg Code of informed consent,” another responded. “These vax companies and Bill Gates know just how deadly they are … and vax companies are immune from prosecution for death or injury from the vax. Gates needs to be hanged from a lamppost and left swinging like a piñata while we have a shot at him with bats.”

More of the latest news about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) can be found at Pandemic.news.

Sources for this article include:




10 Things You Need to Know about the Experimental COVID Vaccines

By Makia Freeman - 12. January 2021



    Since the COVID vaccine is planned on being given to everyone worldwide, there's a lot you need to know about it.


    These COVID vaccines constitute a massive, unprecedented and dangerous experiment on the entire world population.

experimental covid vaccines

As the experimental COVID vaccines are militarily deployed worldwide (being the weapon they are), here are 10 things you need to know about these dangerous, transhumanistic tools of destruction.

Experimental COVID Vaccines

are coming to town, being rolled out worldwide as the transhumanistic New World Order (NWO) agenda dictates. This next phase of the COVID scamdemic is an incredibly dangerous one – the phase where authorities take their sovereignty-violating ways a step further by actually penetrating the body with poison disguised as medicine. These new COVID vaccines are even worse than your plain old regular toxic, carcinogenic and mutagenic vaccines, because some of them (the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna) are a dangerously new exotic creature: tools that actively hijack your genes and reprogram them. Here are 10 things you need to know about the COVID vax, plus a list at the end of the article of just some of the horrendous injuries and deaths it has caused thus far.

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Never-Before-Used Tools to Modify and Program Your Genetics

The COVID vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna are called mRNA (messenger RNA) vaccines – a completely new type of vaccine that has never been licensed or used on humans before. We have absolutely no idea what to expect from this vaccine, nor no way to know if it will be effective or safe. Traditional vaccines introduce pieces of a weakened virus to stimulate an immune response. mRNA vaccines inject molecules of synthetic genetic material from non-human sources into your cells, thus hijacking your genes and permanently reprogramming them to produce antibodies to kill the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus causing COVID (although, as regular readers of The Freedom Articles know, the virus has never been isolated, purified or proven 100% to exist). These newly-created proteins are not regulated by your DNA and are thus completely foreign to your body.

Experimental COVID Vaccines: mRNA Vax is an Operating System

The mRNA vaccines of Moderna and Pfizer could barely be regarded as medicine in the traditional sense. They are transhumanistic tools to synthetically alter you at the genetic level. In fact, Moderna has even admitted on their website that their new COVID vaccines are an “operating system” and the “software of life”:

“Recognizing the broad potential of mRNA science, we set out to create an mRNA technology platform that functions very much like an operating system on a computer. It is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the “program” or “app” is our mRNA drug – the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein.”

Catherine Austin Fitts has recently been pointing out that these tools are ‘vaccines’ in name only, called so to give them legal immunity from liability, when actually they are operating systems:

“Just as Gates installed an operating system in our computers, now the vision is to install an operating system in our bodies and use “viruses” to mandate an initial installation followed by regular updates. Now I appreciate why Gates and his colleagues want to call these technologies “vaccines.” If they can persuade the body politic that injectable credit cards or injectable surveillance trackers or injectable brain-machine interface nanotechnologies are “vaccines,” then they can enjoy the protection of a century or more of legal decisions and laws that support their efforts to mandate what they want to do.”

“Why are we calling these formulations “vaccines”? If I understand the history of case law, vaccines, in legal terms, are medicine. Intentional heavy metal poisoning is not medicine. Injectable surveillance components are not medicine. Injectable credit cards are not medicine. Injectable brain-machine interface is not a medicine. Immunity for insurance companies is not the creation of human immunity. We need to stop allowing these concoctions to be referred to by a word that the courts and the general population define and treat as medicine and protect from legal and financial liability.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Safety Abandoned

Vaccines usually take 7-20 years to adequately research, test and bring to market. The slew of COVID vaccines produced by Big Pharma companies are being rushed to market in less than 12 months, which is nowhere enough time to meet established safety standards. No long-term safety studies were conducted, so no one has any real idea of the danger these vaccines could cause down the line. Many of the trials only lasted 3-4 months. Animal trials, an important part of safety testing, were skipped. While long-term safety is completely unknown, short-term safety looks extremely sketchy (see next section and list of links at end of article). It is no understatement to say that much of the worldwide population has just become Big Pharma’s guinea pigs.

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Dangerous Adverse Effects

The COVID vaccines promote disease enhancement due to pathogenic priming. In other words, they make people sicker than the disease would have. In Moderna’s trials alone, FDA documents record that 13 people died (6 from the vaccine and 7 from the placebo), while the FDA also issued a new warning regarding Bell’s Palsy as a potential side effect (results were correct up until December 3rd 2020). Since the rollout of the COVID vax, doctors and nurses have fainted live on TV (nurse manager Tiffany Dover fainted while speaking to the media about receiving the vaccine, and later died), contracted Bell’s palsy and become paralyzed. Some people have even died following the vaccine, including in places like Miami, Portugal, Israel, Switzerland, Iceland and more (see links in last section of article).

Experimental COVID Vaccines: COVID Vax Only Designed to Stop Mild Symptoms

With the risks of the COVID vaccine so undeniably grave, you might think the benefits are large. Think again. Big Pharma has stated that the vaccine only protects against mild (not moderate or severe) symptoms, which makes the vaccine virtually pointless, given the large majority of people who allegedly have COVID have little or no symptoms whatsoever.
The study Will covid-19 vaccines save lives? Current trials aren’t designed to tell us published in the BMJ (British Medical Journal) by Professor Peter Doshi raises at least 2 very good points about the failure of the COVID vaccines to stop moderate/severe symptoms and to stop transmission. He quotes, among others, Moderna chief medical officer Tal Zaks:

“But what will it mean exactly when a vaccine is declared “effective”? To the public this seems fairly obvious. “The primary goal of a covid-19 vaccine is to keep people from getting very sick and dying,” a National Public Radio broadcast said bluntly. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, said, “Ideally, you want an antiviral vaccine to do two things . . . first, reduce the likelihood you will get severely ill and go to the hospital, and two, prevent infection and therefore interrupt disease transmission.” Yet the current phase III trials are not actually set up to prove either. None of the trials currently under way are designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths. Nor are the vaccines being studied to determine whether they can interrupt transmission of the virus.”

“Tal Zaks, chief medical officer at Moderna, told The BMJ that the company’s trial lacks adequate statistical power to assess those outcomes. “The trial is precluded from judging [hospital admissions], based on what is a reasonable size and duration to serve the public good here,” he said. Hospital admissions and deaths from covid-19 are simply too uncommon in the population being studied for an effective vaccine to demonstrate statistically significant differences in a trial of 30 000 people. The same is true of its ability to save lives or prevent transmission: the trials are not designed to find out. Zaks said, “Would I like to know that this prevents mortality? Sure, because I believe it does. I just don’t think it’s feasible within the timeframe [of the trial]—too many would die waiting for the results before we ever knew that.” What about Hotez’s second criterion, interrupting virus transmission, which some experts have argued should be the most important test in phase III studies? “Our trial will not demonstrate prevention of transmission,” Zaks said, “because in order to do that you have to swab people twice a week for very long periods, and that becomes operationally untenable.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: COVID Vax Not Designed to Stop Transmission

Likewise, Big Pharma admitted they didn’t design the vaccine to stop transmission. Therefore, if someone else gets the vaccine, it doesn’t stop them from transmitting the virus to you, and if you get the vaccine, it does not stop you from transmitting the virus to others. This may be why NIAID head Dr. Anthony Fauci continued to push the dehumanizing agenda when he stated on MSM TV that people should still socially distance and wear masks even after getting vaccinated:

“Obviously, with a 90+% effective vaccine, you could feel much more confident [about not getting sick] … but I would recommend to people to not abandon all public health measures just because you have been vaccinated.”

genomic virus Fran Leader

Experimental COVID Vaccines: No Real Isolated Virus Was Used to Make the Vaccine

The vaccine cannot possibly be truly effective since it was not based on an actual isolated sample of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The WHO protocols that Pfizer used to produce the mRNA do not appear to identify any nucleotide sequences that are unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. I have been covering this point ever since the COVID scamdemic began, especially in articles like SARS-CoV-2: The Stitched Together, Frankenstein Virus where I highlight that COVID or SARS-CoV-2 is a theoretical digital virus, constructed from a computer database, that doesn’t exist in the real world. Fran Leader questioned the UK MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) about this, asserting that the ‘virus’ was actually a computer generated genomic sequence, and ultimately they confirmed:

“The DNA template does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: WHO Admits There’s No Evidence COVID Vax Works

The World Health Organization chief scientist Soumya Swaminathan Yadav admitted that there is no “evidence on any of the [COVID] vaccines to be confident that it’s going to prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Contains PEGylated Lipid Nanoparticles Which Can Cause Disease

Dr. Frank Shallenberger writes about the dangers of PEGylated lipid nanoparticles which are used to hide the mRNA from our bodies:

“The mRNA molecule is vulnerable to destruction. So, in order to protect the fragile mRNA strands while they are being inserted into our DNA they are coated with PEGylated lipid nanoparticles. This coating hides the mRNA from our immune system which ordinarily would kill any foreign material injected into the body. PEGylated lipid nanoparticles have been used in several different drugs for years. Because of their effect on immune system balance, several studies have shown them to induce allergies and autoimmune diseases. Additionally, PEGylated lipid nanoparticles have been shown to trigger their own immune reactions, and to cause damage to the liver.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Pfizer Vaccine Fallout

An astonishing number of people have been hurt, damaged, injured and killed from the Pfizer COVID vax. Take a look at the following headlines, data and links from our friends at For Our Rights:

CDC data shows that 3,150 people are now “unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work” after vaccination. This is 2.7% of people who took it


Portuguese health worker, 41, dies two days after getting the Pfizer covid vaccine as her father says he “wants answers”


Mexican doctor hospitalized after receiving COVID-19 vaccine


Hundreds of Israelis get infected with Covid-19 after receiving Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine


Wife of ‘perfectly healthy’ Miami doctor, 56, who died of a blood disorder 16 days after getting Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine is certain it was triggered by the jab, as drug giant investigates first death with a suspected link to shot


75-year-old Israeli man dies 2 hours after getting Covid-19 vaccine


Death of Swiss man after Pfizer vaccine


88-year-old collapses and dies several hours after being vaccinated


Thousands negatively affected after getting Covid-19 vaccine


Hospital worker with no prior allergies in intensive care with severe reaction after Pfizer Covid vaccine


4 volunteers develop FACIAL PARALYSIS after taking Pfizer Covid-19 jab, prompting FDA to recommend ‘surveillance for cases’


Investigation launched as 2 people die in Norway nursing home days after receiving Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine


Hundreds Sent to Emergency Room After Getting COVID-19 Vaccines


US officials report more severe allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines


NHS told not to give COVID vaccine to those with history of allergic reactions


COVID-19: Single vaccine dose leads to ‘greater risk’ from new coronavirus variants, South African experts warn


CDC reveals at least 21 Americans have suffered life threatening allergic reactions to Pfizer’s COVID vaccine


Woman experiences side effects of COVID-19 vaccine


COVID vaccine side effects more common after 2nd dose


Bulgaria reports 4 cases of side effects from Pfizer COVID vaccine


Two NHS workers suffer allergic reaction to Pfizer vaccine


Conclusion: Watch Out!

The above are just 10 reasons to watch out for the COVID vax, however for those wishing to dig deeper, I suggest investigating things such as unsafe epitopes (parts of proteins capable of causing immune and auto-immune conditions), ADE (antibody-dependent amplification, long known from experiments with corona vaccines in cats. All cats that initially tolerated the vaccine well, died after catching the wild virus), nanoparticles (graphene and hydrogel) and more, all of which are likely linked to the COVID vaccines. These concoctions take the NWO scheme to a whole new level. The agenda has arrived at your doorstep and, indeed, at your bloodstream.


Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles, author of the book Cancer: The Lies, the Truth and the Solutions and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com. Makia is on Steemit and Parler.


















Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Docs Were Hacked From European Agency

BioNTech's docs on its COVID-19 vaccine candidate were illegally accessed at a European agency.

By  - 09. December 2020

Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Docs Were Hacked From European Agency

Science in HD / Unsplash

BioNTech — a COVID-19 vaccine manufacturer in partnership with Pfizer — announced its regulatory submission was subject to a cyber-attack from the European Medicines Agency on Wednesday, according to a brief statement on the agency's website.

The hack is under investigation.

Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine documents were hacked

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is working toward approving two COVID-19 vaccine candidates, expected to reach completion in two weeks, and the recent cyber-attack won't affect this timeline, according to BioNTech, the BBC reports.

The EMA didn't offer additional details on the extent or nature of the cyber-attack in a brief note on the hack on its website — except to say a full investigation was underway.

An agency spokesperson said it was still "functional," reports the BBC. But BioNTech said it was told documents relevant to the COVID-19 vaccine were accessed, in a different statement on its website.

BioNTech said hack will have 'no impact' on vaccine review timeline

"Today, we were informed [...] that the agency has been subject to a cyber-attack and that some documents relating to the regulatory submission for Pfizer and BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine candidate, BNT162b2, which has been stored on an EMA server, had been unlawfully accessed," said the company's statement.

"EMA has assured us that the cyber attack will have no impact on the timeline for its review," added BioNTech's release.

UPDATE Dec. 9, 3:20 PM EST: EMA investigating safety of Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine for E.U. member nations

Regarding the possibility of medical study participants' personal data security, BioNTech said it was "unaware" of any compromise. The EMA is responsible for authorizing medicines and vaccines across the entire European Union (E.U.)

At present, the EMA is investigating whether the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine — which is still undergoing its initial rollout in the U.K., in addition to a different vaccine candidate from Moderna — is safe for use in E.U. member nations.

Whether Moderna's vaccine documents were also accessed has yet to be announced.

UPDATE Dec. 9, 3:26 PM EST: UK COVID-19 vaccine rollout remains unaffected, said country's cybersecurity center

This is the latest cyber-attack in a series of warnings of possible hacks against vaccine-developers, in addition to public health institutions.

In October, an India-based pharmaceutical company experienced a cyber-attack. Additionally, IBM recently said the cold storage supply chain — crucial for transporting viable vaccines — had already experienced cyber-attacks.

This latest hack comes one day before the European agency is slated to update the European Parliament on the progress made in assessing the vaccine.

The U.K.'s National Cyber Security Centre said no signs suggest the hack will alter the rollout schedule of the vaccine in the U.K., which began administering COVID-19 vaccines on Tuesday.

We have created an interactive page to demonstrate engineers’ noble efforts against COVID-19 across the world. If you are working on a new technology or producing any equipment in the fight against COVID-19, please send your project to us to be featured.



“Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine!"

Discussion between Dr. David Martin, Rocco Galati, Judy Mikovits, Ph.D und Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the Inocculations - it is a synthetic pathogen used in the mass-"vaccinations"! - by Sacha Stone

Important excerpt secured on BITCHUTE January 9th, 2021. From "FOCUS ON FAUCI" event 05. January 2020

Clarification from Dr. David Martin:
“Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine. They are using the term “vaccine“ to sneak this under their public health exemptions. This is not a vaccine. This is mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term under public health law; they are a legally defined term under CDC and FDA standards.
In the vaccine specifically, it has to stimulate both the immunity within the person receiving it and it also has to disrupt transmission. And that is not what this is. They have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop the transmission, it is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities because then people would say “what other treatments are there?“
The use of the term vaccine is unconscionable for both the legal definition and also, it is actually the sucker punch to open free discourse. Moderna was started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARSCOV 2. If we said we are going to give people prophylactic chemotherapy for the cancer they don’t have, we’d be laughed out of the room because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is. This is a mechanical device in the form of a very small package of technology that has been inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site.
And I refuse to stipulate in any conversations that this is, in fact, a vaccine issue. The only reason why the term is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobson case that has been misrepresented since it was written. And if we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within a cell. It is a medical device, not a drug because it meets the CDRH definition of a device. It is not a living system, it is not a biologic system, it is a physical technology and it happens to just come in the size of a molecular package.
So we need to be really clear on making sure we don’t fall for their game. Because their game is if we talk about it as a vaccine, then we are going to get into a vaccine conversation. But this is not, by their own admission, a vaccine...
In other words, nothing about this is going to stop you from transmitting anything. This is about getting you sick and having your own selves be the thing that gets you sick.

FULL TRANSCRIPT - Transcript of Focus on Fauci - January 5 2020.pdf


The LIVESTREAM ON 05th January 2021


If you missed the Livestream event, you can watch it here on Earth Heroes TV - this is a MUST WATCH


How many in the UK know about this?

It does say the UK gov is in the Gates and WHO's back pockets for sure.  They have been for some time. 

MHRA awarded over £980,000 for collaboration with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Health Organisation


Vaxxed v. Unvaxxed: Lawsuit Seeks to Protect Americans From Discrimination Based on Vaccination Status

In a federal complaint filed last month in the U.S. District Court of California, constitutional litigators Greg Glaser and Ray Flores presented results of a pilot study showing unvaccinated adults and children are healthier than their vaccinated counterparts.

By Greg Glaser - 06. January 2021

Vaxxed v. Unvaxxed: Lawsuit Seeks to Protect Americans From Discrimination Based on Vaccination Status

On George Washington’s birthday, Feb. 22, constitutional litigators Greg Glaser and Ray Flores will be in federal court in Sacramento to request an order immediately protecting all Americans from discrimination based on vaccination status.

Glaser and Flores represent The Control Group, which is a recently completed pilot survey of unvaccinated Americans showing 1,248% better health for unvaccinated adults and 1,099% better health for unvaccinated children.

In the federal complaint filed December 2020 in the U.S. District Court of California — Eastern District, Sacramento, Glaser and Flores state:

“As a matter of national security, this constitutional case is respectfully brought by scientifically focused patriotic Americans, including United States military family members. The American population is currently in the process of being decimated by chronic illness, due to injured and dysfunctional immune systems … The Control Group dataset provides profound proof that vaccine exposure is in fact the primary cause of this nation’s current public health crisis.”

According to Glaser, here is the case in a nutshell:

“America is dying from the current trajectory of chronic illness. Our Control Group pilot survey proved it is the vaccines causing our nation’s demise. And even the government’s own admissions make it clear vaccines are unavoidably unsafe. There is no single agency such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that can be petitioned to heal the whole nation, nor a single law such as SB277 that can be overturned to heal this nation from the current trajectory. That is why Ray Flores and I are requesting comprehensive relief in the form of an executive order preventing discrimination based on vaccination status. If we prevail, then every American will be protected from mandatory vaccination.”

Glaser said he believes this case is the most comprehensive presentation of evidence to date on vaccine harm. For example, Glaser and Flores have 400+ top-level science exhibits offered for judicial notice, which requires the court to accept certain statements made by government officials and other authoritative sources. A key goal of this judicial notice technique is to help shift the legal burden to the state to prove vaccine safety. According to Glaser, because the State has no vaxxed versus unvaxxed study, the state cannot meet its legal burden.

Judicial Notice #1 connects all these chronic illnesses (i.e., digestive disorders, diabetes) to the immune system with the most authoritative citations on the planet.

Judicial Notice #2 shows that vaccines are dangerous and untested — once again all of these are authoritative citations the government cannot dispute.

And Judicial Notice #3 shows how vaccines are made and distributed through communist China.

Because the evidence is so voluminous, Glaser and Flores also filed infographics (demonstrative evidence) to help showcase some of the main points: Health Crisis In America, Vaccines Are Dangerous, Vaccines Are Made In Communist China.

A great deal of the complaint is devoted to insisting that control groups are necessary to the scientific method, and the court’s job is to preserve this particular vital evidence necessary to rescue America from the current trajectory of chronic illness.

Some evidence highlights from the case include:

  • National data of vaccinated children show approximately 54% have a chronic health condition. But in The Control Group of unvaccinated children, the number is only 6%. That means vaccination causes an 800% increased risk of chronic illness in children. This has now been proven with a 99% confidence interval. Moreover, this pattern is repeated over and over in The Control Group data with 99% confidence: diabetes (0% in the unvaccinated Control Group v. 10% in the vaccinated), digestive disorders (0.4% in the unvaccinated v. 18% in the vaccinated), ADHD (0.47% in the unvaccinated v. 9.4% in the vaccinated).
  • The Control Group provides numerical proof that vaccines are causing chronic illness. For example, the p-value (probability or odds) that the excess health conditions seen in the vaccinated population under the age of 18 are not due to vaccine exposure is:
    1 in 84,721,527,559,728,800,000,
  • The calculated Pearson correlation coefficient shows a “very high correlation” between the increase in the CDC vaccine schedule and the increase in these chronic illnesses. This is another numerical proof showing vaccines are causing chronic illness.
  • America is suffering an epidemic of chronic illness caused by vaccination. The nation will collapse on the current trajectory of vaccination.
  • Vaccination is unavoidably unsafe. It is a form of experimental biological alteration of the human immune system.
  • Improved living conditions (not vaccination) are responsible for historical improvement of public health.

All of the evidence filed in the complaint can be found on The Control Group litigation website.


Greg Glaser, Esq.'s avatar

Greg Glaser, Esq., J.D. is a vaccine rights attorney with a litigation and transactional law background. 


Coronavirus: EU health authority approves Moderna vaccine

06. January 2021

The US-developed COVID-19 vaccine was rubber-stamped by the European Commission after getting conditional market approval from the EU's medical watchdog. It is the second vaccine authorized for use in the 27-nation bloc.

A bottle of the Moderna vaccine

The Moderna vaccine has received conditional approval from the EU's medicine agency

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommended  Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine for conditional market authorization on Wednesday, the agency announced following a meeting.

Hours later, it was approved by the European Commission, a step that was considered a formality. The rubber stamp, announced by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, means it is now the second vaccine available in the EU to fight the coronavirus. 

"With the Moderna vaccine, the second one now authorised in the EU, we will have a further 160 million doses. And more vaccines will come," von der Leyen said in a statement.

Ursula von der Leyen is deeply embedded with Bill Gates and BigPharma

Leaders of EU nations have come under fire for their slow vaccine rollout programs, compared with those in Israel and other countries.

The BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine is currently the only authorized coronavirus vaccination in the EU.

It received fast-track authorization by the EMA on December 21, but supply chain issues and low production capacity have marred the rollout of the mass vaccination programs across the bloc.

"This vaccine provides us with another tool to overcome the current emergency," Emer Cooke, Executive Director of EMA, said.

Wednesday's EMA meeting to discuss the Moderna vaccine was the second this week after an initial meeting on Monday proved inconclusive.

The United States, Canada and Israel have already authorized the Moderna shot.

The commission could finally approve the vaccine later on Wednesday, news agency Reuters reported, citing the Dutch medicines authority.

EU leaders welcome authorization

German Health Minister Jens Spahn said Germany was to receive around 50 million doses of the Moderna vaccine in 2021, including 2 million in the first quarter.

He told reporters in Berlin that he expected the vaccine to begin rolling out to EU nations next week, and that if further vaccines beyond the BioNTech-Pfizer and Moderna shots are approved "we'll be able to offer everyone in Germany a vaccine by the summer.''

Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz called the authorization "a further important step in the fight against the pandemic." 

"With it, we have more vaccines available in the EU to combat the pandemic."

What is the Moderna vaccine?

The mRNA-1273 vaccine from US company Moderna is a gene-based vaccine that is very similar in principle to the one from BioNTech-Pfizer.

It was about 95% effective at preventing the illness in clinical trials.

No serious safety issues were found during the clinical trials. Participants tolerated the vaccine well, according to the manufacturer and testing authorities. There were some common vaccination reactions, but these were mild or moderate and didn't last long. [N.B.: This statement has already been contested!]

Almost 10% of those vaccinated with mRNA-1273 experienced fatigue, according to an interim report by an independent surveillance panel.

The EU medicines agency did not specify at the time why it did not approve the vaccine following the initial EMA meeting on Monday. But it did say experts were "working hard to clarify outstanding issues with the company.

kmm/sms (AFP, Reuters, dpa)


Experimental COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Operating System Designed To Program Human DNA, Says Moderna

According to pharma giant Moderna, the COVID-19 mRNA based experimental vaccines being approved for emergency use for the first time in history are Operating System designed to program human DNA.

Experimental COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Operating System Designed To Program Human DNA, Says Moderna
Experimental COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Operating System Designed To Program Human DNA, Says Moderna

Messenger RNA (mRNA) is found in all living cells. These strands of genetic code act as chemical intermediaries between the DNA in our chromosomes and the cellular machinery that produces the proteins we need to function: mRNA provides the instructions this machinery needs to assemble these proteins.

Moderna’s mRNA-1273 is programmed to make your cells produce the coronavirus’ infamous spike protein that gives the virus its crown-like appearance (“corona” is crown in Latin) for which it is named.

Moderna has made public that mRNA platforms are an “operating system” designed to program human DNA and turn their cells into efficient drug delivery systems.

We set out to create an mRNA technology platform that functions very much like an operating system on a computer. It is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the “program” or “app” is our mRNA drug – the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein.

Experimental COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Operating System Designed To Program Human DNA
Moderna has made public that mRNA platforms are an “operating system” designed to program human DNA and turn their cells into efficient drug delivery systems. Courtesy: Moderna

These mRNA vaccines alter the coding region – the actual genetic code that instructs ribosomes to make protein.

Utilizing these instruction sets gives our investigational mRNA medicines a software-like quality. We also have the ability to combine different mRNA sequences encoding for different proteins in a single mRNA investigational medicine.

Moderna mRNA COVID19 vaccine alters DNA
Within a given modality, the base components are generally identical across development candidates – formulation, 5’ region and 3’ region. Only the coding region varies based on the protein/s the potential medicine is directing cells to produce. Courtesy: Moderna

There are unique and unknown risks to messenger RNA vaccines, including the possibility that they generate strong type I interferon responses that could lead to inflammation and autoimmune conditions.

Scientists have raised concerns that an immune reaction to RNA could lead to some autoimmune diseases like lupus.



Say what? WHO says there is “no evidence” that COVID-19 vaccines will prevent spread of disease… so what good are they?

By  - 03. January 2021

Image: Say what? WHO says there is “no evidence” that COVID-19 vaccines will prevent spread of disease… so what good are they?

(Natural News) The World Health Organization was busted earlier this year carrying water for the Chinese government in terms of helping Beijing cover up its responsibility for COVID-19 and the resulting global pandemic the virus caused.

In fact, the cover-up was so egregious that President Donald Trump took the extraordinary step of cutting off the WHO from American tax dollars.

But now it appears as though the global health agency is attempting to atone for its past mistakes involving Beijing’s coronavirus cover-up with some damning new information regarding the highly controversial COVID-19 vaccines — namely, that they don’t do anything to stop the spread of the disease.

During a virtual press conference earlier this week, WHO chief scientist Soumya Swaminathan was specific: “I don’t believe we have the evidence on any of the vaccines to be confident that it’s going to prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on.”

"I don't believe we have the evidence on any of the vaccines to be confident that it's going to prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on”, says WHO Chief Scientist @doctorsoumya pic.twitter.com/QdTvzj7Nyd

— Disclose.tv 🚨 (@disclosetv) December 28, 2020

Mind you, that is the entire purpose behind a vaccine in the first place — to not only inoculate people, but to prevent the spread of the disease the vaccine is meant to target.

So if they don’t actually do what they’re supposed to do, why are governments, including ours, spending billions of dollars to manufacture and distribute them?

As noted by Zero Hedge, “a close look at the research released by Pfizer and Moderna shows the studies haven’t actually tested whether the vaccines actually prevent transmission of the virus; the goal of the trials was to see whether vaccinated patients presented with COVID symptoms at a rate that was substantially less frequent than individuals who hadn’t been vaccinated. That’s pretty much it.”

Though the available data may sorta, kinda, suggest that the vaccines will lower transmission rates, apparently scientists (and the vaccine makers) don’t have that information yet.

That seems awfully important data to have, though, considering the objective behind mass vaccination. 

It all just seems rather obvious (again) that this vaccine, though Trump’s heart was obviously in the right place, has been little more than a mechanism by which Big Pharma and co-opted scientists can make an mint off the people’s suffering (and tax dollars).

There’s more: The vaccines may actually be killing people already.

Israeli media reported this week that a 75-year-old man from Beit Shean died after getting his first Pfizer vaccine (two are required for ‘full immunity’). Naturally, according to the country’s health ministry, Israelis and the rest of the world are being told that the vaccine had absolutely nothing to do with the death (and yet, people who die from heart disease or lung problems and are COVID-19 positive are counted as ‘COVID deaths’).

Israel National News reported

The man received the vaccine at 8:30 in the morning, and waited for the customary time at the health clinic before he was released to his home feeling well.

Some time later, the man lost consciousness and was later confirmed dead from heart failure.

Heart failure while positive with coronavirus is due to COVID; heart failure and death after getting a COVID vaccine is…due to “heart failure.” Got it?

Meanwhile, health officials in Switzerland said a person from the Swiss Canton of Lucerne also died after being one of the country’s first to get the vaccine. 

“We are aware of the case,” a spokesperson said, noting further that the case had been referred to the country’s medications regulator Swissmedic.

One more thing: A San Diego-based emergency room nurse got sick with COVID this week after being vaccinated, though again, the ‘experts’ are telling everyone the vaccines are super effective and there’s nothing at all to worry about.

Which generally means there is plenty to worry about. 

See more reporting like this at Pandemic.news.

Sources include:





The story of mRNA: How a once-dismissed idea became a leading technology in the Covid vaccine race

By Damian Garde and Jonathan Saltzman - 10. November 2020

Pfizer freezer farm

Part of a "freezer farm," a football field-sized facility for storing finished Covid-19 vaccines, under construction in Kalamazoo, Mich. Pfizer’s experimental vaccine requires ultracold storage, at about -70 C, so as they are made, the vaccines are being stored in special freezers. JEREMY DAVIDSON/PFIZER VIA AP

ANDOVER, Mass. — The liquid that many hope could help end the Covid-19 pandemic is stored in a nondescript metal tank in a manufacturing complex owned by Pfizer, one of the world’s biggest drug companies. There is nothing remarkable about the container, which could fit in a walk-in closet, except that its contents could end up in the world’s first authorized Covid-19 vaccine.

Pfizer, a 171-year-old Fortune 500 powerhouse, has made a billion-dollar bet on that dream. So has a brash, young rival just 23 miles away in Cambridge, Mass. Moderna, a 10-year-old biotech company with billions in market valuation but no approved products, is racing forward with a vaccine of its own. Its new sprawling drug-making facility nearby is hiring workers at a fast clip in the hopes of making history — and a lot of money.

In many ways, the companies and their leaders couldn’t be more different. Pfizer, working with a little-known German biotech called BioNTech, has taken pains for much of the year to manage expectations. Moderna has made nearly as much news for its stream of upbeat press releases, executives’ stock sales, and spectacular rounds of funding as for its science.

Each is well-aware of the other in the race to be first.

But what the companies share may be bigger than their differences: Both are banking on a genetic technology that has long held huge promise but has so far run into biological roadblocks. It is called synthetic messenger RNA, an ingenious variation on the natural substance that directs protein production in cells throughout the body. Its prospects have swung billions of dollars on the stock market, made and imperiled scientific careers, and fueled hopes that it could be a breakthrough that allows society to return to normalcy after months living in fear.

Both companies have been frequently name-checked by President Trump. Pfizer reported strong, but preliminary, data on Monday, and Moderna is expected to follow suit soon with a glimpse of its data. Both firms hope these preliminary results will allow an emergency deployment of their vaccines — millions of doses likely targeted to frontline medical workers and others most at risk of Covid-19.

There are about a dozen experimental vaccines in late-stage clinical trials globally, but the ones being tested by Pfizer and Moderna are the only two that rely on messenger RNA.

For decades, scientists have dreamed about the seemingly endless possibilities of custom-made messenger RNA, or mRNA.

Researchers understood its role as a recipe book for the body’s trillions of cells, but their efforts to expand the menu have come in fits and starts. The concept: By making precise tweaks to synthetic mRNA and injecting people with it, any cell in the body could be transformed into an on-demand drug factory.

But turning scientific promise into medical reality has been more difficult than many assumed. Although relatively easy and quick to produce compared to traditional vaccine-making, no mRNA vaccine or drug has ever won approval.

Even now, as Moderna and Pfizer test their vaccines on roughly 74,000 volunteers in pivotal vaccine studies, many experts question whether the technology is ready for prime time.

“I worry about innovation at the expense of practicality,” Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine and an authority on vaccines, said recently. The U.S. government’s Operation Warp Speed program, which has underwritten the development of Moderna’s vaccine and pledged to buy Pfizer’s vaccine if it works, is “weighted toward technology platforms that have never made it to licensure before.”

Whether mRNA vaccines succeed or not, their path from a gleam in a scientist’s eye to the brink of government approval has been a tale of personal perseverance, eureka moments in the lab, soaring expectations — and an unprecedented flow of cash into the biotech industry.

It is a story that began three decades ago, with a little-known scientist who refused to quit.

Before messenger RNA was a multibillion-dollar idea, it was a scientific backwater. And for the Hungarian-born scientist behind a key mRNA discovery, it was a career dead-end.

Katalin Karikó spent the 1990s collecting rejections. Her work, attempting to harness the power of mRNA to fight disease, was too far-fetched for government grants, corporate funding, and even support from her own colleagues.

It all made sense on paper. In the natural world, the body relies on millions of tiny proteins to keep itself alive and healthy, and it uses mRNA to tell cells which proteins to make. If you could design your own mRNA, you could, in theory, hijack that process and create any protein you might desire — antibodies to vaccinate against infection, enzymes to reverse a rare disease, or growth agents to mend damaged heart tissue.

In 1990, researchers at the University of Wisconsin managed to make it work in mice. Karikó wanted to go further.

The problem, she knew, was that synthetic RNA was notoriously vulnerable to the body’s natural defenses, meaning it would likely be destroyed before reaching its target cells. And, worse, the resulting biological havoc might stir up an immune response that could make the therapy a health risk for some patients.

It was a real obstacle, and still may be, but Karikó was convinced it was one she could work around. Few shared her confidence.

“Every night I was working: grant, grant, grant,” Karikó remembered, referring to her efforts to obtain funding. “And it came back always no, no, no.”

By 1995, after six years on the faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, Karikó got demoted. She had been on the path to full professorship, but with no money coming in to support her work on mRNA, her bosses saw no point in pressing on.

She was back to the lower rungs of the scientific academy.

“Usually, at that point, people just say goodbye and leave because it’s so horrible,” Karikó said.

There’s no opportune time for demotion, but 1995 had already been uncommonly difficult. Karikó had recently endured a cancer scare, and her husband was stuck in Hungary sorting out a visa issue. Now the work to which she’d devoted countless hours was slipping through her fingers.

“I thought of going somewhere else, or doing something else,” Karikó said. “I also thought maybe I’m not good enough, not smart enough. I tried to imagine: Everything is here, and I just have to do better experiments.”

Katalin Kariko
Katalin Karikó, a senior vice president at BioNTech overseeing its mRNA work, in her home office in Rydal, Penn. JESSICA KOURKOUNIS FOR THE BOSTON GLOBE

In time, those better experiments came together. After a decade of trial and error, Karikó and her longtime collaborator at Penn — Drew Weissman, an immunologist with a medical degree and Ph.D. from Boston University — discovered a remedy for mRNA’s Achilles’ heel.

The stumbling block, as Karikó’s many grant rejections pointed out, was that injecting synthetic mRNA typically led to that vexing immune response; the body sensed a chemical intruder, and went to war. The solution, Karikó and Weissman discovered, was the biological equivalent of swapping out a tire.

Every strand of mRNA is made up of four molecular building blocks called nucleosides. But in its altered, synthetic form, one of those building blocks, like a misaligned wheel on a car, was throwing everything off by signaling the immune system. So Karikó and Weissman simply subbed it out for a slightly tweaked version, creating a hybrid mRNA that could sneak its way into cells without alerting the body’s defenses.

“That was a key discovery,” said Norbert Pardi, an assistant professor of medicine at Penn and frequent collaborator. “Karikó and Weissman figured out that if you incorporate modified nucleosides into mRNA, you can kill two birds with one stone.”

That discovery, described in a series of scientific papers starting in 2005, largely flew under the radar at first, said Weissman, but it offered absolution to the mRNA researchers who had kept the faith during the technology’s lean years. And it was the starter pistol for the vaccine sprint to come.

And even though the studies by Karikó and Weissman went unnoticed by some, they caught the attention of two key scientists — one in the United States, another abroad — who would later help found Moderna and Pfizer’s future partner, BioNTech.

Derrick Rossi, a native of Toronto who rooted for the Maple Leafs and sported a soul patch, was a 39-year-old postdoctoral fellow in stem cell biology at Stanford University in 2005 when he read the first paper. Not only did he recognize it as groundbreaking, he now says Karikó and Weissman deserve the Nobel Prize in chemistry.

“If anyone asks me whom to vote for some day down the line, I would put them front and center,” he said. “That fundamental discovery is going to go into medicines that help the world.”

Derrick Rossi one of the founders of Moderna
Derrick Rossi, one of the founders of Moderna, in his Newton, Mass., home. He ended his affiliation with the company in 2014. SUZANNE KREITER/THE BOSTON GLOBE

But Rossi didn’t have vaccines on his mind when he set out to build on their findings in 2007 as a new assistant professor at Harvard Medical School running his own lab.

He wondered whether modified messenger RNA might hold the key to obtaining something else researchers desperately wanted: a new source of embryonic stem cells.

In a feat of biological alchemy, embryonic stem cells can turn into any type of cell in the body. That gives them the potential to treat a dizzying array of conditions, from Parkinson’s disease to spinal cord injuries.

But using those cells for research had created an ethical firestorm because they are harvested from discarded embryos.

Rossi thought he might be able to sidestep the controversy. He would use modified messenger molecules to reprogram adult cells so that they acted like embryonic stem cells.

He asked a postdoctoral fellow in his lab to explore the idea. In 2009, after more than a year of work, the postdoc waved Rossi over to a microscope. Rossi peered through the lens and saw something extraordinary: a plate full of the very cells he had hoped to create.

Langer is a towering figure in biotechnology and an expert on drug-delivery technology. At least 400 drug and medical device companies have licensed his patents. His office walls display many of his 250 major awards, including the Charles Stark Draper Prize, considered the equivalent of the Nobel Prize for engineers.

As he listened to Rossi describe his use of modified mRNA, Langer recalled, he realized the young professor had discovered something far bigger than a novel way to create stem cells. Cloaking mRNA so it could slip into cells to produce proteins had a staggering number of applications, Langer thought, and might even save millions of lives.

“I think you can do a lot better than that,” Langer recalled telling Rossi, referring to stem cells. “I think you could make new drugs, new vaccines — everything.”

Langer could barely contain his excitement when he got home to his wife.

“This could be the most successful company in history,” he remembered telling her, even though no company existed yet.

Three days later Rossi made another presentation, to the leaders of Flagship Ventures. Founded and run by Noubar Afeyan, a swaggering entrepreneur, the Cambridge venture capital firm has created dozens of biotech startups. Afeyan had the same enthusiastic reaction as Langer, saying in a 2015 article in Nature that Rossi’s innovation “was intriguing instantaneously.”

Within several months, Rossi, Langer, Afeyan, and another physician-researcher at Harvard formed the firm Moderna — a new word combining modified and RNA.

Springer was the first investor to pledge money, Rossi said. In a 2012 Moderna news release, Afeyan said the firm’s “promise rivals that of the earliest biotechnology companies over 30 years ago — adding an entirely new drug category to the pharmaceutical arsenal.”

But although Moderna has made each of the founders hundreds of millions of dollars — even before the company had produced a single product — Rossi’s account is marked by bitterness. In interviews with the Globe in October, he accused Langer and Afeyan of propagating a condescending myth that he didn’t understand his discovery’s full potential until they pointed it out to him.

“It’s total malarkey,” said Rossi, who ended his affiliation with Moderna in 2014. “I’m embarrassed for them. Everybody in the know actually just shakes their heads.”

Rossi said that the slide decks he used in his presentation to Flagship noted that his discovery could lead to new medicines. “That’s the thing Noubar has used to turn Flagship into a big company, and he says it was totally his idea,” Rossi said.

Afeyan, the chair of Moderna, recently credited Rossi with advancing the work of the Penn scientists. But, he said, that only spurred Afeyan and Langer “to ask the question, ‘Could you think of a code molecule that helps you make anything you want within the body?’”

Langer, for his part, told STAT and the Globe that Rossi “made an important finding” but had focused almost entirely “on the stem cell thing.”

Robert Langer
Robert Langer, the prolific inventor and MIT biomedical engineering professor, is a Moderna co-founder. PAT GREENHOUSE/THE BOSTON GLOBE

Despite the squabbling that followed the birth of Moderna, other scientists also saw messenger RNA as potentially revolutionary.

In Mainz, Germany, situated on the left bank of the Rhine, another new company was being formed by a married team of researchers who would also see the vast potential for the technology, though vaccines for infectious diseases weren’t on top of their list then.

A native of Turkey, Ugur Sahin moved to Germany after his father got a job at a Ford factory in Cologne. His wife, Özlem Türeci had, as a child, followed her father, a surgeon, on his rounds at a Catholic hospital. She and Sahin are physicians who met in 1990 working at a hospital in Saarland.

The couple have long been interested in immunotherapy, which harnesses the immune system to fight cancer and has become one of the most exciting innovations in medicine in recent decades. In particular, they were tantalized by the possibility of creating personalized vaccines that teach the immune system to eliminate cancer cells.

Both see themselves as scientists first and foremost. But they are also formidable entrepreneurs. After they co-founded another biotech, the couple persuaded twin brothers who had invested in that firm, Thomas and Andreas Strungmann, to spin out a new company that would develop cancer vaccines that relied on mRNA.

That became BioNTech, another blended name, derived from Biopharmaceutical New Technologies. Its U.S. headquarters is in Cambridge. Sahin is the CEO, Türeci the chief medical officer.

“We are one of the leaders in messenger RNA, but we don’t consider ourselves a messenger RNA company,” said Sahin, also a professor at the Mainz University Medical Center. “We consider ourselves an immunotherapy company.”

Like Moderna, BioNTech licensed technology developed by the Pennsylvania scientist whose work was long ignored, Karikó, and her collaborator, Weissman. In fact, in 2013, the company hired Karikó as senior vice president to help oversee its mRNA work.

But in their early years, the two biotechs operated in very different ways.

In 2011, Moderna hired the CEO who would personify its brash approach to the business of biotech.

Stéphane Bancel was a rising star in the life sciences, a chemical engineer with a Harvard MBA who was known as a businessman, not a scientist. At just 34, he became CEO of the French diagnostics firm BioMérieux in 2007 but was wooed away to Moderna four years later by Afeyan.

Moderna made a splash in 2012 with the announcement that it had raised $40 million from venture capitalists despite being years away from testing its science in humans. Four months later, the British pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca agreed to pay Moderna a staggering $240 million for the rights to dozens of mRNA drugs that did not yet exist.

Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel at the company’s offices in Cambridge, Mass. ARAM BOGHOSIAN FOR STAT

The biotech had no scientific publications to its name and hadn’t shared a shred of data publicly. Yet it somehow convinced investors and multinational drug makers that its scientific findings and expertise were destined to change the world. Under Bancel’s leadership, Moderna would raise more than $1 billion in investments and partnership funds over the next five years.

Moderna’s promise — and the more than $2 billion it raised before going public in 2018 — hinged on creating a fleet of mRNA medicines that could be safely dosed over and over. But behind the scenes the company’s scientists were running into a familiar problem. In animal studies, the ideal dose of their leading mRNA therapy was triggering dangerous immune reactions — the kind for which Karikó had improvised a major workaround under some conditions — but a lower dose had proved too weak to show any benefits.

Moderna had to pivot. If repeated doses of mRNA were too toxic to test in human beings, the company would have to rely on something that takes only one or two injections to show an effect. Gradually, biotech’s self-proclaimed disruptor became a vaccines company, putting its experimental drugs on the back burner and talking up the potential of a field long considered a loss-leader by the drug industry.

Meanwhile BioNTech has often acted like the anti-Moderna, garnering far less attention.

In part, that was by design, said Sahin. For the first five years, the firm operated in what Sahin called “submarine mode,” issuing no news releases, and focusing on scientific research, much of it originating in his university lab. Unlike Moderna, the firm has published its research from the start, including about 150 scientific papers in just the past eight years.

In 2013, the firm began disclosing its ambitions to transform the treatment of cancer and soon announced a series of eight partnerships with major drug makers. BioNTech has 13 compounds in clinical trials for a variety of illnesses but, like Moderna, has yet to get a product approved.

When BioNTech went public last October, it raised $150 million, and closed with a market value of $3.4 billion — less than half of Moderna’s when it went public in 2018.

Despite his role as CEO, Sahin has largely maintained the air of an academic. He still uses his university email address and rides a 20-year-old mountain bicycle from his home to the office because he doesn’t have a driver’s license.

Then, late last year, the world changed.

MODERNA - Norwood facility
Moderna’s facility in Norwood, Mass. ALEX HOGAN/STAT

Shortly before midnight, on Dec. 30, the International Society for Infectious Diseases, a Massachusetts-based nonprofit, posted an alarming report online. A number of people in Wuhan, a city of more than 11 million people in central China, had been diagnosed with “unexplained pneumonia.”

Chinese researchers soon identified 41 hospitalized patients with the disease. Most had visited the Wuhan South China Seafood Market. Vendors sold live wild animals, from bamboo rats to ostriches, in crowded stalls. That raised concerns that the virus might have leaped from an animal, possibly a bat, to humans.

After isolating the virus from patients, Chinese scientists on Jan. 10 posted online its genetic sequence. Because companies that work with messenger RNA don’t need the virus itself to create a vaccine, just a computer that tells scientists what chemicals to put together and in what order, researchers at Moderna, BioNTech, and other companies got to work.

A pandemic loomed. The companies’ focus on vaccines could not have been more fortuitous.

Moderna and BioNTech each designed a tiny snip of genetic code that could be deployed into cells to stimulate a coronavirus immune response. The two vaccines differ in their chemical structures, how the substances are made, and how they deliver mRNA into cells. Both vaccines require two shots a few weeks apart.

The biotechs were competing against dozens of other groups that employed varying vaccine-making approaches, including the traditional, more time-consuming method of using an inactivated virus to produce an immune response.

Moderna was especially well-positioned for this moment.

Forty-two days after the genetic code was released, Moderna’s CEO Bancel opened an email on Feb. 24 on his cellphone and smiled, as he recalled to the Globe. Up popped a photograph of a box placed inside a refrigerated truck at the Norwood plant and bound for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in Bethesda, Md. The package held a few hundred vials, each containing the experimental vaccine.

Moderna was the first drug maker to deliver a potential vaccine for clinical trials. Soon, its vaccine became the first to undergo testing on humans, in a small early-stage trial. And on July 28, it became the first to start getting tested in a late-stage trial in a scene that reflected the firm’s receptiveness to press coverage.

The first volunteer to get a shot in Moderna’s late-stage trial was a television anchor at the CNN affiliate in Savannah, Ga., a move that raised eyebrows at rival vaccine makers.

Along with those achievements, Moderna has repeatedly stirred controversy.

On May 18, Moderna issued a press release trumpeting “positive interim clinical data.” The firm said its vaccine had generated neutralizing antibodies in the first eight volunteers in the early-phase study, a tiny sample.

But Moderna didn’t provide any backup data, making it hard to assess how encouraging the results were. Nonetheless, Moderna’s share price rose 20% that day.

Some top Moderna executives also drew criticism for selling shares worth millions, including Bancel and the firm’s chief medical officer, Tal Zaks.

In addition, some critics have said the government has given Moderna a sweetheart deal by bankrolling the costs for developing the vaccine and pledging to buy at least 100 million doses, all for $2.48 billion.

That works out to roughly $25 a dose, which Moderna acknowledges includes a profit.

In contrast, the government has pledged more than $1 billion to Johnson & Johnson to manufacture and provide at least 100 million doses of its vaccine, which uses different technology than mRNA. But J&J, which collaborated with Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center’s Center for Virology and Vaccine Research and is also in a late-stage trial, has promised not to profit off sales of the vaccine during the pandemic.

Over in Germany, Sahin, the head of BioNTech, said a Lancet article in January about the outbreak in Wuhan, an international hub, galvanized him.

“We understood that this would become a pandemic,” he said.

The next day, he met with his leadership team.

“I told them that we have to deal with a pandemic which is coming to Germany,” Sahin recalled.

He also realized he needed a strong partner to manufacture the vaccine and thought of Pfizer. The two companies had worked together before to try to develop mRNA influenza vaccines. In March, he called Pfizer’s top vaccine expert, Kathrin Jansen.

“I asked her if Pfizer was interested in teaming up with us, and she, without any discussion, said, ‘Yes, we would love to do that,’” Sahin recalled.

Philip Dormitzer, chief scientific officer for viral vaccines at Pfizer, said developing a coronavirus vaccine is “very much in Pfizer’s comfort zone as a vaccine company with multiple vaccine products.”

Pfizer has about 2,400 employees in Massachusetts, including about 1,400 at its Andover plant, one of three making the vaccine for the New York-based company in the U.S.

Pfizer, through its partnership with BioNTech, isn’t taking any money upfront from the government. Rather, the federal government will pay the partners $1.95 billion for at least 100 million doses if the vaccine gets approved.

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, who rose through the ranks after more than 25 years with the company, said in a September interview with “Face the Nation” that if the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine fails, his company will absorb the financial loss. He said Pfizer opted not to take government funding up front to shield the drug giant from politics.

“I wanted to liberate our scientists from any bureaucracy,” he said. “When you get money from someone, that always comes with strings.”

Top executives at Pfizer also have sold far less stock compared to Moderna since the pandemic began.

BioNTech executives haven’t sold any shares since the company went public last year, according to Securities and Exchange Commission records. Still, the soaring share prices of BioNTech and Moderna have made both Sahin and Bancel billionaires, according to Forbes.

Some experts worry about injecting the first vaccine of this kind into hundreds of million of people so quickly.

“You have all these odd clinical and pathological changes caused by this novel bat coronavirus, and you’re about to meet it with all of these vaccines with which you have no experience,” said Paul Offit, an infectious disease expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and an authority on vaccines.

Blood samples from volunteers
Blood samples from volunteers participating in Moderna’s Phase 3 Covid-19 vaccine trial wait to be processed in a lab at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. TAIMY ALVAREZ/AP

Several other drug makers have also developed experimental mRNA vaccines for the coronavirus, but are not as far along, including CureVac, another German biotech, and Translate Bio, which has partnered with the French vaccine giant Sanofi Pasteur.

Pfizer began its late-stage trial on July 27 — the same day as Moderna — with the first volunteers receiving injections at the University of Rochester. It announced its promising early results from that trial on Monday, and hopes to have sufficient data this month to seek emergency use authorization of the vaccine for at least some high-risk people.

Moderna may not be far behind. Its spokesperson Ray Jordan said Monday that executives suspected Pfizer would release some preliminary late-stage trial data before Moderna, in part because of the dosing schedule of the rival vaccines. Recipients of Pfizer’s vaccine get two doses three weeks apart, while recipients of Moderna’s get two doses four weeks apart.

Striking a magnanimous note, he described Pfizer’s news as “an important step for mRNA medicine.”

“We’ve said that the world needs more than one Covid-19 vaccine,” Jordan said. “We remain on track.”

Mark Arsenault of the Globe staff contributed reporting.


Damian Garde

Damian Garde - National Biotech Reporter - Damian covers biotech, is a co-writer of The Readout newsletter, and a co-host of "The Readout LOUD" podcast.   @damiangarde


Selling stock like clockwork, Moderna’s top doctor gets $1 million richer every week



The Whole Truth

Covid-19 and Covid-19 Vaccines (pdf)

By Professor Jean-Bernard Fourtillan, Doctor Christian Tal Schaller, Docteur Serge Rader, Didier Rochard, Frédéric Chaumont

August 20, 2020

Warning Vaccine !

October 26th, 2020

Part 1


Part 2




FDA and WHO have banned human administration without realizing it of all medicines for human use that contain aluminum

Statement to wo/men around the world (pdf)

By ProfessorJean-Bernard FOURTILLAN - Chemical Engineer, Honorary Professor of Therapeutic Chemistry and Pharmacokinetics, Expert Pharmacologist-Toxicologist specialized in Pharmacokinetics with AFSSAPS (now ANSM)



By  - 19. November 2018

Forced vaccinations now can be legally stopped-no quality control for 32 years

Wide ramifications for Australia

Go to: Update from Doctor in Georgia 20/05/2020 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JG5b8Qt_CY&feature=youtu.be



Case 1:18-cv-03215-JMF Document 18 Filed 07/09/18

Vaccine injury lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr.,&  Del Bigtree, producer of the suppressed anti-vaccine documentary, Vaxxed and the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) are credited with this victory. They demanded the relevant government documents proving that all federally approved vaccines had been tested for quality over the past 32 years — and there were none.

Here are the huge legal and practical implications in this legal victory for the American people:

A recent US court case revealed there has been no quality control over vaccines manufactured by big-pharma for at least 32 years. Autism rates are excepted to drop dramatically now that parents can stop the poison being injected into their kids

o This means that the US Department of Health and Human Services and all vaccine makers have been lying to the American people for over 30 years about the effectiveness and safety of vaccines; this may
ultimately mean that continuing the existence — at least in their current form — of five US “healthcare” agencies are now in doubt: the CDC, the FDA, the IOM, the NIH and the “Health” part of DHHS itself;
this may also threaten the existence of state medical boards and exclusive medical guilds like the AMA:

o This means that vaccine makers have been fraudulently exempt from what all other pharmaceutical drug makers have been forced to do concerning biannual recertification for quality and effectiveness — meaning that that their vaccines have never been tested for quality and have had no proven safety or effectiveness for over 30 years;

o This case can now be legally cited by all parents fraudulently mandated by any government/organizational regulation/requirements that they must vaccinate their children for school or any other activity to stop
the forced vaccination of their children;

o This case can now be legally cited by all employees being mandated by their employers to be vaccinated in order to retain their jobs;

o This case can now be legally cited by all those who seek compensation for vaccine injury, making it likely that the pharmacidical vaccine industry can in the near future be legally bankrupted out of existence, like Bayer-Monsanto after the landmark legal victory won by the dying landscaper in San Francisco several weeks ago, as well as their stock value plummeting precipitously;

o The future of allopathic medicine in its current form is now in doubt, as well as that of the global pharmacidical cartel, since almost all of the drugs allopathic practitioners prescribe come from pharmacidical corporations which have also committed vaccine fraud and injury;

o The existence of the deep-state corporate mainstream news media will now also be further endangered, since 70% of their income stream comes from the global pharmacidical cartel, which in America has been
responsible for 750,000-1 million human sacrifices per year for at least the past half century;

o Autism rates will now likely plummet, freeing the American people from another deep state-engineered debility, and providing further evidence of mass vaccination-caused autism;

o All government officials who have passed laws legalizing vaccine fraud at the state, national, or international level, or otherwise aided and abetted this vaccine fraud can now be charged with vaccine fraud, criminal malfeasance and in some cases, war crimes under the Nuremberg Code.


This letter from Dawn Bell, an American health professional, warns that vaccines are not safe and become ineffective after 10 years. She says her daughter was injured by vaccination:

In the recent mumps outbreak, 100% of the mumps cases were college students, who were ALL 100% vaccinated. 90% (9 out of 10) people who died from last years flu epidemic had received the flu shot.

Herd immunity can only be achieved when 85% of the population is immune to a disease. Vaccines are only good for about 10 years, at absolute max 20 years, so most people over the age of 20 are not immune any longer. So now you have created a situation of a “false” immunity.

Those who get the chicken pox are immune for life, those who get the vax are not. I do believe, maybe to your surprise that vaccines can and have saved lives, however, think about when MD’s we’re giving out antibiotics like popcorn at the movies, it started having a bad affect on our immune systems and gut. It’s propbable to think that the same thing might start happen with the overuse of vaccines.

For really deadly diseases, hey I’m all for it, but they started making so much money that you all of a sudden had to start getting vaccines for everything, even the everyday childhood diseases and for stuff like Hep B at 1 day old, really? The rise in autism and other sensory diseases has been mind boggling, as well as childhood autoimmune disorders.

32 people get sick from ecoli and FDA tells everyone to stop buying romaine lettuce, but thousands report issues with vaccines and it’s pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Then everyone is surprised when people get upset and start asking questions.

I’m an Occupational Therapist and was all in with the vax thing, until I watched my daughter lose Speech ability directly following a vaccine. I was one telling everyone it was a coincidence until I saw it happen with my own eyes to my own kid. They have NEVER done safety studies in these vaccines have NEVER been studied being given all at once as they do.

It’s common sence that all of these vaccines given to a child with a developing immune system and neuro system might have some issues. It’s the lying about it that really has everyone worried though. When they say safety studies have been done when no one can find them, then Kennedy offers $$ for anyone who show they have been done. Of course no one could produce them so hence this lawsuit and of course, they haven’t. My OBGYN told me the flu shot was studied and proven safe during pregnancy.

So I go to work, as a nurse friend for the flu vax insert and guess what? It clearly stated it had not been studied in children or pregnant woman and if given to pregnant woman you should call and add them to a registry. Furthermore, on the front of the box, it stated to NOT give to kids under 5! I could keep going, but I’ll end with, have you watched the CDC video aproving the Hep vax?

If not, you should because it’s extremely interesting! First, they give to 1 day old babies and it’s never been approved for those under 18. When asked if it was safe to give with other vaccines they said they didn’t know but we’re making the assumption it was generally safe like other vaccines. Then when asked about the “new” mutated gene thing they said the same thing, “we’re making the assumption that’s it’s safe like other vaccines.”

They were then asked about the heart and autoimmune markers seen in their internal study and they acknowledged that they saw the markers and were going to monitor it and make determination Dec 2020 whether not there was a problem, and in the mean time it’s being given to day old babies. So yes, there are concerns that need to be addressed about the safety of vaccines and I’m thrilled that it’s finally being addressed!!!


Editor, cairnsnews - One of the few patriots left who understands the system and how it has been totally subverted under every citizen's nose. If we can help to turn it around we will, otherwise our children will have nothing. Our investigations show there is no 'government' of the people for the people of Australia. The removal of the Crown from Australian Parliaments, followed by the incorporation of Parliaments aided by the Australia Act 1987 has left us with corporate government with policies not laws, that apply only to members of political parties and the public service. There is no law, other than the Common Law. This fact will be borne out in the near future as numerous legal challenges in place now, come to a head soon.


UK: MHRA awarded over £980,000 for collaboration with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Health Organisation

How many in the UK know about this? It does say the UK gov is in the Gates and WHO's back pockets for sure.  They have been for some time. 

MHRA today announced a partnership worth over £980,000 to improve the safety monitoring of medicines in low and middle-income countries.

Published 15 December 2017

From: Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
LogoWe are delighted to announce a new partnership with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Health Organisation that aims to extensively improve the safety monitoring of medicines in low and middle-income countries (LMIC).

New medicines and vaccines, for diseases such as malaria and HIV, may be introduced for the first time in LMIC’s where there are weak or no regulatory systems in place for effective safety monitoring. These new treatments have been developed with urgent public health needs in mind and therefore the need to gather and analyse information quickly on their safety and effectiveness is important. The healthcare and regulatory systems in these settings may often lack the tools, training and capacity to operate a robust safety monitoring system. Whilst great progress has been made with many of LMIC’s now involved as members of the World Health Organization Program for International Drug Monitoring, the experience in collecting, assessing and acting on adverse reaction data, and risk management planning is limited.

Without an effective system, public health programs are at risk and patients may be affected, should they suffer from adverse drug reactions (ADRs) which are not promptly identified and treated. This can consequently undermine the program and result in a loss of trust in the product or a vaccine. Ultimately, this may lead to lower uptake and therefore, the disease not being effectively treated.

WHO and the Gates Foundation have launched ‘Project Smart Safety Surveillance’ (also known as Project 3-S) to help LMIC’s identify, assess, and adequately manage the risks associated with new products. MHRA will be joining this initiative to bring regulatory expertise to the project. This will be for a 3-year period where it is intended to run three pilot exercises in different LMIC settings.

Dr Ian Hudson, Chief Executive Officer at MHRA said:

We are delighted to be involved in such an important global initiative. New drugs and vaccines are being brought to the market for the first time in public health programmes in settings where the safety monitoring and regulatory systems need strengthening. The expertise we can bring to the project will help national safety monitoring centres identify risks and benefits early and take appropriate regulatory action to support global heath.

Dr Dan Hartman of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation said:

The Triple S project is vitally important to the success of public health programmes to combat some of the world’s major diseases. When a new medicine or vaccine is being used it is critical that potential risks are identified early and well understood. The involvement of MHRA in this project will ensure scientific and regulatory expertise are developed within the national centres.

Dr Ian Hudson discusses a new partnership with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Health Organisation



The Nuremberg Code and the ethics against the upcoming forceful vaccinochipization

The Nuremberg Code and the ethics against the upcoming forceful vaccinochipization 88Vaccination / chipization is moving by leaps and bounds and people around the world are already starting to think about how to avoid this miraculous manipulation. Of course, no one knows the laws, but in different countries the laws are also different, however, there is a universal law. It is called the Nuremberg Code.

The Nuremberg Code is an international document regulating the principles of conducting medical experiments and procedures on people. The Code was developed and adopted after the Nuremberg trial of doctors in 1947, as a result of which many, many citizens were sent to the gallows, in particular for the forcible administration of different vaccines to people. The code has only ten points and it reads:

1. The absolutely necessary condition for conducting an experiment on a person is the voluntary consent of the latter.

2. The experiment should bring positive results to the society, unattainable by other methods or research methods; it should not be random, essentially non-binding in nature.

3. The experiment should be based on data obtained in laboratory studies on animals, knowledge of the history of the development of this disease or other studied problems. Its holding should be organized in such a way that the expected results justify the fact of its holding.

4. When conducting an experiment, it is necessary to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and damage.

5.None of the experiments should be carried out if there is reason to assume the possibility of death or a disabling injury to the subject; an exception, perhaps, may be cases when research physicians act as subjects in carrying out their experiments.

6. The degree of risk associated with the experiment should never exceed the humanitarian importance of the problem that the experiment is aimed at

7. The experiment should be preceded by appropriate training, and its implementation should be provided with the equipment necessary to protect the subject from the slightest possibility of injury, disability or death.

8. The experiment should be carried out only by persons with scientific qualifications. At all stages of the experiment, those who conduct it or are engaged in it require maximum attention and professionalism.

9. During the experiment, the subject should be able to stop him if, in his opinion, his physical or mental state makes it impossible to continue the experiment.

10. During the experiment, the researcher responsible for carrying out the experiment should be prepared to terminate it at any stage if professional considerations, conscientiousness and caution in the judgments required of it, give reason to believe that the continuation of the experiment may lead to injury, disability or death test subject.

As American lawyers write, the key points are 1 and 6 – that is, the person involved in the vaccination must be capable to give consent; a person should be able to exercise freedom of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, deception, coercion, direct or hidden; the person must possess sufficient knowledge and understanding of the elements of the subject in question. The next universal legal document is called Article 6 of the 2005 UNESCO statement on bioethics and human rights. It is written there:

Article 6, section 1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical interventions should be carried out only with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned on the basis of adequate information. If necessary, consent must be expressed and can be revoked by the person concerned at any time and for any reason.

Article 6, section 3: In no case shall the collective agreement of the community or the consent of the community leader or other authority be a substitute for the informed consent of individuals.

Thus, any orders of a particular Parliament or a celebrated supreme leader on compulsory vaccination will violate Article 6 of the UNESCO statement on human rights and bioethics. Along the way, they violate the Nuremberg Code, in particular Article 1 and Article 6. It is still unknown how the authorities of different countries will try to circumvent these fundamental ethical documents.


Future Zombies. Rudolf Steiner 1923 Prophecy: A Vaccine to Sever the Spiritual Connection in Mankind

By  - 29. November 2020

Rudolf Steiner

Excerpt from a much longer Dark Journalist broadcast … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EbntOIYdPM



July 2021
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31