In the U.S., vaccines granted Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA, as is the case with the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines, are considered experimental. Administrators of emergency use vaccines are required by law to inform vaccine recipients of the potential risks.
With the mass vaccination program now in full swing, we are hearing of more and more reports suggesting this fundamental right and legal requirement is not being respected. The vast majority of people are simply not being given the opportunity to exercise this right that is a foundational principle of medical ethics and central to the concept of patient autonomy. Most people likely don’t even know what information they should be able to receive prior to vaccination.
Check out our video below (under 8 minutes in length), presented by Rob Verkerk Ph.D., including inputs from dentist, Dr. Zac Cox, from the World Doctors Alliance and integrative doctor, Dr. Anna Forbes, founder and director of the UK Medical Freedom Alliance.
You don’t need to sign something to give consent — baring your arm is sufficient.
In the case of vaccination, this is, in essence, your gesture that gives the vaccinator permission to touch you and inject you. Failure to seek your permission would typically be regarded, legally, as assault or battery.
The real problem therefore isn’t with the consent itself, but with the information that should precede the issue of consent.
The three prerequisites for informed consent
For consent to be valid you need 3 things:
It must be given voluntarily— without coercion or deceit.
It must be given by an individual who has mental capacity.
BEFORE giving consent, a person needs to have been fully informed about the issue. That includes being informed about what the risks and benefits of the treatment or vaccination are, as well as the risks and benefits of going without the treatment or vaccination, and what alternate options might be available.
Do health authority vaccine claims constitute deceit?
Health authorities around the world continue to claim that COVID-19 vaccines are “safe.” However, according to the Collins dictionary, this means that:
“Something that is safe does not cause physical harm or danger.”
A search we carried out of the VAERS database in the U.S. shows that nearly 8,000 adverse events have been reported to date (note: as many as 90% of adverse reactions often go unreported), and over 1.5% of these involved death. It is then arguably deceitful to refer to these experimental vaccines as “safe.”
Information chasm
Even if it can be argued that the existing safety claims, advertising campaigns or pressure from some sectors of the health professions are neither coercive nor deceitful, it is this last prerequisite concerning the provision of information where mass vaccination programs typically fall short.
Given the lack of vaccine transparency, vaccinators themselves are not properly informed so are generally not in any position to offer accurate information that might be available in the public domain, but is generally not well known.
Information that should be freely communicated includes the fact that the vaccines are experimental and unproven. Those considering giving consent should be told about the vaccines’ reliance on synthetic biology that has never been tested at scale. But it also includes information on known risks and benefits from Phase 3 trials, and that these trials are still under way and some won’t be complete for over 18 months (e.g. Jan. 31, 2023, for Pfizer mRNA vaccine).
Put simply – without vaccine transparency, informed consent is just not possible.
The very least we should expect is that every person gets to read the product information leaflet agreed between vaccine makers and regulators — before giving their consent. Even this isn’t happening. Where the information is being given — it’s often being handed to people as a passing gesture — a formality — after vaccination.
It’s time that those in charge of the vaccination programs begin to respect informed consent. And while they’re at it, recognize that they better change how they’re approaching informed consent because many are likely breaking the law by not allowing that right to be exercised.
The law on informed consent — present in nearly all jurisdictions — forms one of the central planks of medical ethics that’s the bedrock for the practice of “good medicine” in civilized, democratized societies. Let’s not throw that to the wind.
Dr. Vernon Coleman Responds to BBC Documentary About the “Vaccine Disinformation War”
Dr. Vernon Coleman Responds to BBC Documentary About the “Vaccine Disinformation War”
Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: See We Will Not Be Silenced for more information on the BBC Panorama documentary and to view Dr. Vernon Coleman’s presentation. Dr. Coleman is the last speaker highlighted in the film.
(This is the script of Vernon Coleman’s contribution to the film `We will not be silenced’ (Ask the Experts II) which was published on 20th February 2021 by Oracle Films and Covileaks. It is Vernon’s response to a Panorama programme which was broadcast on 15th February 2021.)
My name is Vernon Coleman. I was a British GP for ten years and resigned because I refused to break patient confidentiality by putting diagnoses on sick notes. That, incidentally, was the only time I was ever disciplined. I was fined by the NHS for this and it’s something I am proud of because patient confidentiality is important to me.
The BBC’s official policy is not to allow any discussion or debate about vaccination. Instead, they accept as gospel anything the Government, the regulators and the drug companies tell them. Those who question any aspect of the Government line are banned.
This is an extraordinary state of affairs for a national broadcaster which is supposed to inform and educate its viewers and listeners and to provide a fair and accurate account of the news; and it means that those who obtain all or most of their information from the BBC are never fully informed about a topic which is, almost certainly, the most important health issue of our times.
To use a sporting metaphor it’s as though the BBC were to report on a football match between Manchester United and Liverpool but to tell its viewers and listeners only what the Liverpool players were doing and to count only the goals scored by Liverpool.
The result, of course, is propaganda. And the BBC’s policy exposes it to ridicule and contempt from independent scientists and journalists.
It is impossible to defend such a one-sided approach to informing the public.
Especially at a time when the public is desperate for accurate information.
Despite all the Government’s propaganda and advertising, around one third of the population still have serious doubts about the planned vaccination programme and there are millions who are desperately seeking solid, unbiased information upon which to base their decisions.
They won’t get that information from the BBC which steadfastly denies the evidence and follows the official ‘Gatesian’ line that the covid-19 jabs are effective and safe when the science clearly shows that they are neither.
Indeed, instead of just refusing to debate with those who question the plan to give an experimental covid-19 jab to everyone in the world, the BBC seems to do everything it can to demonise those who dare to tell the truth about the jab and, indeed, about everything else related to covid-19.
When it comes to propaganda, the BBC has form, of course.
But it’s in the area of covid-19 that the BBC’s ignorance and failure to understand research or science really becomes blatant and embarrassing. Their attempts to fact check expert claims are so poor that I fear that an infant school teacher would be embarrassed if her pupils produced such shoddy work as part of a science project. This is truly pathetic, a mark of D minus would be for getting the date right.
For example, when the BBC decided that the Government’s official line on mask wearing needed support , they ignored around 100 solid, scientific papers, interviewed a solitary advisor who said masks were essential and safe, quoted a curious WHO report that masks wouldn’t lead to hypoxia and then concluded that a whole library of scientific evidence could safely be ignored or, in their words, debunked.
If this embarrassingly childish approach to science was simply embarrassing to the BBC it wouldn’t matter much. I don’t think the BBC has much of a reputation anyway these days.
But there are, sadly, some who still believe what they hear or see or read from the BBC. And the lives of those people are in danger as a result of this grotesque parody of journalism.
By the time the covid-19 fraud has been finally condemned, I believe the BBC will have been responsible for tens of thousands of deaths.
What a long way the BBC has travelled from the stout and solid aims of Lord Reith that the organisation should educate and inform.
Like many others I’ve spent most of the last year campaigning against this fraud because I know that governments around the world are engaged in a massive conspiracy. And, for the record, my campaigning has cost me hugely in terms of reputation and finance. BBC staff are well rewarded to endorse the Government’s Gatesian line. I haven’t made one penny out of my videos or articles about this fraud. On the contrary the cost in personal and financial terms has been massive. I made a video for Brand New Tube explaining exactly how my Wikipedia page had been deliberately altered to demonise me within days of my starting this campaign in March 2020.
Anyone who says the covid-19 jab is extremely safe and completely effective is lying. There is a long list on my website of just some of those who’ve been killed or injured by what is without question an experimental jab.
Anyone who looks at my record will see that I have spent my life campaigning passionately on behalf of patients. I am not going to be bullied into silence by people who don’t understand the meaning of science or the responsibility of journalists.
As always, everything I’ve said or written is based on hundreds of scientific papers and real evidence – much of which is available on my website, free. My two recent books on the fraud are also available free on my website.
And, unlike the BBC, I don’t have any financial links with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Copyright Vernon Coleman February 20st 2021
We Will Not Be Silenced: Medical Professionals Worldwide Continue to Speak Out in “Ask the Experts II”
Below you will find the dynamic film “ASK THE EXPERTS II | Oracle Films | CoviLeaks | 2021 BBC Panorama Response”, which not only gives a platform for censored health professionals to speak truth, but also documents the ongoing efforts by mainstream, controlled media to suppress this truth.
I’ve created an unofficial transcript of Oracle Film’s introduction to the video because the details they share are key to our understanding of this global crime against humanity. Oracle Films, along with all of these voices of courage, provide essential information about the major deceptions and conflicts of interest involved in this worldwide medical tyranny. ~ Kathleen
Speakers in the film:
Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Medical Doctor & Forensic Psychiatrist from the USA
Dr. Tom Cowan, Medical Doctor from the USA
Dr. Kevin P. Corbett, Qualified Nurse & Health Scientist from the UK
Dr. Anne Fierlafijn, Medical Doctor from Belgium
Dr. Hilde De Smet, Medical Doctor from Belgium
Prof. Konstantin Pavlidis, Metaphysicist from the UK
Dr. Zac Cox, Holistic Dentist & Homeopath from UK
Dr. Piotr Rubas, Medical Doctor from Poland
Dr. Johan Denis, Medical Doctor and Homeopath from Belgium
Senator Scott Jensen, Medical Doctor, Family Physician & Politician from the USA
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, Medical Doctor from the USA
Dr. Heiko Santelmann, Medical Doctor from Germany
Sandy Lunoe, Pharmacist from Norway
Dr. Simone Gold, Medical Doctor, Physician & Founder of America’s Frontline Doctors USA
Dr. Brian Tyson, Medical Doctor & Family Physician from the USA
Dr. Teryn Clark, Medical Doctor & Neurologist from the USA
Dr. Gaston Cornu-Labat, Medical Doctor, General Surgeon, Holistic & Integrative Physician from Argentina
Dr. Antoine Barbari, Medical Doctor, Senior Consultant, Professor of Medicine from Lebanon
Prof. Dolores Cahill, Molecular Biologist and Immunologist from Ireland
Kate Shemirani, Natural Nurse from the UK
Dr. Mario Cabrera Avivar, Medical Doctor from Uruguay
Dr. Elke F. de Klerk, Medical Doctor from Holland
Dr. Vernon Coleman, General Practitoner from the UK
Unofficial Transcript of Introduction by Oracle Films:
On the 15th of February 2021, the BBC aired a Panorama documentary entitled “Vaccines: The Disinformation War”. The program spent a great majority of it’s 29-minute runtime attacking a film we produced in collaboration with CoviLeaks in December called “Ask the Experts”. It brought together the professional opinions of medical doctors, scientists and professors from around the world — specifically regarding the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.
All experts involved were speaking on behalf of themselves and not as a collective. Every person that spoke out did so with no financial incentive and at great personal risk to their reputation and their livelihood.
The BBC accused Oracle Films of spreading dangerous misinformation and targeting vulnerable people and ethnic minorities.
Liam Smeeth, professor of clinical epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, prominently featured in the program. Smeeth claimed the information in “Ask the Experts” was putting the health of vulnerable people at risk and that doctors spreading “false claims” should be investigated and, perhaps, even have their licenses revoked.
Now — setting aside for a moment, the question of exactly who is deciding, in this scenario, what is true and what is false — I should point out that it is not our intent to discredit the scientific prowess of Professor Smeeth. The man is clearly a qualified and accomplished career academic in the fields of epidemiology and medicine. We would, however, be remiss were we not to point out the multiple, flagrant conflicts of interest attached to him.
A quick browse of the awards and grant section of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation will show you that the LSHTM has received no fewer than 122 grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, spanning the past 20 years, totaling well-over 250 million dollars in donations.
BBC Media Action, the BBC’s international development charity, has also received over 50 million dollars from the Gates Foundation in the same time frame.
Smeeth is a member of the steering group for UK Biobank, the UK’s major medical database, which has catalogued, in depth, genetic and health information from over half a million UK participants to date. Last year, UK Biobank partnered DNAnexus, a cloud-based analytics platform aimed at genomics and other clinical big data. DNAnexus is funded, in large part, by donations from Google and Microsoft, with Gates himself listed here as an owner.
Why didn’t Panorama — which the BBC describes as an investigative documentary series, revealing the truth about the stories that matter — consider these huge vested interests when choosing Smeeth alone to “debunk” professional opinions of dozens of specialists from around the world?
Science is the pursuit of truth and it should never be considered settled as long as scientists and doctors are putting forward alternative opinion. We stand by our decision to offer medical doctors a platform to express their views during a time of immense government overstep, coercion, and digital censorship. Every person on the planet has the right to make an informed choice and the right to receive information. We aim to preserve that right and we will never stop fighting for it.
Ask the Experts II provides a platform to some of the world’s most outspoken and heavily censored medical professionals to express their views on the validity of the global pandemic, the safety & efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, masks and the other precautionary measures that have been so readily integrated into our everyday lives.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
The Moral Case Against Lockdowns: Governments Have Given Themselves the Power to Play God | The Blood-Stained History of Vaccines & Pharmaceuticals
The Moral Case Against Lockdowns: Governments Have Given Themselves the Power to Play God | The Blood-Stained History of Vaccines and Pharmaceuticals
“Let me tell you, as an anti-vaxxer myself, who we really are. We are people who have been severely damaged by vaccines. We are mothers who watched our perfectly-healthy children regress after being vaccinated. We are children who bang our heads against walls because we’re living in agony and can’t put our pain into words.
We are individuals from all walks of life who looked into the blood-stained history of vaccines and pharmaceutical companies. We are people who are tired, who are absolutely fucking done being bullied by monkeys in lab coats into injecting our children with chronic disease.”
Is it moral to sacrifice the lives of a few to save the lives of many?
If so, who has the moral authority to choose who lives or dies?
This moral dilemma was answered in the aftermath of the second World War, when the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights where “it forbids government from sacrificing some people for the benefits of others”.
Unfortunately, this lesson from history has been forgotten as we see governments completely disregard the human rights of people around the world with lockdowns.
Governments have given themselves the power to play God with our lives.
Governments, doctors and scientists have been encouraging people to sacrifice themselves for an alleged greater good.
One egregious example of this is the dismissal of VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System).
Doctors are lying and suppressing information about the effects of the covid-19 vaccine in order to decrease vaccine hesitancy. These people are slandering both their professional colleagues and victims of vaccine injuries for their own moral superiority.
No one is infallible, neither government or health professionals.
For this reason we must educate ourselves, for we alone are the bearers of the consequences of our choices.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Leading Samoa Medical Freedom Hero Goes Free After Court Case Dismissed
Medical freedom advocates around the globe know Edwin Tamasese’s name. In June 2019, I visited Samoa at the invitation of Prime Minister Tuilaepa Lupesoliai Neioti Aiono Sailele Malielegaoi who has served as the Prime Minister of Samoa and Leader of the Human Rights Protection Party since 1998.
I went to Samoa to attend an independence celebration and discuss with the government the introduction of a medical informatics system that would allow Samoa’s health officials to assess, in real time, the efficacy and safety of every medical intervention or drug on overall health.
A nephew of the Prime minister was diagnosed with autism following a vaccine-induced fever and seizures and government officials, including the Prime Minister were curious to measure health outcomes following the “natural experiment” created by the national respite from vaccines.
Samoa’s choice had infuriated the Global Medical Cartel. A mild measles outbreak in November gave that cohort the opportunity to turn Tamasese into an international villain. Near the end of the month, following the introduction of an Indian-manufactured MMR vaccine, many Samoans began dying.
On the ground, Samoan families blamed the vaccine and poor hospital protocols — mainly the use of panadol and widespread vaccination of measles-infected hospital patients — for the mortalities. The global cartel and the Pharma-compliant press blamed anti-vaxxers and Tamasese.
When police arrested Tamasese, our movement created an international furor.
On the mention of a measles outbreak in Samoa, I thought nothing of it. I had fairly good insight into measles as an infection and having had it myself, was not concerned and expected it to be a non event. We had also had several small outbreaks since 2003 according to WHO statistics that had come and gone without event despite our low vaccination rate of around 31% for the last 14 years.
I was shocked therefore when the first death was announced and started to pay more attention to what was happening. I also noted comments on social media from contacts of mine talking about the struggle they were having dealing with patients at the national hospital.
The first case I was to come across was a staff member who came to me with her nine-month-old baby. She had taken her baby to the hospital twice, but said the baby was getting worse. She had the child with her. There were lesions across the baby’s body with a red rash. I asked her what the hospital had prescribed for her child. She showed me a white bottle filled with a pink liquid labeled “Pamol,” a liquid form of paracetamol or acetaminophen and a liquid antibiotic mixture labeled as augmentin.
With my basic knowledge of viruses having been a livestock farmer for two decades, I knew the medications she was using were not going to work. I had vitamins in my house at the time that I gave to her. Vitamin C and A. I also told her how to use them.
By the next morning her child had made a significant turn around and was visibly stronger. Using social media she posted her thanks for the assistance. In addition she requested I assist a neighbor. I told her I am not a doctor and they needed to be going to the hospital for assistance. She said the neighbor had been to hospital twice as well and they were progressively getting worse. I agreed and went to see them as they were close by.
When I entered the home I was horrified at what I saw: a 9-month-old boy, his 2-year-old brother and their father were all lying together in one room of the house. The 9-year-old was severely ill, with cracked lips and eyes swollen shut, oozing pus. I asked why the child was not admitted to hospital. They confirmed that they had been there twice, but the child was not admitted. I was shocked. The child clearly looked like he was going to die.
I asked to see the medications that they had been given. It was the same pamol liquid and antibiotics. I asked if they had been taking them as per prescription and they said yes. I then reiterated that the child should be in hospital, but the mother was clearly concerned. She said the children are dying at the hospital and the medications they were given were not working. I said ok, I am not a doctor, but if you agree, I will help you. She said yes and I gave them the vitamins and the doses to give.
By the next morning the 2-year-old and father were up and about, feeling much better. The very ill 9-month-old was breathing easier and the swelling of his eyes and cracks on the lips were much improved. He fully recovered over the next few days much to my relief as I honestly thought he was going to die.
This is when things got out of control. Word spread very rapidly. I started to get calls from everywhere for help. I had also realized at this point that the medications being given out by the hospital were ineffective and needed to change urgently before more lives were lost.
I tried to call the measles helpline to get through to them, but the phones just rang out repeatedly. I also started to email several of my contacts in the medical community to hopefully urgently get changes put through. In addition, I contacted a few of my contacts who are members of Parliament to see if they could help.
In addition, organizations like Children’s Health Defense had reached out from the U.S. Quite quickly when I raised my concerns with them I was linked into a group of medical professionals by Mr. Kennedy and we worked on a protocol to ensure effective treatment. In addition, a nurses’ group from Australia made contact.
I also decided to make public posts on Facebook passing on information on how to treat measles using vitamin C and A. I also passed on information on using Carica Papaya leaf Extract (CPLE) for those who did not have access to these vitamins as they are ordinarily beyond the affordability price point of many.
Amongst all this activity, I had put out a request on Facebook to overseas families to send vitamins A and C. The first to respond with a shipment was Tays Way in Australia with hundreds of packages to follow from all over the world. The way the world responded was overwhelming and very touching. My parents, brother and I hired an extra vehicle and we formed two teams that went out to distribute vitamins. We also had a local team of supporters who were helping to pack vitamins and distribute as well.
In the midst of this activity, we were being harassed by a local group and online trolls who felt we were undermining the government efforts to contain the outbreak, not realizing that there was a major issue with the treatment protocol, confirmed by the U.S. team of doctors.
As we were going out to villages treating children, a very troubling trend was emerging. Over 90% of those we were treating were either recently vaccinated or according to the parents, had caught “measles” from a recently vaccinated person. This led to a call to a few contacts in the medical community to ask if it was possible that the vaccine could actually be the source of the outbreak.
A contact who happens to be on the medical board of New Zealand mentioned that there are a few ways that this could happen. Either the vaccine is under attenuated or not weak enough, the population being injected is vulnerable and too weak to take the vaccine, the vaccine is not being transported in a suitable chilled environment allowing it to regain virulence or the vaccine itself is contaminated and we are not dealing with measles at all, but another pathogen.
As activities ramped up and news spread that we were having very good success treating children, I received my first call to come in to the police station to meet with the police. During this conversation, the officer interviewing me explained that he had been directed by NEOC (National Emergency Operations Center) to arrest me for disobeying the state of emergency orders. He stated that he had been told that I had posted a video on facebook telling parents not to come into the national hospitals for treatment.
I advised him that this was not the case at all and convinced him to review the video on his computer. He agreed and we watched it together. In the video I am clearly directing parents to take their children into the national health services and to ensure that they are given vitamin A as per the WHO guidelines for their treatment.
A few days after this interview, I received an email response from one of the doctors who was supporting our efforts in the U.S., Dr. Jim Meehan, who wrote a full protocol based on the treatments that we were giving and endorsed it from his medical opinion. I printed this out and presented it to the secretary for the Prime Minister in the hope that he would be able to support it and prevent further unnecessary deaths. I am not sure if he received it, however.
Early the next morning, I was to go to another of the islands to work on the coconut oil factory that I am a shareholder in. The night previous, I had received a call from one of the district hospitals. A parent of a very sick little girl was calling asking for help. I had spent an exhausting day delivering vitamins to several villages and almost did not take the call.
By this time I had lists of messages asking for help, my phone was sending constant message alerts to such a degree that it was almost as if it was ringing. It was at the stage where I would just say a prayer, flip through the messages and whichever one it stopped on I would choose to help. I just imagined if this person was me appealing for help with a sick child and I decided to take it and go. I got there in the late evening and the mother met me in the carpark. I said that I did not think I was allowed into hospitals, but she said do not worry, just come in. I went through the usual spiel: “I am not a doctor, the protocol I am giving you however has been endorsed by doctors. If you agree that you understand this then I will help you.” She agreed and I helped her out. While I was speaking to her, I could hear several other parents looking after children saying my name. “That is Tamasese” from Facebook. They came over and asked for help as well. I explained again that I am not a doctor, but if they wanted my help still I would help them. They agreed.
Early the next morning, I headed to catch the ferry to the other island to get to the oil factory. I called to follow up with the sick child I had visited the night before at the district hospital. The mother stated that her child had regained her strength overnight and the nurses said she could be discharged. The other patients that I helped also experienced the same outcome and were all waiting to be discharged except for a 3-week-old baby who was going to be discharged the next day.
Unfortunately in my happiness with the outcome, I made a post on Facebook stating that an “angel” visited Poutasi district hospital and the measles ward was going to be cleared. This post immediately set off events within the NHS who directed the district hospital to hold all the patients and contacted the police.
As I was on the way to Savaii, I took another one of the messages. Just by chance it happened to be on the island I was heading to. It was a message from Australia asking if I could help. I responded yes and we began to communicate. She mentioned the child, a little girl, was in hospital in Tuasivi, Savaii, the island I was going to. I explained everything about what we were doing and the protocol and said I did not want to go into the hospital, but could meet the parents outside. She thanked me and organized the meeting.
It was while waiting to meet these parents outside the hospital that an individual I know saw me and pulled up his car to talk to me. He mentioned that I am entitled to my view, but that I was being disruptive of government efforts. I stated that I would be as disruptive of the deaths of children as I could possibly be and if NEOC thought this was contrary to what we should be trying to achieve then that was their problem. He left and I continued to my meeting with the parents. I explained how to use the vitamins and left it with them.
Later that evening just on dusk, a police car turned up at our factory. I was on a call with some other parents asking for help. I told the parents I would call them back and approached the car. The officers advised that they had been informed to deliver a letter to me to inform me that there was going to be a two-day lockdown starting in the morning. If I was seen outside my place of residence during the period of the lockdown, I would be arrested on site. I asked why I was getting this special letter and nobody that I was aware of in the country was getting one. They said they were just acting on the orders of their superiors. I agreed and signed the letter and they left.
Around 9:00 p.m. that evening, the parents of the child I had just provided vitamins sent me a video of the child I had just helped six hours previous. The change was miraculous. The little girl had been lying on her back with a distended stomach and an IV in her arm before she started on the vitamins. Three doses later of a gram a dose every two hours of vitamin C powder mixed in 20 mls of water and she was sitting up eating. She was very close in age to my daughter and seeing her recover like that brought me to tears of happiness and frustration at the same time.
The fact that there was an effective treatment at hand and children were still dying needlessly was incredibly disheartening.
The following morning I noted a post from a friend who was to help with the mass vaccination efforts of the government. Considering the pattern of infection that made it look like the outbreak was coming from the vaccine, I made a post in reply that I later took down.
Two hours after this post, the police arrived and said that I was going to be arrested, with the charges to be advised later. The oddest part of this arrest was that one of the officers had been hugging me across the shoulders and thanking me for helping his relative the day before.
I was then transported to the police post at Tuasivi near the main town center where I was held for one night. My greatest concern was for the parents of the child I had spoken to the previous evening that I was intending to meet when the curfew was to be lifted in the afternoon.
In the meantime,I had no method to contact the team working the main island where the outbreak was at its worst. We had set up a distribution pattern where we would create delivery routes and assign people to areas to drop off vitamins. We were also keeping records of infections, age, sex, village, vaccination status and then following up on outcomes. It was an incredible effort from a very small but dedicated team.
I was held for two nights in this cell. Sleeping on a dirty concrete floor in a filthy cell with rats and cockroaches running about and an unflushed blocked toilet in one corner. Early the second morning, I was taken by ferry to the main island to be questioned at the main police headquarters.
When I arrived I asked what my charge was. They said they were yet to finalize it. I said you can’t hold me for more than 24 hours unless you charge me. They asked me to wait and I complied. There was no point escalating the situation.
I was finally given a charge of incitement against a government order under state of emergency powers in the afternoon. The registrar at the advice of the police asked that I be confined until bail hearing. The registrar complied and I was then transferred to the main prison to be held. I ended up spending three nights in that prison which was thankfully in much better condition then the one I had left behind.
At the bail hearing on the third day, the Judge agreed to release me on bail under the specific conditions that I release my passport and not say anything against the specific measles vaccine on social media. He disagreed that I should not be allowed to give out vitamins as requested by the prosecution and permitted me to continue doing this.
After being released on bail the outbreak had subsided significantly. A group of us met to look at what data we had available to try to determine what had actually happened in Samoa to cause this outbreak to be so severe and why the death rate was an astronomical one in 68 and not one in 5000 as would be expected if you trust the official statistics.
It was then that a few anomalies showed themselves. At the commencement of the outbreak, 36 tests were sent to Australia. Only seven came back positive for measles. What then were the other 29? All those for which samples had been sent were “suspected measles” cases.
The record of what this infection was if not measles needs to be made public. In addition, the Government stated that the mass vaccination campaign eliminated the virus and was a resounding success.
The infection charts, however, do not support this at all. In fact the mass vaccination drive statistically had no significance at all. Infection rates had been falling from a peak on the 26th of November. Mass vaccination occurred on the 5th and 6th of December. The vaccine takes two weeks to develop antibodies. Over the two weeks, the infection rate continued to plummet. By the time the vaccine would have become effective on the 19th-20th December, the infection rate was already as low as the seven case high that had led to the declaration of the outbreak.
Not only that, cases continued to occur on the six days after which the vaccine should have eliminated all cases.
In my view, and unless the government releases the results of all tests, both positive and negative, and what the infection actually was and if vaccine measles or some other pathogen was part of this outbreak, the suspicion that there was a faulty batch of vaccine, in particular the vaccine that was the basis of the vaccination drive from Serum Institute of India is credible.
What also showed through very clearly is that there are very simple and effective treatments available that should have been used in the outbreak.
18,500 Lawyers Ask for the Return of the Rule of Law (Belgium)
18,500 Belgian lawyers represented by the 3 professional associations, the French-German-speaking order, the Flemish order and the lawyers of the Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation) denounce the government’s short-circuiting of Parliament in an common open letter. As always in times of crisis, the authorities in place must respond effectively and quickly to the difficulties it generates. However, in Belgium, as in other European countries such as France and Germany, the Executive power has operated almost exclusively under the tutelage of a small group of scientific experts, away from the parliament, civil society, courts and other consultative bodies. The 18 500 lawyers insist on recalling the importance of fundamental freedoms and respecting the rule of law, the very foundation of a democratic state.
“What worries me most is the fact that no debate in the House of Representatives has been initiated concerning the decisions taken to address the Covid-19 pandemic”, confides the president of the Brussels Bar Maurice Krings.
It’s time to remember that we live in a democracy.
Xavier Van Gils, president of Avocats.be, the French-German-speaking bar of Belgium: “I find that since April our government has taken a lot of largesse with the Constitution, which is a risk for our democracy (…/…) Making laws is the role of the Parliament, not the government ”.
With this public statement the bars point at a the series of ministerial orders that were directly issued by the federal government. Even if ministers want to follow the advice of experts and scientists, the lawyers want to remind them that the state is a democracy and must remain so. “We are no longer facing a pandemic that we do not know about. We have time for a parliamentary debate. Perhaps we would end up with the same decisions, but then they would have the required legitimacy since they would have been taken by the elected representatives of the nation,” the lawyers wrote
What the bars also fear is growing legal insecurity in the country. Lockdown, curfew, travel restrictions, mask mandates, these legislative changes upset and cloud the understanding of Belgians. “Citizens need clear information from their government. All the more so in this crisis situation” says the president of Avocats.be.
“The pandemic cannot justify everything” and certainly not the fact of ignoring any form of debate.
Media and experts also under fire
This open criticism was echoed by a recent documentary about the biased way and the lack of debate with which the pandemic has been covered in national channels and the mainstream media. The video called “Ceci n’est pas un Complot” (This is not A Conspiracy”) made over 1 million views in a couple of weeks. Viewers were shocked when they saw archives of a Chatham house conference of Jan. 2019 in which Prof. Marc Van Ranst one of Belgium’s ‘daily experts’ and eminent vaccinologists explained the basic principles of a good communication strategy during a pandemic drawing on his experience with the H1NA flu. He made it very clear how useful it was to scare the public and how one could do it starting a daily death count that would feed the mainstream media at all times and how this could be used to promote the ‘life saving vaccines.’
Needless to say a good part of the public opinion didn’t really appreciate this new portrait of their ‘national heroes’. Shortly thereafter the Prime Minister announced that a public debate would be held in Parliament over the Coronameasures.
Meanwhile the government had taken the decision to close its borders for non-essential travel in an attempt to block its population to leave on winter holidays. Belgium, France and Germany carry on with strict measures whilst some of their European neighbours like Italy, Austria, Espagne, Poland, Greece start to release the pressure on the society and take decisions which respect the economic context and the public opinion in favour of reopening.
The European Commission reacted in an open letter to the 27 members of the Union against the closure of borders and called to the respect of the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination. Belgium did not change its decision to keep its borders closed until the 1st of April, but announced ‘a possible reevaluation’. The country’s experts keep the confusion going with forecasts of variants and a third wave and insist that the measures have to be maintained while indicators of hospital capacity and mortality are stable and low. Debates in Brussels at national and European level are much awaited and could and should be heated.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Commentary and excerpts by Truth Comes to Light editor.
This is the first time The Berlin Corona Investigative Committee is being broadcast internationally. Conversation and testimony is shared with lawyers from around the world.
This livestream is 4 hours long. The first hour of this livestream involves conversation between attorneys Dr.Reiner Fuellmich and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
Dr. Fuellmich translates RFK, Jr.’s statements into German as they go along.
Later in the video, testimonies are made in German and periodically Dr. Fuellmich translates a summary into English.
Included are two lawyers from the Austrian Corona Committee who have won 22 cases before the Austrian Constitutional Court.
A high-ranking justice from Italy shares, in Italian, evidence that he and his collegues have gathered which is relevant internationally. English translation is provided.
Senta Depuydt, a journalist with Children’s Health Defense Europe, shares updates for France and Belgium, and European Union.
The participants reveal the deaths and atrocities related to covid vaccines and detail many successes that have already taken place in the courts. Discussion includes ways to continue and expand international cooperation for challenging global medical tyranny via the COVID-19 mandates.
Inspiring examples are shared of how people throughout the world are rising up and gathering together to stand against the lockdowns and tyrannical mandates.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich addresses the question from Austrian lawyers about how people who have been damaged by lockdowns and mandates might receive compensation. His suggestion is to focus on going after the corporations and the individuals who are responsible, not the governments.
A lawyer from the Netherlands describes his challenges — with dramatic ups and downs — in taking on the mandatory curfew.
A lawyer from Spain shares small, yet significant, successes.
The situation in Israel was discussed, including a social experiment called “consciousness engineering“, which focuses on the entire population. The horrific unfolding experience for all Israeli citizens, along with serious vaccine injuries, was shared.
Conversation with Dr. Reiner Fuellmich also addressed the attempted global takeover via The World Economic Forum’s Great Reset and much more.
Excerpts from conversation between Dr. Reiner Fuellmich and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.:
RFK, Jr. shares a clip from a video “where a whistleblower from a nursing home in Germany reported some atrocities in that nursing home in conjunction with the administration of vaccines.” [see this short segment of the livestream event, with the shared whistleblower video and comments by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich HERE.]
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich responds:
“The thing that is disturbing about this is because we are getting more and more calls from other whistleblowers — from other nursing homes in this country. Plus we’re getting information from other countries. Sweden, for example. Norway, for example. Gibraltar, for example. There are also incidents in England and in the United States that match these descriptions…
It means that people are dying because of the vaccine.
So, of course, we’re going to have to go and look into the details. We’re going to have to have autopsies performed.
But what we’re seeing in this video clip is worse than anything we ever expected.
And, if that is true, and if this is representative for what’s going on in the other nursing homes and in other countries, then we have a very serious problem.
And so do the people who make the vaccines, so do the people who administer the vaccines…
It looks more and more as though we’re dealing with homicide, maybe even murder.
We’re going to have to look into the details.”
RFK, Jr. speaks of the economic devastation for the average person, while at the same time those who are orchestrating the lockdowns are making billions of dollars. He also speaks on the media (and social media) censorship of information related to the vaccine
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich responds:
“The odd thing is that this very same thing is going on, not just in the United States, not just here in Germany, but all over the world — which does seem to point at some kind of, shall I say “lockstep”, or plan behind this.
Because it cannot be a coincidence — at least, not in my mind as an attorney, as a lawyer. It cannot be a coincidence that this is going on worldwide.
Now we know that the people who we were just talking about — the people who are profiting from this crisis — have so much money that they also, of course, have invested in the so-called mainstream media.
But…isn’t anybody worried about the fact that the notion of free speech, the idea of free speech as the very basis for any functioning democracy, is now in the hands of private corporations who have never been elected by anyone?”
RFK, Jr.:
“One of the problems that we have in the United States that you don’t have in Europe is that in 1997 we changed the law in our country to allow pharmaceutical companies to do direct consumer advertising on television.
So, today the big television networks can make up to 70% of their revenues on pharmaceutical products. What it means is that pharmaceutical companies are dictating the content of what we see on the news…
Anderson Cooper gets 12 million dollars a year and about 10 million of that comes from pharmaceutical companies…
Rupert Murdock, who runs Fox News also runs/owns the biggest vaccine company in Australia.
And so you have the press in our country that has absolutely been taken over by the pharmaceutical industry.”
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich:
“This problem seems so big, and the resulting damage seems so horrendous all over the world, that many of us have been thinking that maybe the national courts will not be able to cope with this. So the idea has been floating — and we’ve been discussing this with a number of our colleagues from all over the world — that maybe we’re going to need — once we get this to stop — we’re going to need, in order to go and deliver justice, we’re going to need something like a Nuremberg trial, second generation. Is that something that lawyers you work with have also been thinking about?”
RFK, Jr. explains the obstacles that have been created globally that would make it difficult to be treated fairly and the challenges we face. He focuses on getting the public involved and focusing on the parts of the national and local court systems that still have integrity.
“We need to try to figure out ways, first of all, of communicating to the public.
So, we’re off of social media. The mainstream press is now captured by the pharmaceutical industry. But there are now other, evolving, ways for people who are learning to communicate to each in other ways.
We need to establish credible ways for people who care about democracy, who care about civil rights, who are concerned about the ascendency of the medical cartel to begin really revolting against the increase and unacceptable power of those power centers.
And one of those ways in through communication.
The other is, in many of our independent nations, there are opportunities in the courts — where you still have integrity in the courts and judicial system of some of our countries. And it’s getting smaller and smaller, more constricted.
But, to me those present the best opportunity. Public organizing, public communication and the use of the courts.”
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich:
“And I think what also makes sense — what we’ve been doing for months now…
I think it also makes a lot sense for all of us to continue to cooperate and share the evidence that we have, so that we’re all on the same page and that we’re all on the same level… Because the problem is universal. It’s almost identical worldwide…
I think it’s really important to show that, as you said, those parts of the judicial system that still have integrity are still functioning — and that we — you and I and the rest of the people who are working with us — are doing the best we can to show and to get as many decisions as possible from the courts of law that say:
PCR tests cannot tell you anything about infections. And that there are no asymptomatic infections. And even if there were that doesn’t play a role. As many of these decisions as possible.
Because the PCR test. the Drosten PCR test, was and still is the centerpiece of this whole thing.
If we destroy that narrative, I think this house of cards is going to come down crashing soon.”
Isolation: The action of isolating; the fact or condition of being isolated or standing alone;
separation from other things or persons; solitariness.
– Oxford English Dictionary
The controversy over whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus has ever been isolated or purified continues. However, using the above definition, common sense, the laws of logic and the dictates of science, any unbiased person must come to the conclusion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated or purified. As a result, no confirmation of the virus’ existence can be found. The logical, common sense, and scientific consequences of this fact are:
the structure and composition of something not shown to exist can’t be known, including the presence, structure, and function of any hypothetical spike or other proteins;
the genetic sequence of something that has never been found can’t be known;
“variants” of something that hasn’t been shown to exist can’t be known;
it’s impossible to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 causes a disease called Covid-19.
In as concise terms as possible, here’s the proper way to isolate, characterize and demonstrate a new virus. First, one takes samples (blood, sputum, secretions) from many people (e.g. 500) with symptoms which are unique and specific enough to characterize an illness. Without mixing these samples with ANY tissue or products that also contain genetic material, the virologist macerates, filters and ultracentrifuges i.e. purifies the specimen. This common virology technique, done for decades to isolate bacteriophages1 and so-called giant viruses in every virology lab, then allows the virologist to demonstrate with electron microscopy thousands of identically sized and shaped particles. These particles are the isolated and purified virus.
These identical particles are then checked for uniformity by physical and/or microscopic techniques. Once the purity is determined, the particles may be further characterized. This would include examining the structure, morphology, and chemical composition of the particles. Next, their genetic makeup is characterized by extracting the genetic material directly from the purified particles and using genetic-sequencing techniques, such as Sanger sequencing, that have also been around for decades. Then one does an analysis to confirm that these uniform particles are exogenous (outside) in origin as a virus is conceptualized to be, and not the normal breakdown products of dead and dying tissues.2 (As of May 2020, we know that virologists have no way to determine whether the particles they’re seeing are viruses or just normal break-down products of dead and dying tissues.)3
2 “Extracellular Vesicles Derived From Apoptotic Cells: An Essential Link Between Death and Regeneration,” Maojiao Li1 et al, Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, 2020 October 2. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2020.573511/full — accessed 2/15/21
3“The Role of Extraellular Vesicles as Allies of HIV, HCV and SARS Viruses,” Flavia Giannessi, et al, Viruses, 2020 May
If we have come this far then we have fully isolated, characterized, and genetically sequenced an exogenous virus particle. However, we still have to show it is causally related to a disease. This is carried out by exposing a group of healthy subjects (animals are usually used) to this isolated, purified virus in the manner in which the disease is thought to be transmitted. If the animals get sick with the same disease, as confirmed by clinical and autopsy findings, one has now shown that the virus actually causes a disease. This demonstrates infectivity and transmission of an infectious agent.
None of these steps has even been attempted with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor have all these steps been successfully performed for any so-called pathogenic virus. Our research indicates that a single study showing these steps does not exist in the medical literature.
Instead, since 1954, virologists have taken unpurified samples from a relatively few people, often less than ten, with a similar disease. They then minimally process this sample and inoculate this unpurified sample onto tissue culture containing usually four to six other types of material — all of which contain identical genetic material as to what is called a “virus.” The tissue culture is starved and poisoned and naturally disintegrates into many types of particles, some of which contain genetic material. Against all common sense, logic, use of the English language and scientific integrity, this process is called “virus isolation.” This brew containing fragments of genetic material from many sources is then subjected to genetic analysis, which then creates in a computer-simulation process the alleged sequence of the alleged virus, a so called in silico genome. At no time is an actual virus confirmed by electron microscopy. At no time is a genome extracted and sequenced from an actual virus. This is scientific fraud.
The observation that the unpurified specimen — inoculated onto tissue culture along with toxic antibiotics, bovine fetal tissue, amniotic fluid and other tissues — destroys the kidney tissue onto which it is inoculated is given as evidence of the virus’ existence and pathogenicity. This is scientific fraud.
From now on, when anyone gives you a paper that suggests the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated, please check the methods sections. If the researchers used Vero cells or any other culture method, you know that their process was not isolation. You will hear the following excuses for why actual isolation isn’t done:
There were not enough virus particles found in samples from patients to analyze.
Viruses are intracellular parasites; they can’t be found outside the cell in this manner.
If No. 1 is correct, and we can’t find the virus in the sputum of sick people, then on what evidence do we think the virus is dangerous or even lethal? If No. 2 is correct, then how is the virus spread from person to person? We are told it emerges from the cell to infect others. Then why isn’t it possible to find it?
Finally, questioning these virology techniques and conclusions is not some distraction or divisive issue. Shining the light on this truth is essential to stop this terrible fraud that humanity is confronting. For, as we now know, if the virus has never been isolated, sequenced or shown to cause illness, if the virus is imaginary, then why are we wearing masks, social distancing and putting the whole world into prison?
Finally, if pathogenic viruses don’t exist, then what is going into those injectable devices erroneously called “vaccines,” and what is their purpose? This scientific question is the most urgent and relevant one of our time.
We are correct. The SARS-CoV2 virus does not exist.
Sally Fallon Morell, MADr. Thomas Cowan, MDDr. Andrew Kaufman, MD
John Edmunds is on top of the world. He’s one of the modelling-paper mafiosi.
The London, U.K., professor is a key government advisor on COVID-19-related policies. Edmunds also was a co-author of one of the primary modelling papers that have been used to convince the masses that vigilance against Variant of Concern (VOC) B.1.1.7 should be their top priority.
And Edmunds co-wrote an influential January 21, 2021 report that concluded, “There is a realistic possibility that VOC B.1.1.7 is associated with an increased risk of death compared to non-VOC viruses.”
In addition, he speaks often to reporters about the deadlinessof the new variant. Edmunds tells them, for example, that a “disaster” would ensue if lockdowns are eased too soon, because what first must be done is to “vaccinate much, much, much more widely than the elderly.”
Follow the funds
Edmunds also happens to be the spouse of someone who, at least until April 2020, was an employee of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and held shares in the company. (Edmunds doesn’t disclose this in any of his media interviews that I’ve read and watched. He also doesn’t disclose his own stock holdings.)
According to an April 2020 Daily Telegrapharticle, Edmunds’s wife is Jeanne Pimenta and she works for GSK. The Daily Telegraph article states Edmunds asserted his partner had recently resigned from GSK. So it’s unclear whether Pimenta currently works there or not. I did a little digging and found that the only Jeanne Pimenta LinkedIn profile indicates she’s currently director of epidemiology at GSK, while Jeanne Pimenta’s ResearchGate profile says she’s an epidemiologist at BioMarin Pharmaceutical. (I’ll have a bit more about Edmunds being married to a present or former Glaxo employee later in this article.)
In any case, GSK’s financial success is skyrocketing. On February 3 the company announced it’s collaborating with mRNA-vaccine company CureVac to spend 150 million Euros — approx $180 million USD — to make vaccines for the new variants. That effectively gives them first-entrant advantage in vaccines for the new variants. And that same Feb. 3 news release touts the new-variant vaccines as also able to serve as ‘booster’ shots after the initial rounds of vaccination.
Not only that: this fall GSK together with another international pharmaceutical firm, Sanofi, are scheduled to start producing what could turn out to be up to one billion doses of their COVID-19 vaccine annually. GSK’s understated Feb. 3 announcement of its Q4 2020 financial results said it will “continue to expect meaningful improvement in revenues and margins” because they are “building a high-value biopharma pipeline.”
Note that GSK and other pharma companies like Moderna and Pfizer are not responsible for damage and compensation payments to people seriously injured and killed by COVID-19 vaccines. Governments will pay instead – that is, if those injured and killed and their loved ones are able to beat the long odds and get any compensation at all.
And a remarkable February 8, 2021, investigative report in the German news outlet Welt Am Sonntag (which translates to World on Sunday) reveals another impetus for the wildly inaccurate modelling governments use to keep populations in a state of fear and control. The German article shows that in March 2020 government officials enlisted “leading scientists from several research institutes and universities. Together, they were to produce a [mathematical-modelling] paper that would serve as legitimization for further tough political measures.” These scientists obediently wrote a modelling paper tailored to the government’s instructions. The then-secret paper asserted that if lockdown measures were lifted immediately, up to one million Germans would die from COVID-19, some “agonizingly at home, gasping for breath,” after being turned away from overflowing hospitals.
Edmunds Is Deeply Invested in the Vaccine World
There’s still more to the web of money and influence surrounding Edmunds and other modelling-paper mafiosi, including Neil Ferguson (information on Ferguson is in the section below titled MoreModelling Mafiosi).
The first new-variant modelling paper Edmunds co-wrote, which I mention in the second paragraph of this article, was posted on December 23, 2020. Edmunds co-authored it with his fellow members of the Centre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). People in the centre’s COVID-19 Working Group also contributed.
The modelling paper was posted on the e-journal Medrχiv, which publishes only non-peer-reviewed papers. The journal is the creation ofan organization headed by Facebook head Mark Zuckerberg and his wife. I discuss Medrχiv and the Zuckerberg connection in my Feb. 3 article on the baselessness for the modelling papers that claim the new variants are very dangerous.
Edmunds also is dean of the LSHTM’s Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health. I contacted the institution’s media-relations department to request an interview with one of the Dec. 23, 2020, modelling paper’s authors. I didn’t receive a response.
In a Feb. 2017 video interview, Edmunds enthused that the LSHTM specializes in every aspect of vaccine development, from basic science to large-scale clinical trials. In the video he also touts using mathematical modelling as a good way to show that vaccines protect individuals and society. (And among other things he describes his group’s efforts in giving children flu vaccines and — in conjunction with Public Health England — promoting human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccines for girls and boys.)
In addition, Edmunds is a key member of the UK Vaccine Network (which until recently was known as the UK Vaccines Network – the URL for the organization has ‘UK Vaccines Network‘ in it).
And he’s a member of the U.K. govenment’s Science Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), which provides Covid-measure advice — much of it related to the unprecedentedly forceful push for mass vaccination — to U.K. prime minister Boris Johnson and his cabinet.
And as mentioned earlier, Edmunds is married to a current or former GSK employee. A 2015 article that Edmunds co-authored states under ‘Competing interests’ for Edmunds that “My partner works for GSK.” Similarly, on the NERVTAG website’s conflict-disclosure pages – which for some reason haven’t been updated since Oct. 2017 – it reveals that Edmunds’s spouse works for GSK.
As a quick other note, the ‘Author Contributions and Acknowledgements’ section of the PDF of the December 23 modelling analysis of B.1.1.7 (pages 15 and 16) shows that almost all of the paper’s authors and members of the modelling centre’s COVID-19 Working Group receive funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and/or Wellcome Trust. (By the way, a search for Wellcome Trust yields the Wellcome website.)
And there’s more to the Edmunds story. Among other of my finds: he’s also on the Scientific Advisory Board for the Coalition for Epidemic Innovations (CEPI). CEPI was created primarily by the BMGF, the World Economic Forum and the major pharma company Wellcome. CEPI’s website states it was “launched in Davos [at the meeting of the World Economic Forum in January] 2017 to develop vaccines to stop future epidemics. Our mission is to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases and enable equitable access to these vaccines for people during outbreaks.”
Investigative journalist Vanessa Beeley last year wrote a must-read two-part analysis of the ties between the key individuals, institutions, companies and funders of the UK’s Covid-19 response. She mentioned that GSK is working with CEPI to develop COVID-19 vaccines. This alliance is still going strong today.
Note also that the LSHTM’s Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, which Edmunds heads, is primarily funded by the BMGF and the Gavi alliance. (Gavi promotes mass vaccination of people around the world — including by quarterbacking the COVAX program. Gavi’s biggest funders include the BMGF.Doctors Without Borders has criticized GAVI for being “aimed more at supporting drug-industry desires to promote new products than at finding the most efficient and sustainable means for fighting the diseases of poverty.”)
BMGF funding for the LSHTM’s Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health is growing very fast. For example, BMGF’s new grants to the faculty rose from $4.9 million USD in 2013-2014 (see page 14 [p. 9 in the PDF] of the LSHTM’s 2014 annual report) to $13.19 million USD in 2015-2016 (see page 14 [p. 9 in the PDF] of the LSHTM’s 2016 annual report)(top new research grants to each faculty at the LSHTM stopped being reported in the annual reports after 2017). Funding from the BMGF to the LSHTM as a whole was 30.2 million pounds ($40.2 million USD) in 2017-2018 (see page 9 [p. 6 in the PDF] in the school’s 2018 annual report).
By the way, the LSHTM also has a Vaccines Manufacturing Innovation Centre. It develops, tests and commercializes vaccines. (I couldn’t find any information on where the vaccines centre’s funding comes from.)
The vaccines centre also performs affiliated activities like combating ‘vaccine hesitancy.’ The latter includes the Vaccine Confidence Project. The project’s stated purpose is, among other things, “to provide analysis and guidance for early response and engagement with the public to ensure sustained confidence in vaccines and immunisation.”
Here’s information about two other members of this club:
– Public Health England (PHE) issued its first detailed report on the new variant in late December 2020 and continues to provide updates. None of their reports are peer-reviewed. One of the highest-profile co-authors of the PHE reports is PHE director Susan Hopkins. She’s also a professor of infectious diseases at Imperial College London. The college receives tens of millions of dollars a year from the BMGF. See for example this grant, this one, this one and this one. (I emailed PHE media relations to request an interview about PHE’s new-variants reports. PHE communications person Zahra Vindhani responded, “Dr. Hopkins won’t have the capacity for this in the upcoming weeks, and we aren’t able to confirm anyone else for this either.”)
– PHE is guided in its approach to vaccination by PHE’s “Strategic Priority 1” for combating infections diseases in 2020-2025. It is to “Optimise vaccine provision and reduce vaccine preventable diseases in England” (see p. 9 of PHE’s Infectious Disease Strategy 2020-2025).
– Ferguson’s modelling has been extremely faulty again over the years. This has been thoroughly documented. For example, as investigative journalist Beeley wrote in Part One of a two-part investigative report in April-May 2020, Ferguson’s modelling over-estimated by about three million-fold the death toll from the bird flu, also known as H5N1. As a result, a lot of money was made by bird-flu-vaccine manufacturers, ranging from Roche (for its now-infamous, ineffective Tamiflu) to Sanofi, and they were used widely.
– Ferguson also is a member, together with Edmunds and others, of SAGE.
– Another group he’s a member of is the highly influential NERVTAG. It’s the group that issued the January 21, 2021 warning, mentioned earlier in this article, that B.1.1.7 is deadly. Ferguson is a NERVTAG member even though he was reported to have resigned last spring after being caught visiting with his married lover when everyone in England was supposed to only be having contact with members of their own households (based in large part on Ferguson’s modelling and his urging the government to lock the country down).
– Ferguson also is a member of the UK Vaccines Network, along with Edmunds and others such as the Network chair Chris Whitty, who’s also the UK government’s top Covid-19 adviser Chris Whitty. The network’s focus, according to its website, “to support the [U.K.] government to identify and shortlist targeted investment opportunities for the most promising vaccines and vaccine technologies that will help combat infectious diseases with epidemic potential, and to address structural issues related to the UK’s broader vaccine infrastructure.”
These ties bind Edmunds, Ferguson and Hopkins – along with the rest of the modelling-paper mafiosi — to the bidding of governments, Big Pharma, Bill Gates and other powerful players.
They present an image of being fully devoted to the public good, while in fact actively helping to destroy it.
After obtaining an MSc in molecular biology from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary, Rosemary Frei became a freelance writer. For the next 22 years she was a medical writer and journalist. She pivoted again in early 2016 to full-time, independent activism and investigative journalism. Her website is RosemaryFrei.ca.
Truth Slips Out in Coronavirus Vaccine Deaths ‘Fact Check’?
The big money media that have been working for a year to stir up maximum fear of coronavirus have been taking the opposite tack regarding coronavirus vaccines. These experimental vaccines, which are not even vaccines under the normal understanding of what qualifies as a vaccine, rushed to the public without the regular testing, the big money media insists, are safe and should be taken by everyone.
Yet, even in this Pollyanna coverage of the experimental vaccines, occasionally the truth slips out.
On February 3, ABC News ran an article by Stephanie Widmer titled “Fact-check: No link between COVID-19 vaccines and those who die after receiving them.” The main thrust of the article is that all the people who die after taking the experimental coronavirus vaccines would have died anyway: The vaccine never caused the death no matter how soon the death occurred after a person received a shot or how out of the blue and strange the circumstances of the death. The deaths are all just a coincidence, the article suggests. Plenty of people — around 8,000 people according to the article — die each day in America, you know.
This seems like some fanciful thinking. And the thinking is the opposite of the thinking employed in attributing deaths to coronavirus. With coronavirus, the presumption generally employed by government and big money media in America is that coronavirus is the killer if a person who tested positive for coronavirus dies, no matter what other health problems he had and irrespective of coronavirus tests producing many false positive results.
Still, there is some value in this ABC News article for people not interested in reading yet another big money media article promoting everyone having an experimental vaccine injected into his arm. Around halfway through the article is a sentence that suggests something much less fanciful to explain the conclusion that the experimental coronavirus vaccines kill nobody. The article states. “Every time someone gets sick or dies shortly after getting a vaccine, government agencies investigate to ensure there’s no link.” Is this the truth slipping out?
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Attorney Tom Renz is a Godsend for human freedom. Initially single-handed, but gaining more widespread support, Tom is leading a defensive legal assault on the those in the state and federal governments who want to destroy our freedom in the name of the public health “emergency” surrounding COVID-19. You will be moved and enlightened and inspired by his work. I am honored to share my hour with him with you. You will enlarge your understanding of COVID-19 and confirm that there is hope for better times. Please watch this, for all our sakes, and perhaps add your energy to his work. He needs good people to volunteer to help him in every possible way. If you help to advance the work of Tom Renz, you join the pantheon of people who have and who are advancing human freedom.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Transcript:
Like many others I have for months been warning that the covid-19 jabs would cause numerous deaths and serious health problems. In videos and articles I have outlined the deaths and the serious injuries caused by the jabs. My website contains a list of the evidence. Just go to the Health page and there, right at the top, you will find a terrifying list of the people who have already been killed by these experimental jabs.
Care home deaths, you will be saddened but not surprised to hear have soared. At care homes everywhere elder citizens are having their jab and then dying within days. And still the Government and the media claim the jabs and immediate sudden deaths are all a coincidence. The call is for more jabs, more jabs, jab harder, faster and more.
It gives me absolutely no pleasure to know now that my warnings were absolutely right.
The Government agencies and the BBC continue to provide bland, unscientific reassurance, of course, insisting there have been no deaths and no side effects other than a little soreness here or a little soreness there. On the 5th February the BBC website responded to the question, `Is the Covid-19 vaccine safe?’ with the astonishing reply `Although some people get mild side effects, both vaccines are extremely safe’ – with the words extremely safe printed in bold just so that we’d be sure to notice. The BBC, financially linked to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, gave as the source for this staggering nonsense the UK’s Bill Gates funded drug regulator. And the Government, the regulator and the BBC will doubtless continue to suppress the truth right up until the end – when millions are dead. Indeed, they will doubtless continue to do what they’re doing now – blaming covid-19 and not blaming the jabs. Governments, regulators and the media seem to me to be involved in massive triple headed fraud.
We are presumably expected to ignore the hundreds of deaths and the tens of thousands of serious injuries now linked to the vaccines around the world. In the US, the CDC has so far reported 653 deaths and 12,044 other injuries. It’s interesting that some people seem to me to define death as a mild side effect. I think I’d call it a bit more than mild, but then I don’t have BBC standards. I wonder if those claiming there are no side effects would feel the same if a loved one had died – or was lying paralysed in bed.
And remember in the USA the authorities admit that doctors miss more than 99% of vaccine related injuries.
The authorities claim that anyone who dies within 60 or 28 days of a positive PCR test must have died of covid-19 but if a healthy person drops dead within five minutes of having a covid-19 jab then it’s just another unfortunate coincidence. People die all the time, they say, so why blame the jab. That they manage to do this with a straight face suggests to me that quite a few of them must have taken acting lessons.
Safe and effective is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation line, of course.
And it is no coincidence that government agencies such as Public Health England and the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency have received millions of dollars from Gates. It’s well known too, that the BBC has a financial relationship with the Gates Foundation.
Indeed, it’s difficult these days to find a part of the media or the health industry which doesn’t have a link to the viper filled cesspit that is Bill Gates’ pocket.
Even the Guardian newspaper, which used to fancy itself as a champion of the oppressed and downtrodden little guy has teamed up with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, perhaps unable to resist the allure of a few lorry-loads of that delicious software money.
The official party line, of course, is that those of us warning that the jabs can kill and maim are dangerous conspiracy theorists who must be ignored or, preferably, silenced.
Just the other day, a Guardian writer called for what he called `dangerous falsehoods’ to be prohibited.’
So, there we are. He didn’t say what he thought the dangerous falsehoods to be but presumably he meant things that he didn’t agree with.
Anyway, it seems that at least one person at the Guardian now supports censorship. And presumably wants to choose what we should all be told about covid-19 and the covid-19 vaccines. It’s perhaps not surprising now that the Guardian is linked to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Everyone who gets close to the ‘Gatesean’ viper filled pit must expect to be damned when they call for censorship and prohibitions.
In previous videos and articles I’ve outlined the very real dangers of these experimental jabs. I have constantly warned that the big problems aren’t likely to be the ones we’re seeing now but the ones which will appear in 3, 6 or 12 months’ time – possibly when the person who has been jabbed comes into contact with a coronavirus – or even in 2, 5 or 10 years’ time. And every day I find yet more evidence of the problems which lie ahead and which are being ignored or suppressed by governments, regulators and the media. Indeed, while the BBC continues to spread false comfort and to demonise the truth-tellers, the medical journals are full of doubters expressing real fears about the lies being told about covid-19 and about the jab.
There is, for example, a huge potential problem facing those who have a second jab. Doctors have known since 1913 that a second injection of what we will call for simplicity a poison can sensitise the patient and produce a greater chance of an anaphylactic reaction. And interestingly, there needs to be a delay of three to four weeks before the patient is truly vulnerable to an anaphylactic state. I’ll come back to this another time but this is a very sensitive reaction and needs only a minute amount of the trigger substance. Once that has happened the patient is changed forever. They can never return to normal. And if you’re wondering who said all this by the way it was Charles Richet and he was giving his Nobel Lecture. If you wait at least three weeks then the reaction after the second jab is much commoner.
The drug industry is currently being praised to the skies for making these terrible jabs though this makes as much sense as praising arms companies for making a new and better hand grenade which removes children’s limbs with great precision but as I have shown before the drug industry is the dirtiest industry in the world. I have long believed that Pablo Escobar and the cartels in Columbia cared more for the people than the drug companies do. Watch my videos or read my articles about GSK, Astra Zeneca or Pfizer.
Meanwhile, here’s a favourite drug company trick.
When they test a new anti-arthritis drug they will test it against a well-established drug to see how their product stands up. So, they’ll perhaps test it against aspirin. But they won’t test it against coated or soluble aspirin. They’ll test it against the common or garden stuff that burns holes in your stomach and that no one with their brain in the right way round prescribes any more. And then they can say that their drug is safer.
When they test a new vaccine they use a similar trick. They won’t test it against a placebo. They’ll test it against some grotty vaccine that is known to produce terrible side effects. Then they can say that their nice new vaccine is safe. The people in the media don’t know any of this, of course. They just put their name on the top of the latest press release and then totter off to the canteen.
An article entitled, `Covid -19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Disease’ has just been accepted for the journal `Microbiology and Infectious Diseases’.
The author concludes that `regulatory approval of the RNA based vaccines…was premature and that the vaccine may cause much more harm than benefit’.
In the introduction to his article, Dr Classen points out that `vaccines have been found to cause a host of chronic, late developing adverse events. Some adverse events like type 1 diabetes may not occur until 3-4 years after a vaccine is administered.’ That incidentally is a problem which has been known since 2002.
Dr Classen goes on to say that `the frequency of cases of adverse events may surpass the frequency of cases of severe infectious disease the vaccine was designed to prevent. Given that type 1 diabetes is only one of many immune mediated diseases potentially caused by vaccines, chronic late occurring adverse events are a serious public health issue.’
And the paper goes on to repeat a warning that covid-19 vaccines could induce prion diseases such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
There was a paper in the BMJ in October in which the authors reported on a study to determine whether sufficient literature existed `to require clinicians to disclose the specific risk that covid-19 vaccines could worsen disease upon exposure to challenge or circulating virus’. The authors concluded that it did.
The BMJ also carried an article headlined: `Will covid-19 vaccines save lives? Current trials aren’t designed to tell us.’
But the Government, the regulators and the ‘Gatesian’ poodles ignore all this, of course. You might have thought that one poodle might have thought a small bark worthwhile. But nothing.
This is the biggest fraud, the biggest cover up and the biggest scandal in history. The media hide behind their sponsors and refuse to give space to the truth-tellers. The fact that they won’t debate tells us everything we need to know. The BBC is supposed to inform and educate but it does neither. Thousands of people will die because they’ve trusted the lies on the state broadcaster.
Anyone who speaks out is likely to be damned by the so-called fact checkers. Worldwide there are thousands of them and they are about as reputable and reliable as race course tipsters. Find out who pays them and the same names appear time and time again. It’s a scamming industry but it works, of course. People who don’t know what is going on assume that the fact checkers must know what they’re doing. Most of them probably need help putting their shoes on in the morning. The thousands of fact checkers are paid for by the people who are suppressing the truth. It’s not surprising that I’m banned from just about everywhere now.
Anyone who dares to share the truth will be lied about, demonised and banned. Many doctors don’t dare to say a word. But that’s the plan, of course.
And yet despite all this banning and suppressing and demonisation, a third of Britons still don’t believe what the Government tells them about the vaccines. And a report from India shows that most government hospital health workers in Delhi have refused to take the covid-19 vaccine. Wise people. `I am not yet ready to take a vaccine for which the trials have not even been completed,’ said one. In India, of course, people know about Bill Gates supported vaccines and, as a result, know to be careful about what they trust.
Vaccines have always been dangerous. The Centers for Disease and Prevention, CDC, in the US has 16 recommended vaccines for children. And the leaflets that go with those vaccines list 400 ways that vaccines can kill or injure. These include heart attacks, strokes, allergies, nerve and brain disorders, inflammation and death.
Don’t forget death.
The truth, for those who are interested, is that it is reported that trials for the Moderna vaccine didn’t include people over 80 and included only 20 over the age of 70. On the basis of that small trial, the CDC is giving the vaccine to 34 million Americans over the age of 70.
If the vaccine kills one in every 30 people, there’s a good chance that the trial wouldn’t have picked it up. And over a million over 70s could be killed by the vaccine. Is that the aim?
In America the authorities admit, as I have said, that they collect fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries. The manufacturers have said that there is a fifty fold underreporting of vaccine adverse events. Doctors are not really encouraged to report or talk about vaccine problems. Indeed, anyone who speaks out about problems with vaccines is likely to find themselves in trouble.
And it’s in the same in the UK and elsewhere.
Doctors, regulators and journalists don’t tell people the truth because they don’t know or because it’s just too scary.
In 2017, the Danish government and a Danish vaccine maker, funded a study of the DTP vaccine. Gates and his pet WHO claim that the DTP vaccine saves millions of lives but the truth seems to be very different. After looking at 30 years of data, the scientists concluded that the DTP vaccine was probably killing more children than died from diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus prior to the vaccines introduction. The vaccine had ruined the immune systems of children rendering them susceptible to death from pneumonia, leukaemia, bilharzia, malaria and dysentery. None of those diseases is officially recognised as vaccine injuries but they are.
The vast majority of illnesses and deaths caused by vaccines go unreported. And yet we are still seeing hundreds of deaths and tens of thousands of adverse events with covid-19 vaccines.
But anyone who reports the facts is banned by YouTube, Facebook and the BBC – and branded a conspiracy theorist. That’s the upside down world we are living in: a world where lies are praised as truths and truths are branded lies.
Please share this article with everyone you can reach.
Copyright Vernon Coleman February 16th 2021
The Fraudulent Use of PCR / RT-PCR Techniques for the Manipulation, Harm and, Ultimately, the Destruction of Humanity
A Scientific Analysis of the Significant Pitfalls Associated With the PCR / RT-PCR Techniques for the Alleged Detection of SARS-Cov-2 and Diagnosis of Covid-19
As someone with more than an adequate knowledge of the medical and clinical sciences along with some postgraduate research experience in genomic mapping using molecular genetics techniques, I would like to contribute to our understanding of this nucleic acid amplification method and how information derived from it could be very misleading when it is being used to diagnose purported “infections” in almost anything and everything nowadays.
Is it not amusing to find human swabs, samples of Coca Cola and some fruits all testing positive for “Sars-Cov- 2” using the RT-PCR protocol whilst the kit instructions, the enclosed information leaflet, as well as the print on the box clearly inform the users that the test kit detects Sars-Cov-1 only?
I suspect that the “PCR test” was intentionally chosen for its potential non-specificity. It can be a very useful technique for those wishing to control, mislead, impoverish and eliminate us as it is so easy to manipulate its protocol to suit different purposes.
It is an ideal tool to perpetrate massive deceptions.
Specific results could be generated based on specific requirements to meet certain political objectives in order to create the illusion of high and low rates of an imaginary, specific infection in different populations and appearing at different times.
Rolling trends of supposed Covid-19 infections, rolling trends of the stampeding of our rights and freedoms all in perfect harmony with the rolling trends of different vaccines presented as the only partial way out of our troubles whilst also being told that our lives might never get back to normal.
And to ensure that systematic analysis of results did not raise much suspicion with regards to bias; some degree of “natural data variability” could be fabricated through the incorporation of a certain percentage of negative test results.
The PCR can not diagnose anything useful at all.
In my opinion, being PCR positive is like testing humans for the presence of epithelial cells (which we all possess) and then confirming that indeed all humans have such cells but pretend that those cells are from a non-human or pathogenic microbial entity.
Allow me to make another analogy.
How could the finding of some very small, common, ordinary, random screws that you might find on a trail whilst hiking; necessarily and categorically prove that the screws belonged to a particular car model, manufactured on a specific date and by a specific manufacturer or that those screws belonged to something entirely different; perhaps part of a gadget?
Our bodies are awash with DNA and various RNA molecules which are constantly floating within and outside of our cells. The laboratory amplification of an alleged, specific and very short segment of DNA/RNA could not prove the existence of microbes nor could it ever predict illness or contribute to death.
I would like to refer you to the past statements and interviews of Dr Kary Mullis, the Noble Laureate and the inventor of PCR, regarding the limitations of this technique.
The specifics of the PCR/RT-PCR technique that might lend itself to manipulation and fabrication of a delusion and the creation of fear and anxiety:
1. Size of amplicon (amplified product): The smaller its size, the higher the probability that the product could be found on a variety of DNA sequences from a variety of organisms; including humans. That is why PCR should not be used for clinical diagnosis.
The sizes of the amplified DNA segments, supposedly only coding for various proteins of the Sars-Cov-2 are very small; about 112 bp long or slightly longer.
One particular pair of primers allegedly amplifies a 112 bp cDNA fragment of the Spike protein of this virus.
According to the CDC’s computer model, the size of The Sars-Cov-2 RNA is 30,000 bases long.
Thus, the fraction of the whole genome of the supposed virus that is being amplified using RT-PCR is 112/30,000 = 0.37 %.
This would certainly be a fantastic and an entirely novel way of conferring and confirming the existence and the physical wholeness of an illusory agent that has never been extracted and purified.
How could the use of PCR provide evidence for the functionality of a whimsical creation?
2. Length of individual DNA primers (forward and reverse primers, always a pair),their sequences, their respective concentrations and volumes could be altered thus influencing specificity of the annealing and the amplification rate of the target DNA/RNA molecules.
3. Types of enzymes (Reverse Transcriptases and Polymerases), their concentrations, their volumes and their chemical modifications prior to use could affect the production rate, the specificity of the amplification and the fidelity (accuracy) of amplification.
4. The denaturation temperature and the duration of denaturation could easily be altered on the PCR thermal cycling machine. Extent of DNA denaturation then determines if primers bind specifically to the “target DNA” or non-specifically to themselves in the next phase. These factors also affect the activity of polymerase enzyme, its half life and the yield.
5. The annealing temperature and the duration of annealing could easily be altered on the PCR thermal cycling machine thus affecting whether the primer pair binds to its “DNA target” specifically or non-specifically to other pieces of DNA or even binds to themselves. These factors also affect the activity of polymerase enzymes as well as the yield of specific and nonspecific DNA targets.
6. The amplification temperature and the duration of amplification could easily be altered on the PCR thermal cycling machine thus affecting whether the primers remain bonded to the DNA target and the activity, half life and the fidelity of polymerase enzyme as well as the specific and nonspecific yield of DNA from various sources.
7. The number of cycles of PCR/ RT-PCR amplification programmed into the thermal cycling machine might be altered to directly affect how much amplified product is made and whether the sample would be easily detectable (by measuring the emitted fluorescence light) or not. This could increase or decrease the number of false positives according to prescribed narratives in case of unethical behaviour or genuine laboratory errors.
The higher the number of cycles, the larger the degree of amplification of specific and non-specific nucleic acid targets.
8. The concentration and final volume of the pool of RNA/DNA solution affects the degree of amplification. Has RNA been extracted and purified from the pool of DNA, RNA, proteins, cells, carbohydrates, cholesterol and lipids or is the RNA in a crude state that could negatively impact its amplification.
9. The concentrations and volumes of solutions of fluorescently labelled deoxyribonucleotide triphosphates (dNTPs)could also affect the amplification magnitude. A huge amount of DNA/RNA in the reaction from the start could ensure a higher yield of false positives.
There are four dNTPs: dGTP, dCTP, dATP, DTTP.
10. The ratio of the concentration of fluorescently labelled dNTPsover the concentration of unlabelled dNTPs could also affect the amount of DNA signal perceived and thus the number of false positives that could be detected.
11. Contaminants could result in the generation of false positive results.
12. Various enzyme inhibitors could result in the generation of false negative results.
13. Various enzyme promoters could result in the generation of false positive results.
14. The supposed RNA target belonging to the “alleged virus” is not and has never been isolated and purified prior to its amplification in the PCR machine. A swab sample will contain a mixture of DNA and RNA as well as huge amounts of proteins belonging to human cells, various bacteria, viruses, protozoa and fungal species.
Even if RNA molecules are isolated and purified from the mixture it would contain total RNA and not just the RNA of the alleged virus. The mixture might still be contaminated with traces of various DNA molecules from a variety of sources.
15. The ionic concentrations and volumes of individual components of the buffer and the final pH of the buffer solution used in the reaction could be altered.
16. The handling and preparation of ingredients prior to placement on the thermal cycling machine could also affect the number of false positive rates.
17. The water used in the reaction must be double distilled ( deionised) and autoclaved prior to use.
Contamination with microbes, DNA, RNA, enzymes and other minerals in the water component or other reaction components could yield erroneous and misleading conclusions.
18. The supposed Sars-Cov-2 primer sequences are complementary to hundreds of bacterial and human DNA molecules: If one makes a list of all the different pairs of primers that have ever been used in the PCR technique to detect the alleged “Sars-Cov 2” throughout the world and compare their sequences with bacterial and human genome data sequences, using the BLAST website as an example, you would find hundreds of almost perfect sequence matches between what is alleged to be portions of various Sars-Cov 1 and Sars-Cov 2 gene sequences and human and bacterial DNA sequences.
The various primer pairs used in the detection of the alleged SARS-COV 2 virus exhibit at least 90% sequence homology with between 4-93 human DNA segments and 100 bacterial DNA segments (greenmedinfo.com site). The forward primer in isolation, the reverse primer in isolation, and both in combination pick up hundreds of matching human and bacterial DNA sequences.
And as far as I know, no one has yet to look at sequence similarities and cross matching between Sars-Cov 1 and Sars-Cov 2 primer sequences (used in PCR and RT-PCR for the detection of the alleged viruses) and fungal and parasitic DNA sequences. And I would not be surprised at all if these sequences match plant genomic sequences too.
If the primer pair sequences match hundreds of human and bacterial DNA targets then, by inference, the targets of amplification are also of human and bacterial origin and not of “viral” origin.
However, since the tested swabs contain much more human DNA/RNA than bacterial, viral, fungal and protozoal genetic material then, it is highly likely that the high rates of false positive PCR test results used for allegedly detecting Sars-Cov 2 are actually just detecting human DNA sequences and nothing else.
Irrespective of whether intentional (cheating) or unintentional errors have been made in the PCR reactions or not, the data suggest that the PCR could be detecting hundreds of bacterial and human DNA sequences seemingly portrayed as Sars-Cov 1/2 sequences; causing huge surges in false positive rates and therefore an unmeasurably harmful levels of anxiety and fear in the populations.
19. Amplification of target DNA molecules does not require a perfect match between the DNA sequence and the primer sequences: With only a 50% homology (base sequence matching) between the unknown DNA sequence and the primer sequences, it would still be possible to amplify DNA from humans, bacteria, fungi and protozoa and then generate false positive test results depending on the setting of PCR conditions and the sequence and length of the primer pairs.
The amplified product of the PCR could easily be human DNA masked as viral RNA!
Those who believe in absolute control are forcing us to not only wear face masks but seem to be also masking and covering up the real targets of the PCR amplification reaction which appears to be human DNA, bacterial DNA and DNA/RNA from the natural environment.
20. Recent sequencing of the amplified nucleic acid (from PCR) obtained from more than one thousand patients falsely labelled as having Sars-Cov-2 and misdiagnosed as having Covid-19 has shown the presence of influenza A and influenza B sequences in the samples.
It was found that the buffer solution, as just one of the several ingredients used in the RT-PCR protocol, had allegedly been tainted with influenza virus sequences in more than a thousand samples analysed.
At first glance, the first reaction to this finding is that laboratory protocols must be tightened to prevent contamination of the sterile chemical components of the PCR.
The second obvious conclusion from sequence analysis of samples of patients mislabeled as carrying the Sars-Cov-2 would be that anyone carrying influenza A or B viruses might also test false positives for Sars-Cov-2.
The third conclusion might be that the PCR is not a perfect diagnostic method because it amplifies influenza A, influenza B, Sars-Cov-1 as well as Sars-Cov-2 sequences but that it might still be a reliable tool because it is still capable of specifically amplifying viral sequences and nothing else using the published primer sequences.
We might be sold the illusion that, with some minor adjustments to the PCR protocol, we might be able to eventually differentiate between different viruses.
But that is a total fallacy in my opinion.
What we are not being told categorically is that all those people who apparently test positive with the PCR for Covid-19, whether they appear healthy or unhealthy, are not carrying any kind of microbes whatsoever.
The PCR is capable of amplifying, under the right conditions, any non-specific piece of DNA and RNA from humans, from bacteria and may be even from many other microorganisms.
With inclusion of exogenous RNA/DNA as targets into the PCR mixture, irrespective of its source, the amount of non-specific DNA amplification (signal) would increase; pushing the agenda of labelling more of the tested patients as being positive for an imaginary virus.
What if there might be subtle efforts to try to show that if Sars-Cov-2 could not be detected at least “another virus” could be seen as contributing towards both false positive laboratory results in order to suggest that patients might be infected with a mixture of viruses but due to technical difficulties only the influenza virus sequences could be identified whilst Sars-Cov-2 could not be detected.
Since the PCR might be amplifying any piece of RNA and DNA, both from humans and bacteria, how sensible would it be to suggest that some randomly floating and amplified RNA emanated only from a virus; irrespective of the specific species or strains of the alleged microbe?
It is unlikely that all false positive cases in the world would prove contamination of the tested sample with RNA from influenza A and B viruses.
Even in the absence of contamination, the same PCR protocol has the potential to amplify just about any piece of nucleic acid from a variety of species.
Are we seeing a tactic to merely control, mitigate, repair and perhaps salvage the damaged reputation of the PCR as the alleged gold standard for the detection of a multitude of present and future well-orchestrated, well-timed, conveniently handpicked, suddenly flourishing and imaginary nasty microbes as well as the method by which imaginary diseases could be fabricated out of thin air with the sleight of hand?
21. New evidence is shedding more light on virology research and questioning the dogmatic beliefs in this field in general.
None of the “seven Corona viruses” have ever been isolated and purified.
What if other published viral sequences are also just computer models?
A German molecular biologist, Dr. Stefan Lanka and some other eminent scientists doubt the existence of the Measles and Corona Viruses.
As a validation to this claim, in 2017, the German Federal Supreme Court made a final decision agreeing that there wasn’t enough evidence to support the existence of the “measles virus”. In this trial court, Dr. Lanka even offered to pay 100,000 Euros for anyone who can prove the opposite.
Apparently, there is another offer of a reward for 100,000 Euros for anyone who can prove the existence of Sars-Cov-2.
22. There is some evidence from the CDC website that Sars-Cov-2 sequences seem to have been generated using computer models.
It is alleged that Sars-Cov-2 virus has a total of 30,000 organic bases as an RNA molecule even though it has never been extracted and purified from a single Covid-19 case patient.
The CDC seems to suggest that Sars-Cov-2 was a computer-generated digital virus with 37 bases allegedly sourced from cases (0.001%) with 29, 963 bases (99.99 %) having been fabricated using genomic databases.
Might this behaviour not constitute fraud?
23. Many of us are rathersceptical about the germ theory of diseases in general and unfortunately, there seems to be a conglomerate of powerful and malevolent forces that are constantly and mercilessly pushing the virus agenda. And irrespective of the designated name of a particular trendy virus, this same force subsequently follows up the proceedings with relentless and persistent propaganda to forcefully peddle new vaccines onto the unsuspecting public under the pretext of protecting public health through the fabrication of an endless supply of new and supposedly ever- evolving list of imaginary and dangerous microbes.
Please look up the ignored historical arguments between Dr. Bechamp and Dr. Pasteur that took place about hundred years ago.
24. But where have we repeatedly seen computer modelling before?
In the prediction of various endemic and pandemic infectious diseases for the last fifty years at least.
All those predictions were hugely exaggerated to drive the narrative of the germ theory of disease. By creating the perception of harmful, illusory infectious agents; the pharmaceutical companies, the medical industrial complex, governments and eugenicists push the need for swift action through virtue signalling by ordering edicts allegedly meant to “protect the public” and coercing populations into giving up their freedoms and submitting to inhumane and very harmful treatments.
Those policies are there just to enrich the parasitic minority at the expense of the huge majority.
25. Surely, the notification of a positive PCR result is the harbinger of bad news for the mental and physical health of most of humanity and yet proves itself as a valuable tool in the machinations of those tiny minorities intent on causing undue harm to mankind.
What if the PCR technique is being used as a tool and as the Holy Grail by the control freaks to establish and perpetuate their nefarious agendas in 2021 and 2030?
Could PCR that is routinely carried out in a minute cup (a well in a microtiter plate) be a significant treasure for control freaks?
Could the abuse of the PCR technique and “other dubious diagnostic techniques” bestow technologists miraculous and magical powers that could amplify DNA (alchemy), determine mankind’s fate and simultaneously act as an enabler of technocracy and tyranny?
Could the abuse of PCR create massive deceptions by creating false positive results and mislabel people as sick and dangerous to others and thus promulgate the necessity for mass vaccination programs as the only way to control the imaginary virus?
Could the abuse of PCR create unprecedented opportunities for the medical-industrial-political complex and the banking industries?
Could the abuse of this technique make satanic psychopaths happier when they see the enormous suffering, misery, illness and death of the majority caused by their policies; the inevitable consequences of false positive PCR results?
Could the abuse of such techniques not make the egocentric and solipsistic minority more delighted when they see the exponential increase in their own power, wealth and control?
Could the abuse of this technique or “other trendy diagnostic techniques” in the near future provide the psychopaths with spiritual sustenance in infinite abundance- through the use of torture, abuse, abductions, societal destruction and democide as satanic rituals- and material sustenance in infinite abundance- through monopolistic power grabs, increased wealth, the synchronous control, rationing and contamination of the world’s food production and distribution networks and keeping uncontaminated and healthy foods for themselves- whilst people are constantly being distracted by “new virus strains”, new vaccines, loss of their freedom, loss of liberty, poverty, fake elections and rallies of controlled opposition groups?
Could all these questions be answered by examining the agendas of the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates’ Foundation among many others?
The aim of the psychopathic few has alway been to foment a significant decrease in the world population with a small minority of sheeple remaining. All dumbed down and obedient slaves exhibiting minimal cognitive abilities; incapable of rationality and critical analyses and with all the natural resources and wealth of the world in the hands of the tyrannical dominion.
Synopsis:
You could easily have a situation where you have the same patient/case, same nurse, same technician, same sample, same time and date, same equipment but different results which is total and utter nonsense.
There seems to be intentional errors in and manipulations of the conditions of the RT-PCR in order to fabricate the fraud of much higher rates of non-specific, misleading and random amplifications of human and bacterial DNA target sequences. The more people get tested, the more people yield positive results for the illusive Sars-Cov-2 thus increasing the number of people alleged to be suffering from an imaginary Covid-19 disease. These nefarious policies of fabrication of false and biased data have been in temporal resonance with certain official political objectives and announcements of the officialdom at designated times.
Such policies work hand in glove and in perfect harmony with the spewing of fear propaganda created to drive us into a programmed and preconceived path of the Pied Piper.
The PCR method is used to chemically amplify a very short piece of non-specific DNA in order to generate false positive data; inducing and amplifying frequent and regular psychological traumas, chaos, untold damage to people’s lives and madness. Its esoteric value could be to induce control, obedience, conformity, uncertainty, confusion, compliance and a lack of belief in logic and common sense. All these repugnant practices, policies and responses are killing and psychologically torturing innocent human beings.
If you are determined to socially engineer populations by creating a storm in a teacup, you might want to manipulate the PCR and other diagnostic techniques to fabricate cases.
Suddenly and by some magic, a very small, unimportant, harmless, irrelevant piece of floating RNA/DNA that has been amplified billions of times becomes visible, relevant, omnipotent, omnipresent and irreverent. A theatrical tool to foment confusion, fear and chaos by making us frightened of an imaginary virus.
If you happen to test positive, they label you as having Covid-19 and, if by happenstance your test results are negative, it has been reported that laboratories and clinicians had been ordered to keep repeating the test 30 times or more in order to get a 1 in 30 hit; forcing the false positive result.
When through sheer persistence and cheating, the system finally finds you positive; suddenly the total number of cases would go up by a figure of 30 just based on your own “final result” alone. Because the laboratory might have repeated your test 30 times, your case would be counted as thirty cases!
Now imagine this nauseating and repulsive scenario whilst testing billions of people around the world!
There are just so many ways for the policy makers to use deceit to bulk up their statistics that it beggars belief. Such tricks constitute heinous crimes that are disturbing to our consciences and our souls.
What has been going on is pseudoscience, fakery and fraud.
Instantly, very healthy people testing “positive” are vilified, harassed, intimidated and stigmatised as spreaders of “disease”. Our pockets are emptied and we are impoverished. We would then be manipulated, corralled and coerced into taking their poisonous toxins as vaccines; guaranteed to cut short your longevity, healthspan as well as lifespan.
Alternatively, to cool things down and pretend that the sophistry of the planners of the draconian, ineffective plandemic measures (such as social distancing, masking, lockdowns, the endless vaccinations, trace and track, the use of personal protective equipment, the use of air filters and hand sanitisers, the shutting down of societies, commerce and trade and the ensuing meltdowns) had been effective in temporarily controlling the pre-ordained spread of the illusory virus; at the behest of the controllers, just like flipping a switch, the various parameters on the PCR thermal cycling machine could be altered to magically create the illusion of a “significant decrease” in the number of “positive” cases/deaths.The supposedly significant decrease in cases and deaths would then be strongly and unequivocally causatively linked to the beneficial and positive role of their supposedly preventive public health measures; notably and mainly through the use of their toxic vaccines.
A frequent, regular and constant propaganda piece presented and flaunted about by the media and governments in order to drive/coerce specific, preconceived narratives and evil agendas using mind crowding and encirclement.
The amplification of very small amounts of short and very common DNA segments that could easily belong to humans, bacteria and other organisms does not prove the existence of a specific microbe whatsoever.
Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) must not be perceived as the gold standard of diagnosis with which to assess and compare the reliability of other screening methods for the detection of Sars-Cov-2 or any other viruses. Nor could it be assumed to be a screening method.
The virus has never been isolated and purified and there are no gold standards for its detection and quantitative measurement.
Without the existence of a gold standard for the isolation, purification, detection and quantitative measurement of the virus itself; the use of terms such as true positive, true negative, false positive and false negative would be misleading. Therefore, the spouting of misnomers such as specificity, sensitivity, positive and negative predictive values in attempting to gauge the reliability and accuracy of detection of Sars-Cov-2 or any other virus using the PCR method would be leading us down a deep, long, tortuous and stenching rabbit hole.
PCR technique can not diagnose the existence of microbes.
PCR technique can not diagnose disease.
Presence of a common DNA/RNA sequence does not prove the existence of a specific gene or a specific organism.
Presence of a specific DNA/RNA sequence does not prove the existence and viability of a specific organism.
Natural and harmless RNA/DNA must not be perceived as harmful agents.
Presence of microbes does not prove the existence of disease.
Real science should be about facing the truth without flinching. It must be about honesty, integrity, unbiased enquiry and transparency. It is about thinking and reasoning and arguing. It is about abandoning false beliefs and dogmatic faith.
We must not allow agents of chaos to destroy humanity and the natural world based on fabrications.
Yes, the natural world.
Those same duplicitous people who vehemently espouse the tenets of saving humanity and our planet (not their planet alone) and reducing environmental pollution are the greatest destroyers and polluters of humanity and the natural world themselves.
They are the same minority cabal who are using Covid-19 and future microbial pandemics as a ruse and as a pretext to monopolise both power and the ownership of anything and everything of value under the sun and to try to usher in a dystopian communist world ruled through corruption, kakistocracy and absolutist controls.
A case of doublespeak and hypocrisy.
My tributes, highest regards and praise to the late Dr. Kary Mullis, the Noble Laureate, for his great mind, his scientific contributions, his integrity, incorruptibility, indefatigability and his steadfastness against the prevailing authoritarian and dogmatic systems of control and exploitation.
This article may be freely shared as long as the text is unaltered and the original author, Dr. Freedom, is clearly identified with a hyperlink back to the original article and author.
Huge Victory: Under Pressure, New York Ends Mandatory COVID Testing in Schools
The new guidance follows in the wake of a lawsuit by CHD and eight parents of New York schoolchildren challenging mandatory COVID testing and closing of New York City Schools.
The New York State Education Department issued a letter Feb. 16 informing all public schools in the state that parental consent to COVID-19 tests for their children is not required for in-person instruction, or for participation in any school activities, including extracurricular activities.
The letter, which applies only to public and charter schools, follows in the wake of a lawsuit challenging the closing of New York City Schools and the mandatory testing for students.
The lawsuit was filed Dec.16, 2020, by eight New York City parents and Children’s Health Defense (CHD) against the New York City Department of Education and Mayor Bill de Blasio. The parents are represented by Attorneys James Mermigis, Ray L. Flores II, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CHD chairman and chief legal counsel, and Mary Holland, CHD president and general counsel.
The Feb. 16 letter from Kathleen R. Cataldo, assistant commissioner, Office of Student Support Services said:
“The Department has received reports from the field that some school districts are requiring parents’ consent on behalf of their children, to COVID-19 testing as a condition of activities including in-person learning and extracurricular activities. The Department hereby clarifies that parent/guardian consent for COVID 19 resting of students may not be a condition of in-person learning or other school activities.” (Underlining from the original.)
Since Nov. 19, 2020, children in grades 6-12 have been completely excluded from all in-school education. NYC has provided no specific date by which these students will be back in school.
Since early December, K-5 and special needs students have been able to attend “blended learning,” usually just 1-2 days per week, but only if they submit to in-school polymerase chain reaction (PCR) genetic testing for COVID-19. If parents refused, the education department relegated their kids to remote learning for at least the next 10 months.
NYC schools were open to all students for blended learning September through mid-November, even though all families had the option of remote learning. Mayor de Blasio shut schools down again because of a rise in the city-wide PCR positivity rate.
As plaintiffs’ experts declared in their lawsuit, PCR testing does not diagnose COVID infection, even though NYC has represented to parents that it does. PCR testing generates many false positive results, leading to disruptive and expensive isolation and quarantine, the plaintiffs allege.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that in-school testing without voluntary consent is “unethical and illegal.” Coercing parents to sign consent forms on threat of exclusion is not voluntary, the plaintiffs allege, and the education department is acting in flagrant disregard of federal public health guidance.
As the lawsuit outlined, remote learning disproportionately harms those who can’t afford access to modern technology, including high-speed internet, computers, tablets, printers, scanners and more. Further, most students in NYC are Black and Hispanic, and many parents are wary to submit their kids to medical procedures without their oversight. They wonder what really happens with their children’s test results and DNA samples
NY Teachers for Choice responded to UFT with an open letter to UFT President Michael Mulgrew outlining why NY Teachers for Choice supports the new guidance. The letter ended with:
“Virtually every other school district in New York, and across the country, does not force COVID testing on staff or students because doing so is illegal. I understand and respect that you are trying to do what you believe is best and safest for your membership. However, the UFT should not stand on the side of forcing an illegal practice to take place under its watch. Please accept the new guidance from NYSED and expand upon it to ensure teachers and staff rights are respected as well.”
The lawsuit by CHD and New York parents will continue until the school closure issue is resolved.
How Many People Are the Vaccines Killing?: February 17, 2021 Update
EXPOSED – Pfizer vaccine in the UK. Deaths and injuries include: strokes, heart attacks, miscarriages, Bell’s Palsy, nervous system disorders, immune system disorders, psychiatric disorders and blindness. Deaths and injuries
8 people are now blind after covid jab – Latest AstraZeneca deaths and injuries. As well as blindness, some of the many injuries include: strokes, heart attacks, miscarriages, sepsis, paralysis, Bell’s Palsy, deafness and covid-19. Latest AstraZeneca figures
A 41-year-old Portuguese mother of two who worked in paediatrics died at a hospital in Porto just two days after being vaccinated against covid-19 Portuguese health worker 41 dies
In Florida, U.S., a doctor died after suffering a stroke after receiving a covid-19 vaccination. Death of Florida Doctor
A 32-year-old medical doctor suffered seizures and was paralysed after receiving the covid-19 vaccine. Doctor is paralyzed after…
A 46-year-old healthcare worker dies 24 hours after receiving the covid-19 vaccine but government says death is not related to the jab A 46-year-old healthcare worker…
Those are just some of the possible deaths and injuries that have followed vaccination.
I have no doubt that the authorities will claim that these deaths were coincidental.
And let us remember if a patient dies within 28 days of being tested positive for coronavirus (and the test doesn’t mean that the patient even has the disease since most tests are false positives) then the death will be listed as a covid-19 death and the patient will be said to have died ‘with’ covid-19. So by the same token, it is perfectly reasonable to say that if a patient dies or falls ill within 28 days of being vaccinated then the death or illness was related to the covid-19 vaccine.
Will the mainstream media ever start recording these deaths or illnesses? Or are journalists going to continue to promote the official government line – and to deny, distort or suppress the truth?
How many people have to die before the media wakes up?
Covid-19 vaccine trials to include participants as young as 6 months Covid-19 vaccine trials
Experienced care home manager deeply concerned about the effects of covid-19 and vaccinations, on both staff and the elderly, within care facilities across the country (video) Experienced care home manager deeply concerned…
How those who die following covid jabs are treated in the media How those who die…
Belgian regulators advise against giving AstraZeneca to over 55s Belgian regulators
The pro-vaxxers like to tell you that vaccines are perfectly safe and perfectly effective. Even when they wouldn’t be considered safe enough to use as oven cleaner, the fanatics enthuse about them. Young people and those who know little about medicine or science, talk about vaccines with reverence because they’ve been indoctrinated into believing the pro-vaccine lies.
And the pro-vaxxers are lying, of course.
Vaccines cause a lot of illness and quite a few deaths and they don’t always do what they’re supposed to do. Governments around the world have paid out many billions of dollars to patients who have been made ill by vaccines – or to the relatives of patients who were killed by a vaccine.
There are, for example, grave doubts about what the covid-19 vaccine actually does. Since the vaccine is a new type of vaccine and is being given before the usual tests and observations have been completed no one knows what will happen to the people who have the stuff injected into an arm.
What side effects will there be? How many will die?
Well, I don’t know and nor does anyone else.
What if a woman is pregnant when she has the vaccine or gets pregnant after being given the vaccine? The vaccine isn’t supposed to be given to pregnant women but not all pregnancies are planned.
Will the vaccine interfere with essential life-saving drugs? Many elderly patients already take a number of prescribed drugs. Will the vaccine interfere with them? No one knows. The covid-19 vaccine is the biggest experiment in history. And, unlike a proper clinical trial, it is largely unregulated. As with all vaccines most of the problems which develop will never be reported or recognised.
It is estimated that in the U.S., only 1 in 100 vaccine side effects is reported.
Since I believe everyone is entitled to know what side effects there could be with a heavily promoted vaccine, I’m going to read you the official list of possible side effects. This is, remember, not my list but a draft list compiled by the FDA – the Food and Drug Administration in the US.
Guillain-Barre syndrome
Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis
Transverse myelitis
Encephalitis
Myelitis
Encephalomyelitis
Meningoencephalitis
Meningitis
Encephalopathy
Convulsions
Seizures
Stroke
Narcolepsy
Cataplexy
Anaphylaxis
Acute myocardial infarction (heart attack)
Myocarditis
Pericarditis
Autoimmune disease
Death
Pregnancy, Birth outcomes
Other acute demyelinating diseases
Non anaphylactic allergy reactions
Thromocytopenia
Disseminated intravascular coagulation
Venous thromboembolism
Arthritis
Arthralgia
Joint pain
Kawasaki disease
Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children
Vaccine enhanced disease
You aren’t necessarily going to get all of those or even any of them if you have the vaccine. But those are the possible side effects that the FDA has listed. They’re all unpleasant, most of them very serious and you can’t get more serious than death.
And if you are mad enough to have the vaccine then you and your doctor should keep a look out for the symptoms of all the diseases on the FDA’s list.
Your government won’t tell you about these dangers – they don’t believe in fully informed consent as far as vaccines are concerned.
Indeed, most governments are now doing everything they can to ensure that all criticisms of vaccines are banned. Depending on where you live it is, or soon will be, illegal even to mention that vaccines might not always work or might make you ill.
Finally, if your government really cared about you they would conduct a very simple, cheap trial.
They would keep a note of all the health problems affecting 20,000 patients who had the vaccine and compare that list with a list of all the health problems affecting 20,000 patients who didn’t have the vaccine in the same period. They make the comparisons every 3, 6 and 12 months.
Of course, they’d have to find some honest doctors to oversee the trial because it would be very easy to fiddle.
But it would give some very interesting results so I doubt if they’ll be doing it.
Travelers Entering UK Must Pay to Quarantine in Gov-Sanctioned Hotel for 10 Days
As of Monday, travelers arriving in the United Kingdom from one of thirty-three “red list” countries are being ordered to quarantine in a government-sanctioned hotel for over a week or face a large fine.
Those travelers coming in from any country on the government’s new “red list” must also pre-book and pay £1,750 ($2,120) to stay in the sanctioned hotel, an order which amounts to a large tax burden on travelers and will likely be another blow to the desperately struggling travel industry. The cost will cover the room, testing and transport, according to the BBC.
The additional rates for one extra adult or a child aged over 12 is £650 ($788), and for a child aged five to 12 it is £325 ($394).
If the quarantine order is broken, the government is ready to issue a £10,000 ($12,114.90) fine.
If a traveler is found to be lying about where they are coming from, they will also face a £10,000 fine and potentially up to ten years in prison.
Upon arriving, travelers coming from a listed country will be escorted by government-contracted security guards to a bus which will take them to isolation.
Image Credit: PA MEDIA. / https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56064759
A woman gestures to members of the media while quarantined
at Radisson Blu Edwardian Hotel at Heathrow Airport
The government’s red list includes Portugal, South Africa, Ecuador, Venezuela, and the United Arab Emirates.
The new restrictions are coming into play over health official concern of new strains of COVID-19.
The travel sector has warned that the crackdown has hit the industry in what would normally be the busy half-term week as well as a crucial time for summer bookings.
“The industry simply cannot afford to wait until everyone in the UK is vaccinated before people start to travel again — otherwise insolvencies and redundancies will be inevitable,” ABTA, the trade association for the travel industry, said.
Figures released by the Office for National Statistics on Friday showed that economic output of travel agents and tour operators fell 86 per cent in December 2020 compared with February 2020, while air transport output fell 89 per cent.
Heathrow Airport CEO John Holland-Kaye said in a statement last week that Britain’s new measures are “essentially a border closure that will inevitably delay the country’s recovery and hurt the UK’s supply chains.”
“The world is more locked down today than at virtually any point in the past 12 months and passengers face a bewildering array of rapidly changing and globally uncoordinated travel restrictions,” International Air Transport Association (IATA) CEO Alexandre de Juniac said in a statement this month, adding that airlines would need continued government financial support to stay afloat.
According to the IATA, if the over-the-top travel restrictions stay in place, international passenger demand could only amount to 38% of that seen in 2019. Demand in 2020 only covered a quarter of 2019 demand.
As CNN notes, “It’s not just airlines at stake. Thousands of companies rely on travel and tourism to earn an income. These firms employed 330 million people globally in 2019, according to the World Travel and Tourism Council. The industry body estimates more than half of these workers have been laid off or are currently on furlough.”
By controlling the media, billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates can prolong a crisis indefinitely while they accumulate unprecedented wealth and power over humanity.
On Feb. 15, the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post published a Feb. 11 Associated Press article applauding the censorship of those who criticize the government’s pandemic response policies.
Gates used millions in grants to transform the once proudly unbridled The Guardian into his personal newsletter. With $250 million, he purchased immunity from criticism by news operations like the BBC, NBC, Al Jazeera, ProPublica, National Journal, Univision, Medium, the Financial Times, The Atlantic, the Texas Tribune, Gannett, Washington Monthly, Le Monde and the Center for Investigative Reporting.
Gates also made large contributions to charitable organizations affiliated with news outlets, like BBC Media Action and the The New York Times, according to an August 2020 investigation by Columbia Journalism Review. He similarly disarmed NPR and Public Television by making them reliant on his support. In exchange, these outlets shield his sketchy projects from critical scrutiny.
Gates is arguably the world’s biggest vaccine maker. As its largest contributor, Gates controls the World Health Organization which, according to Foreign Affairs, makes no significant decision without consulting the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He similarly exercises dictatorial authority over an army of quasi-governmental agencies that he largely created or funds: Path, GAVI CEPI, Unicef etc. These agencies have demonstrated their power to turn the globe into a captive market for Gates’ vaccine enterprise.
The mainstream network news shows, including CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox have put COVID Terror, Vaccines Salvation and the obligatory shaming of dissidents on a 24-hour loop with each segment (and I use this term in every sense of the word) with pharmaceutical advertisements.
These outlets have turned their weekly talk shows into fawning hagiographies for Gates’ regular satellite tours in which credulous, obsequious Sunday morning talk show hosts lob softball medical questions to a billionaire with no public health training.
Nobody ever asks Gates or his mini-me, Tony Fauci, why they chose to spend tens of billions in taxpayer dollars on speculative vaccines and zero dollars investigating the many off-the-shelf, off-patent medications that have demonstrated extraordinary success in the hands of private doctors — medications that might have ended the pandemic a year ago.
The media, which has enabled this global hostage crisis, is arguably the most consequential criminal enterprise in human history. As Rahm Emmanuel observed, “never let a good crisis go to waste.”
Gates and Fauci have demonstrated that by controlling the media, billionaires and their government cronies can prolong a crisis forever and accumulate unprecedented wealth and power over humanity.
“They didn’t isolate the virus,” Chief Chinese epidemiologist tells NBC News
“They didn’t isolate the virus,” Chief Chinese epidemiologist tells NBC News — referring to
samples taken from the Wuhan market a year ago
The Chinese scientist’s name is Dr. Wu Zunyou. He is the chief epidemiologist at the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. NBC News reporter, Janis Mackey Frayer, conducted a brief interview with Dr. Zunyou on January 23, 2021.
Frayer mentioned that “samples” were taken, a year ago, at the beginning of the “outbreak,” from the infamous Huanan market in Wuhan. She then asked Dr. Zunyou, “Why has the data not been shared?”
He answered, “They didn’t isolate the virus.” He was referring to tissue samples taken from animals sold at the market.
That’s an interesting answer. Why have researchers and scientists claimed SARS-CoV-2 crossed species from animals to humans at that market, when no one ever isolated the virus from samples taken at the market?
The next, and far bigger question, is: When Dr. Zunyou says, “They didn’t isolate the virus,” is he ONLY referring to tissue samples taken from animals at the market? Or does his answer also apply to the first 40 human cases of pneumonia in Wuhan, which were claimed to result from a newly discovered coronavirus?
I’ve queried Dr. Zunyou. We’ll see if he replies.
I’ve spent the last year demonstrating that no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists. I’ve also explained why people are dying, why the PCR test is meaningless and useless and deceptive, why the case and death numbers are meaningless, and why the con is being foisted on the global population.
Since the early days of the “pandemic,” many scientists authoring papers have claimed they isolated the virus. However, I’ve explained how, in Orwellian fashion, they torture and twist and reverse the meaning of the word, “isolate,” so it signifies the opposite of what it ACTUALLY means.
I’ve also explained that the so-called genetic sequencing of the virus is another con. It isn’t the result of looking through some sort of cosmic microscope at genes lined up like cars in a supermarket parking lot. It’s a process using a computer program to stitch together DATA— PRESUMED pieces of a virus—based on speculation, bias, pretension, and sheer hype. Rather than science.
Based on no evidence of a new virus, the Chinese regime locked down 50 million citizens. Fairly soon, they lifted the lockdowns and pushed their economy into high gear again.
They provided the model of lockdowns to the West, where elite players—Bill Gates, the CDC, the World Health Organization, the United Nations—praised the Chinese regime and adopted their lockdown strategy; thus wrecking national economies and hundreds of millions of lives.
This is called a COVERT OPERATION. It had nothing to do with science. The operation was based on selling A STORY ABOUT A VIRUS.
For literate people, the word “isolate” indicates: a thing is separated from all other material surrounding it. Very simple. However, for virologists, the word means: “We have the virus in a soup in a dish in the lab.” UN-ISOLATED.
Virologists state: The soup consists of the virus, plus human and animal cells, plus (toxic) drugs and chemicals, plus all sorts of other genetic material.
They know the virus is in the soup, because some of the cells are dying. The virus must be killing the cells.
WRONG. The toxic drugs and chemicals could certainly be killing the cells. The cells are also being starved of vital nutrients, and that fact alone could account for cell-death.
There is no isolation. There is no proof a virus is in the soup. There is no proof a virus is killing cells. There is no proof the virus exists.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Book mentioned by Dr. Cowan:
Virus Mania: Corona/COVID-19, Measles, Swine Flu, Cervical Cancer, Avian Flu, SARS, BSE, Hepatitis C, AIDS, Polio. How the Medical Industry … Making Billion-Dollar Profits At Our Expense
Read the forward to Virus Mania by Etienne de Harven HERE.
After Fauci admitted last week there’s no science to support “double masking,” the CDC has now officially ruled that wearing two masks can decrease exposure to infectious aerosols by up to 95%…after lab testing on dummies.
653 Deaths + 12,044 Other Injuries Reported Following COVID Vaccine, Latest CDC Data Show
The numbers reflect the latest data available as of Feb. 4 from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System website. Of the 653 reported deaths, 602 were from the U.S. The average age of those who died was 77, the youngest was 23.
VAERS is the primary mechanism for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before confirmation can be made that the reported adverse event was caused by the vaccine.
As of Feb. 10, about 44.77 million people in the U.S. had received one or both doses of a COVID vaccine. So far, only the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines have been granted Emergency Use Authorization in the U.S. by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). By the FDA’s own definition, the vaccines are still considered experimental until fully licensed.
According to the latest data, 602 of the 653 reported deaths were in the U.S, and 137 of the deaths were related to cardiac disorder. Fifty-three percent of those who died were male, 44% were female, the remaining death reports did not include the gender of the deceased. The average age of those who died was 77, the youngest reported death was of a 23-year-old. The Pfizer vaccine was taken by 58% of those who died, while the Moderna vaccine was taken by 41%.
As The Defender reported today, the CDC is investigating the Feb. 8 death of a 36-year-old doctor in Tennessee who died about a month after receiving the second dose of a COVID vaccination. According to news reports, Dr. Barton Williams died from the adult form of multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-A), a condition caused when the immune system attacks the body resulting in multi-system organ failure. New reports attributed the death to a reaction to an asymptomatic case of COVID, although Williams never tested positive for the virus.
On Feb. 8, Fox5 reported the death of a man in his 70s who collapsed and died Feb. 7 as he was leaving the Javits Center in Manhattan about 25 minutes after receiving a COVID vaccination.
On Feb. 7, a local Villa Hills, Kentucky news site reported on the deaths of two nuns following a “COVID-19 outbreak” that occurred two days after the nuns were vaccinated. Prior to beginning the vaccination program, there had been no cases of COVID at the monastery, which has been shut down to visitors during the pandemic. After vaccinations began, 28 of the women had tested positive for COVID as of Feb. 7.
The Defender also reported this week that according to the New York Times, several doctors now link the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines to immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), a condition that develops when the immune system attacks platelets (blood component essential for clotting) or the cells that create them. The Times article featured two women who are recovering from ITP after being vaccinated. Last month, Dr. Gregory Michaels died from ITP two weeks after he got the Pfizer vaccine.
While the VAERS database numbers may seem sobering, according to a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services study, the actual number of adverse events is likely significantly higher. VAERS is a passive surveillance system that relies on the willingness of individuals to submit reports voluntarily.
According to the VAERS website, healthcare providers are required by law to report to VAERS:
Any adverse event listed in the VAERS Table of Reportable Events Following Vaccination that occurs within the specified time period after vaccination.
An adverse event listed by the vaccine manufacturer as a contraindication to further doses of the vaccine.
The CDC says healthcare providers are strongly encouraged to report:
Any adverse event that occurs after the administration of a vaccine licensed in the United States, whether or not it is clear that a vaccine caused the adverse event.
Vaccine administration errors.
However, “within the specified time” means that reactions occurring outside that timeframe may not be reported, in addition to reactions suffered hours or days later by people who don’t report those reactions to their healthcare provider.
Vaccine manufacturers are required to report to VAERS “all adverse events that come to their attention.”
Historically, fewer than fewer than 1% of adverse events have ever been reported to VAERS, a system that Children’s Health Defense has previously referred to as an “abject failure,” including in a December 2020 letter to Dr. David Kessler, former FDA director and now co-chair of the COVID-19 Advisory Board and President Biden’s version of Operation Warp Speed.
A critic familiar with VAERS’ shortcomings bluntly condemned VAERS in The BMJ as “nothing more than window dressing, and a part of U.S. authorities’ systematic effort to reassure/deceive us about vaccine safety.”
CHD is calling for complete transparency. The children’s health organization is asking Kessler and the federal government to release all of the data from the clinical trials and suspend COVID-19 vaccine use in any group not adequately represented in the clinical trials, including the elderly, frail and anyone with comorbidities.
CHD is also asking for full transparency in post-marketing data that reports all health outcomes, including new diagnoses of autoimmune disorders, adverse events and deaths from COVID vaccines.
Children’s Health Defense asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps.
Stephen writes in to ask about excess mortality. What is this number, how do we find it, and what does it tell us (or fail to tell us) about what happened in 2020? Is there a slam dunk argument here to destroy the COVID narrative? And, if not, what is the real lesson of this hunt for excess deaths? Join James for an in-depth exploration of these issues in this week’s Questions For Corbett.
RFK, Jr.’s Instagram account was deplatformed Wednesday. Dozens of media outlets reported the censorship, saying the account was removed over “vaccine misinformation,” a characterization Kennedy unequivocally rejected.
Kennedy, founder, chairman and chief legal counsel of Children’s Health Defense,” unequivocally rejects those characterizations as false and misleading.
Children’s Health Defense (CHD), including Kennedy, advocates for vaccine safety and health freedom. CHD’s mission is to end childhood health epidemics by exposing the causes, eliminating harmful exposures, holding those responsible accountable and seeking justice for those harmed.
As Kennedy has said many times, for a democracy to function, civil debate of issues — including vaccine science — must be allowed. Censorship of that debate is anathema to democracy.
Kennedy and Mary Holland, CHD president and general counsel, issued the following statements on Instagram’s removal of Kennedy’s account:
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman of Children’s Health Defense, said:
“Every statement I put on Instagram was sourced from a government database, from peer-reviewed publications and from carefully confirmed news stories. None of my posts were false. Facebook, the pharmaceutical industry and its captive regulators use the term ‘vaccine misinformation’ as a euphemism for any factual assertion that departs from official pronouncements about vaccine health and safety, whether true or not. This kind of censorship is counterproductive if our objective is a safe and effective vaccine supply.
“The pharmaceutical industry is hastily creating vaccines using taxpayer money and untested technologies. These include a rash of risky new products that are exempt from liability, from long-term safety testing and that have not received FDA approval. Emergency Use Authorization is a mass population scientific experiment. If it has any prayer of working, it will require extraordinary scrutiny from the press and the public.
“Instead, the mainstream media and social media giants are imposing a totalitarian censorship to prevent public health advocates, like myself, from voicing concerns and from engaging in civil informed debate in the public square. They are punishing, shaming, vilifying, gaslighting and abolishing individuals who report their own vaccine injuries.
“Anyone can see that this is a formula for catastrophe and a coup d’état against the First Amendment, the foundation stone of American democracy.”
Mary Holland, President of Children’s Health Defense, said:
“Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of democracy. Children’s Health Defense and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. provide critically needed information on environmental culprits, including vaccines, that are linked to many chronic diseases that now affect 54% of America’s children. Dr. Anthony Fauci has made it clear that young children will be included in COVID-19 vaccination plans even though children have almost zero risk of serious COVID-19 illness. CHD feels strongly that children should not take on 100% risks of vaccine injuries with 0% benefit.
“The sad reality is vaccine injuries can and do happen. The U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database has more than 11,500 COVID-19 vaccine adverse event reports including more than 500 deaths in just six weeks since the vaccination campaign began. Why would Instagram censor Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s platform and call it ‘misinformation’? Why now?
“Instagram deplatformed Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Hirewire host, Del Bigtree, just 15 minutes before they were to air the webinar, ‘COVID Vaccine on Trial, If You Only Knew’ highlighting COVID concerns, injuries, mechanisms and other facts from four MDs, several Ph.D.s and leaders from the vaccine-injured community. COVID-19 vaccines use novel technology never before used in a human population. With that comes great unknown risks. The people of the world deserve to have this crucial information to protect their health and that of their children.”
“This Isn’t Care, It’s Torture”: Long-Term Care Home Safety Policies Are Hurting Seniors
Those were some of the last words Michelle Woolman spoke in the presence of her dying mother, Jaqueline Woolman, as she and her two siblings served her water from a sponge after being told by nursing home staff that their mother had refused water, and therefore hadn’t had any for two days.
Jaqueline’s body was tired. Although her children lovingly stood by her side to let her know it was okay to let go, they were angry. Angry because they were being robbed not only of future moments with their mother, but also of a dignified goodbye, especially since the government mandated new normal means that many elderly in care homes are isolated from loved ones.
Fear of COVID-19 has brought us as a society to turn a blind eye on many inhumane restrictions. While it’s true we have to protect those who are most at risk from the virus, isolation from their loved ones in their last days is causing more harm than good to many.
A large study on elderly residing in a live-in care agency found an increase in loneliness since the great lockdown. Twenty per cent of those over the age of 70 spoke to their family less, and 40 per cent hadn’t left their home for months.
An Ontario woman in her 90s found the isolation so unbearable that she opted to end her life through medical assistance in dying, rather than go through any more social isolation.
As you’ll see in this interview with Kimberly Woolman, another one of the late Jacqueline Woolman’s adult children, Jacqueline also struggled with being forced to isolate from her children in her last days. Even the Zoom meetings that she found some solace in were forbidden at times, causing distress for the whole family.
Many parents are asking what they can do for their school-age children who are being forced to wear face masks in school. Schools are not listening to parents and are refusing to accommodate those who physically cannot or don’t want to wear masks.
We have received some anecdotal stories that wearing a mask at school is causing physical or psychological harm to some children. We want to dig deeper, and ask you to help.
If you have a first-hand story that you can share, CFFS has set up a new web site to collect such reports.
By first-hand, we mean that you must be directly involved with the student and are not making a second-hand report of something you have heard from someone else. Reports for any other reason or topic will be deleted without notice or apology.
Pfizer and Moderna mRNA inoculations aren’t what they’re promoted to be.
As medically defined by the CDC, vaccines are supposed to stimulate the “immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease.”
Immunization is a “process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination.”
The above is not what mRNA inoculations are designed to do. They’re something else entirely.
They’re gene modifying delivery systems that don’t produce immunity —what Moderna calls “gene therapy technology.”
Not designed to prevent seasonal flu-renamed covid illness, at most they may somewhat reduce symptoms short-term.
Promoting mRNA technology as vaccine protection from covid is part of a state-approved/media proliferated mass deception scam.
The above technology is unapproved by the FDA for human use because it’s experimental, inadequately tested, and high-risk — especially for the elderly with weakened immune systems.
The nanoparticle-based delivery system is unapproved.
mRNA inoculations contain hazardous polyethylene glycol (PEG) to deliver their DNA-altering technology to human cells.
The risk of adverse events increases greatly from follow-up inoculations, including to potentially life-threatening anaphylactic shock.
In 2017, Moderna abandoned mRNA technology and lipid nanoparticles because tests caused large numbers of adverse effects.
Yet the same gene therapy and nanoparticle delivery system are used by Moderna and Pfizer in their misnamed mRNA “vaccines” that aren’t what they’re called.
According to statnews.com, “mRNA is a tricky technology.”
“Several major pharmaceutical companies have tried and abandoned the idea, struggling to get mRNA into cells without triggering nasty side effects.”
“(N)anoparticles created a daunting challenge: Dose too little, and you don’t get enough enzyme to affect the disease.”
“(D)ose too much, and the drug is too toxic for patients.”
“Moderna could not make its therapy work, former employees and collaborators said.”
“The safe dose was too weak, and repeat injections of a dose strong enough to be effective had troubling effects on the liver in animal studies.”
Moderna earlier admitted that its lipid nanoparticles (LNP) risked “significant adverse events,” adding:
“No mRNA drug has been approved in this new potential category of medicines, and may never be approved as a result of efforts by others or us.”
“mRNA drug development has substantial clinical development and regulatory risks due to the novel and unprecedented nature of this new category of medicines.”
“(T)here can be no assurance that our LNPs will not have undesired effects.”
According to virologist Judy Mikovits, LNPs can enter the brain, risking pathologic neuro-inflammation that could cause multiple sclerosis, ALS, or other serious diseases.
Johns Hopkins explained that potentially serious adverse events may occur after receiving follow-up mRNA inoculations.
According to Children’s Health Defense, “doctors link Pfizer (and) Moderna ‘vaccines’ to (a) life-threatening blood disorder.”
Health Impact News reported the following:
“An entire school district in Ohio canceled classes on Monday this week after so many of the staff suffered side effects from one of the experimental COVID mRNA injections over the weekend.”
Fox News Cleveland reported that “(t)wo days after employees were given their first round of COVID-19 vaccinations, the Fairless Local School District canceled classes, attributing it to many developing side effects and becoming ill.”
Similar events to the above are happening in the US and European countries after Pfizer and Moderna inoculations.
The more people jabbed, the more adverse events that at times are fatal.
Going along with experimental mRNA inoculations is playing Russian roulette with human health.
There’s high risk of things turning out badly in the short or longer-term.
Deceased 39-year-old Dr. Keshav Raman Sharma is an mRNA statistic.
Inoculated on January 5, he was found dead at home five days later.
He’s not alone. Others suffered the same fate.
Protecting health and well-being requires avoidance of these experimental, inadequately tested high-risk, unapproved inoculations.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Transcript
We all know now that PCR tests are useless for finding cases of covid-19 but very good at helping governments keep us in our own homes under house arrest. In some parts of the world the PCR tests are banned as utterly useless. I explained precisely what’s wrong with these misused tests in a an article on this website subtly called `The PCR Test Is Useless for Covid-19 (But Useful for Crooked Governments).
The big problem, of course, is that the British Government, for example, deliberately ignores the WHO guidelines and does the test in a crooked way which would, in a just and sensible world, result in Johnson, Hancock and their advisors crowded into the dock.
You’d get as good a result if you just divided people into two groups: those with a vowel in their surname and those without a vowel, and then announced that the ones with the vowel all had covid-19 and the rest all needed to change their names within seven days or pay a huge fine.
So, everyone with functioning brain tissue knows that the PCR test is useless, except for political reasons, and that the whole testing programme is an outrageously expensive and disruptive shambles. Only government ministers, scientific advisors and pseudo-journalists at the wretched BBC think that PCR tests are valuable. Did you know, by the way, that the Government has allegedly hired 900 consultants to help with the test and trace scheme? The consultants are being paid £1,000 a day each though what they do for that I cannot imagine. That’s £900,000 a day. I suspect that 99.99% of the population would be happier if the £900,000 a day were spent on dentists.
But that’s not the half of it. Most people seem to have accepted the need for regular PCR testing. Indeed, people in the UK queue up to have it done as often as possible – as though they get some sort of thrill out of having a complete stranger stuff something into a bodily orifice – pushing it in as far as it will go, twizzling it about a bit, and then pulling it out and buggering off without so much as `a thank you very much I’ll give you a ring tomorrow and we’ll have dinner and then do it again’.
There is talk of children having daily tests though I haven’t been able to find any evidence that this would be a good idea for anyone other than the hugely profitable industry now involved in making and looking at the swabs .
What no one ever mentions is that the PCR tests are dangerous and can, if done improperly, cause excrutiating pain. This is probably why some countries don’t like them. There is indeed a great deal of confusion about how far the swab should go. (Or should that be the Klaus Schwab) In Australia the guidelines are that the swab should only go a few centimetres up the nostril but nasopharyngeal swabs can go much further. The United States Department of Health and Human services says that the swab should reach a depth equal to the distance from the nostril to the outer opening of the ear. That’s a huge distance. In Ottawa, Canada, the recommendation is half that distance.
In October last year I reported on at least one case where a healthy individual had noticed cerebrospinal fluid pouring out of her nose after an invasive PCR test. That really isn’t something you want happening. The woman concerned, who was in her 40s, had a PCR nasal swab test and later went to see a doctor complaining of vomiting, a runny nose, a headache and a stiff neck. The pseudo-journalists at the BBC can, if they are interested in facts, find the details in the JAMA Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. Surgeons found that the fluid running down her nose was cerebrospinal fluid – the fluid that protects the brain.
Then there was the case which was accepted for The Medical Journal of Australia on the 4th December but which I don’t think has been published yet. This reported a healthy 67-year-old woman who had cerebrospinal fluid coming down her nose and the symptoms of meningitis. This followed a covid-19 swab test. How many are being killed – especially in care homes – by this useless and dangerous test?
The authors of the paper stated that the `techniques for deep nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs may be easily confused’. They offer instructions for those conducting the tests. Here’s one part of their instructions: `it involves swab insertion into the nasal cavity at a plane between the opening of the nose and the external ear canal on the patient, which can be considered as the horizontal plane for the purpose of relationship to surface anatomy. This will allow the swab to be inserted parallel to the nasal floor which would avoid injury to the middle turbinates. Swabs inserted in an upward orientation into the nasal cavity, (greater than 30 degrees) not only have a risk of failing to achieve an adequate diagnostic sample from the desired nasal mucosa and nasopharynx but also puts the patient at greater risk of injury to the thin and delicate areas of the skull base (attachment of middle turbinate and cribriform plate) which are superior and anterior to the sphenoid sinus ostium.’ There is then an illustration for swabbing and the authors conclude: `We urge that this angle is not exceeded when performing diagnostic tests as it places the patient at greatest risk of serious adverse events.’
I suggest that anyone having a PCR test should ensure that the person holding the swab has studied and understood these instructions – and will follow them.
In Tripura, a three-day-old boy bled to death after a nasal swab test. In Saudi Arabia an eighteen month old child died after a test swab broke inside his nasal cavity. These are not safe tests. Children are being traumatised by these incredibly invasive tests. These are not safe procedures and they’re often being done by people who know as much about medicine and human anatomy as I know about running a submarine – though I have seen Ice Station Zebra with Patrick McGoohan, and that film with Gene Hackman and Denzel Washington in it. And there was Red October with Sean Connery. Actually, come to think about it, I probably know far more about submarines than the average test and tracer tester knows about anatomy.
Quite a few things have puzzled me about the PCR test.
First, why the devil do they have to push the swab so far up your nose – and so close to your brain. Where is the indisputable scientific evidence that all the little covid-19 bugs are gathering up there for some reason? Do they like out of the way places? Normally, if you have a bug in your nose it will be in your nose. Where is the solid proof that the test only works if a sample is taken from a spot so far up your nose that the tissue up there probably speaks another language and only gets home once a year? Since these tests are now being performed by people who aren’t doctors or nurses or probably even boy scouts, we need some evidence that the test is essential. Actually, since the tests produce more false positives than real positives they are clearly a waste of time anyway and it would make as much sense if the testing swab were inserted into the umbilicus and given a good twizzle there.
Second, researchers at Johns Hopkins University in the US published a study describing a device which has been developed. It’s a tiny, star shaped micro-device capable of delivering a drug. The devices are no larger than a speck of dust but contain a metal core coated in heat sensitive paraffin wax. At the centre of the core there is the drug.
Now, we know that around half of Americans are reluctant to have the covid-19 vaccination.
I think that this hidden injection technology could be used to vaccinate people through nasal or anal PCR swabs. Is this why anal swabs are being introduced? The procedure works best on intestinal tissue.
This could be used to deliver a vaccine to people without their knowledge or consent.
People who think they are just being tested could be receiving the mRNA jab.
Is this going to happen? Is it going to happen?
How the hell would we know?
The authorities are already collecting the names and details of people who have declined the vaccine. Are they planning to use the PCR test to those who refuse the vaccination?
We cannot trust the government or its advisers. We cannot trust the mainstream media. We definitely cannot trust the BBC which has financial links to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and which long ago betrayed us. We can only trust one another.
Giving vaccines nasally is nothing new. Children sometimes have the flu vaccine sprayed up their noses – that’s a live attenuated vaccine, by the way. Attenuated means it’s weaker. But it could still kill granny, of course. Personally, I might use the stuff to clear the drains but I wouldn’t squirt it up a child’s nose.
And you should perhaps know this: nasal vaccinations are already used on cattle.
Copyright Vernon Coleman February 9th 2021
“Never-Before-Seen Strange COVID Symptoms”? Try Using Logic
UPDATE: one of the “strange and unique” COVID symptoms, cited to prove “the virus must be the cause,” is loss of the sense of smell. Try this. On a search engine, type in, “Mayo Clinic, loss of smell, causes.” You’ll find a long list of conventional explanations. [1] Nothing new or unique…
Recently, I published an article explaining why people are dying without the presence of a virus. It’s the great COVID re-labeling scam. [2]
All sorts of traditional lung problems are re-packaged as “COVID.”
Of course, I’ve also been writing many articles showing that SARS-CoV-2 has never been proven to exist. [3]
I’ve made it clear that in every so-called epidemic, there are “outlier cases.” People with unusual symptoms. Commenters pick up on these outliers and weave all sorts of stories around them.
COVID is no different in this respect. The stories begin with reports that “some patients” have extreme shortness of breath, or their chest X-rays reveal “ground glass” lung patterns.
Therefore, the stories go, SARS-CoV-2 must exist, or another massive and singular cause is creating these highly unusual symptoms.
First of all, in the reports, we don’t know HOW MANY patients have the unusual symptoms. Is it 10? 50? 500? And are they all from the same city or town? We’re fed a generality.
And second, no one bothers to look for prosaic causes of these “strange symptoms.” Of course not. That would be too obvious. Too simple. Less interesting.
Let me give you an example. Extreme shortness of breath. Hypoxia. Low oxygen levels in the blood. That’s one of the “strange symptoms.”
Patients in New York have mystified ER doctors because they show up with this condition.
But WebMD lists a number of obvious causes for hypoxia: asthma attack; trauma (injury); COPD; emphysema; bronchitis; pain medicines, “and other drugs that hold back breathing”; heart problems; anemia, “a low number of red blood cells, which carry oxygen.” [4]
Among the drugs that can cause the oxygen deprivation known as hypoxia? From drugabuse.com: “…opiate [opioid] drugs also slow your breathing…and in case of an overdose, your breathing is slowed to a virtually non-existent and lethal level.” [5]
Is anyone looking into THAT, in New York?
More from drugabuse.com: “In the U.S., a whopping 44 people die each and every day as a result of respiratory arrest brought on by prescription opioid overdose. The opioids depress your breathing, bring on heavy sedation and make it impossible to wake up. What’s more, the opioids found in painkillers are the same ones found in heroin, which caused over 8,000 overdose deaths in 2013.”
2018 estimate of deaths from opioid overdoses in New York: 3000. Many more people in the New York area are addicted to these drugs. In New York State, in 2017, the number of people discharged from hospitals, after treatment for opioid overdose or dependency: 25,000. [6]
In 2020, people who have developed opioid hypoxia are misdiagnosed with “COVID-19 lung problems.” Some of these people would be sedated further, put on ventilators—ignoring the need to deal with their overdose, their addiction, their withdrawal—and they die. [7] [8]
New York City, opioids, heroin, severe breathing problems, hypoxia, ventilators with sedation, death.
None of this requires the existence or transmission of a purported coronavirus.
And hypoxia can be alleviated with oxygen delivered through means other than ventilators.
So…it turns out that extreme shortness of breath is not unusual. It has a number of causes. None of them requires the existence of a virus.
Now let’s consider the so-called “ground glass” phenomenon. From MEDPAGE Today: “The term [ground glass] refers to the hazy, white-flecked pattern seen on lung CT scans, indicative of increased density.” [9]
“Chest radiologists adopted it [the term] in the 1980s, with a first appearance in the Fleischner Society Glossary of Terms for Thoracic Radiology in 1984.”
“’We see [ground-glass opacities] so often in chest imaging,’ Guo [‘Henry Guo, MD, PhD, of Stanford University in Palo Alto, California’] told MedPage Today. “They come in different shapes, sizes, quantities, and locations, and they can indicate many different underlying pathologies — including other viral infections, chronic lung disease, fibrosis, other inflammatory conditions, and cancers.”
So there’s nothing new or highly strange about the ground glass phenomenon.
But wait. There’s more. “Adam Bernheim, MD, of the Mount Sinai system in New York City, authored one of the early papers on chest CT findings in COVID-19. He and his colleagues studied images captured from 121 patients at four centers in China mostly in late January [2020].”
“’There are a lot of diseases that can cause ground-glass opacities, but in COVID-19, there’s a distinct distribution, a preference for certain parts of the lung,’ chiefly in the lower lobes and periphery, and it appears multifocally and bilaterally, Bernheim said.”
“COVID-related ground-glass opacities also have a very round shape that’s ‘really unusual compared with other ground-glass opacities,’ he said.”
Aha. So maybe COVID patients ARE exhibiting an outlier pattern of ground glass.
Alas, there are several problems with that assertion:
First of all, how do we define a “COVID patient?” Through a PCR test for a virus that has never been proved to exist.
The second problem with the doctor’s statement in the MEDPAGE article? All the patients came from China, and they were diagnosed very early, at the beginning of the “outbreak.” How were they diagnosed?
“Guess what? We have 20 patients with unusual CT lung scans. We’re going to call them ‘pandemic victims of a new virus.’ Why? Because they have unusual CT lung scans.” This is called circular reasoning. It’s a chapter in a subject called logic, which used to be taught in schools, before “I’m triggered” and “I want to cancel everything” became major courses on the way to a PhD in Grunge. [10]
The other problem has to do with deadly pollution, and what lung X-ray patterns it can cause. In China, for example, above large cities like Wuhan, there is a unique mixture of early industrial and modern industrial pollutants—never before seen in human history. [11]
The synergistic effects of these individually toxic compounds have never been studied. Therefore, it’s quite possible that the outlier ground glass patterns are the result of this new and different air pollution mixture.
What I’m reporting, in this article, needs to be understood, before making bald claims that a new virus, or some other esoteric cause, is responsible for “ground glass in COVID patients” or “low oxygen levels.”
Getting the picture?
Going off on tangents—claiming that “some COVID patients” are showing astounding symptoms—makes for shocking stories, but it doesn’t take into account far more likely explanations.
People with a propensity for launching shocking stories will never be satisfied with ordinary answers. They’ll keep driving their tales forward. They’ll keep claiming patients are showing symptoms that have never been seen before.
Some shocking stories are true. Some aren’t. I suggest using a degree of rationality and logic, to differentiate between what is merely bizarre for its own sake, and what is strange AND true.
Even the Robert Koch Institute and other health authorities cannot present decisive proof that a new virus named SARS-CoV-2 is haunting us. This alone turns the talk of dangerous viral mutations into irresponsible fearmongering and the so-called SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests definitely into a worthless venture.
In a request for a study which shows complete isolation and purification of the particles claimed to be SARS-CoV-2, Michael Laue from one of the world’s most important representatives of the COVID-19 “panicdemic,” the German Robert Koch Institute (RKI), answered that[1]:
I am not aware of a paper which purified isolated SARS-CoV-2.
This is a more than remarkable statement, it is admitting a complete failure. This concession is in line with the statements we presented in our article “COVID-19 PCR Tests Are Scientifically Meaningless” which OffGuardian published on June 27th, 2020 — a piece that was the first one worldwide outlining in detail why SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests are worthless for the diagnosis of a viral infection.
One of the crucial points in this analysis was that the studies contending to have shown that SARS-CoV-2 is a new and potentially deadly virus have no right to claim this, particularly because the studies claiming “isolation” of so-called SARS-CoV-2 in fact failed to isolate (purify) the particles said to be the new virus.
This is confirmed by the answers of the respective studies’ scientists to our inquiry, which are shown in a table in our piece — among them the world’s most important paper when it comes to the claim of having detected SARS-CoV-2 (by Zhu et al.), published in the New England Journal of Medicine on February 20, 2020, and now even the RKI.
Incidentally, we are in possession of a further confirmatory answer from authors [2] of an Australian study.
WANTED, IN VAIN: SARS-COV-2 VIRUS
Additionally, Christine Massey, a Canadian former biostatistician in the field of cancer research, and a colleague of hers in New Zealand, Michael Speth, as well as several individuals around the world (most of whom prefer to remain anonymous) have submitted Freedom of Information requests to dozens of health and science institutions and a handful of political offices around the world.
They are seeking any records that describe the isolation of a SARS-COV-2 virus from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.
But all 46 responding institutions/offices utterly failed to provide or cite any record describing “SARS-COV-2” isolation; and Germany’s Ministry of Health ignored their FOI request altogether.
The German entrepreneur Samuel Eckert asked health authorities from various cities such as München (Munich), Dusseldorf and Zurich for a study proving complete isolation and purification of so-called SARS-CoV-2. He has not obtained it yet.
REWARDS FOR PROOF OF ISOLATION AND CAUSALITY
Samuel Eckert even offered €230,000 to Christian Drosten if he can present any text passages from publications that scientifically prove the process of isolation of SARS-CoV-2 and its genetic substance. The deadline (December 31, 2020) has passed without Drosten responding to Eckert.
And another deadline passed on December 31 without submission of the desired documentation. In this case the German journalist Hans Tolzin offered a reward of €100,000 for a scientific publication outlining a successful infection attempt with the specific SARS-CoV-2 reliably resulting in respiratory illness in the test subjects.
PARTICLE SIZE VARIATION ALSO REDUCES VIRUS HYPOTHESIS TO ABSURDITY
Recently we are being scared by alleged new strains of “SARS-CoV-2”, but that claim is not based on solid science.
First of all, you cannot determine a variant of a virus if you haven’t completely isolated the original one.
So, to claim that now suddenly there are “new strains” is hogwash even from an orthodox perspective, because from that perspective viruses mutate constantly. Thus, they can constantly proclaim to have found new strains, perpetuating the fear.
Such fearmongering is all the more absurd when one casts a glance at the electron micrographs printed in the relevant studies, which show particles that are supposed to represent SARS-CoV-2. These images reveal that these particles vary extremely in size. In fact, the bandwidth ranges from 60 to 140 nanometers (nm). A virus that has such extreme size variation cannot actually exist.
For example, it can be said of human beings that they vary from about 1.50 meters to 2.10 meters, as there are several individuals of different heights. Now, saying that viruses as a whole range from 60 to 140 nm — as did Zhu et al.— may eventually make sense; but to say that the individual SARS-Cov2 virions vary so much would be like saying that John varies his height from 1.60 to 2 meters depending on the circumstances!
One could reply that viruses are not human individuals, but it is also true that, according to virology, each virus has a fairly stable structure. So, with SARS-Cov2 they are taking liberties of definition which further confirm that everything on this specific virus is even more random than usual. And that license of unlimited definition led to the fact that the Wikipedia entry on coronavirus was changed, and now reports that “Each SARS-CoV-2 virion has a diameter of about 50 to 200 nm”.
That would be like saying that John varies his height from 1 to 4 meters according to circumstances!
What is passed off as SARS-Cov2 are actually particles of all kinds, as can also be seen from the images provided by the mentioned paper by Zhu et al. Below is the photo that Zhu et al. present as the photo of SARS-Cov2:
Through a screen size meter (FreeRuler), the particles that the authors assign to SARS-CoV-2 can be measured. The enlarged particles of the left side photograph measure about 100 nm each (on a 100 nm scale). But in the image on the right side, all the small particles indicated with arrows as SARS-CoV-2, measured on a scale of 1 MicroM (1,000 nm), have totally different sizes.
The black arrows actually indicate vesicles. Measuring some of these particles with the ruler, the result is that in the central vesicle the highest particle at the center measures almost 52nm, thus below the range proposed by Zhu et al (60 to 140 nm); the particle immediately to its right measures a little more, about 57.5nm, but still below limit; while, almost at the center of the lowest vesicle, the largest particle (yellow arrow) measures approximately 73.7nm, falling within the broad margins of Zhu et al.; finally, in the lower-left vesicle, the largest particle measures a good 155.6nm, i.e. well above the maximum limit defined by Zhu et al. (140nm).
It is likely that the correction made lately on Wikipedia was aimed precisely at covering this problem.
There are other strong indications that the particles referred to as SARS-CoV-2 may actually be those harmless or even useful particles, called “extracellular vesicles” (EVs), which have extremely variable dimensions (from 20 to 10,000nm), but which for the most part range from 20nm to 200nm, and which include, as a sub-category, that of “exosomes.”
Exosomes account for perhaps the largest share of EVs, and have been the object of numerous studies for over 50 years. Although few have heard of these beneficial particles, the scientific literature on them is huge, and only on PubMed, if one types “exosome,” over 14,000 studies are provided! We cannot go into detail about EVs and exosomes here, but it is important to point out how they are indistinguishable from viruses, and several scientists think that in reality what is defined as a dangerous virus is nothing but a beneficial exosome.
This is immediately visible under the electron microscope [3]:
As can be seen, the largest of the exosomes is of the same size and structure of the alleged SARS-CoV-2, and it is therefore plausible to believe that, in the large sea of particles contained in the supernatant of the COVID-19 patient’s broncho-alveolar fluid, what is taken to be SARS-CoV-2 is but an exosome.
WHY PURIFICATION IS VITAL TO PROVING SARS-COV-2 EXISTS
So, logically, if we have a culture with countless extremely similar particles, particle purification must be the very first step in order to be able to truly define the particles that are believed to be viruses as viruses (in addition to particle purification, of course, it must then also be determined flawlessly, for example, that the particles can cause certain diseases under real and not just laboratory conditions).
Therefore, if no particle “purification” has been done anywhere, how can one claim that the RNA obtained is a viral genome? And how can such RNA then be widely used to diagnose infection with a new virus, be it by PCR testing or otherwise? We have asked these two questions to numerous representatives of the official corona narrative worldwide, but nobody could answer them.
Hence, as we have stated in our previous article, the fact that the RNA gene sequences – that scientists extracted from tissue samples prepared in their in vitro studies and to which the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests were finally “calibrated” – belong to a new pathogenic virus called SARS-CoV-2 is therefore based on faith alone, not on facts.
Consequently, it cannot be concluded that the RNA gene sequences “pulled” from the tissue samples prepared in these studies, to which the PCR tests are “calibrated,” belong to a specific virus, in this case SARS-CoV-2.
Instead, in all the studies claiming to have isolated and even tested the virus something very different was done: the researchers took samples from the throat or lungs of patients, ultracentrifuged them (hurled at high speed) to separate the larger/heavy from the smaller/lighter molecules, and then took the supernatant, the upper part of the centrifuged material.
This is what they call “isolate,” to which they then apply the PCR. But this supernatant contains all kinds of molecules, billions of different micro- and nanoparticles, including aforementioned extracellular vesicles (EVs) and exosomes, which are produced by our own body and are often simply indistinguishable from viruses:
Nowadays, it is an almost impossible mission to separate EVs and viruses by means of canonical vesicle isolation methods, such as differential ultracentrifugation, because they are frequently co-pelleted due to their similar dimension,
So, scientists “create” the virus by PCR: You take primers, ie. previously existing genetic sequences available in genetic banks, you modify them based on purely hypothetical reasoning, and put them in touch with the supernatant broth, until they attach (anneal) to some RNA in the broth; then, through the Reverse Transcriptase enzyme, you transform the thus “fished” RNA into an artificial or complementary DNA (cDNA), which can then, and only then, be processed by PCR and multiplied through a certain number of PCR cycles.
(Each cycle doubles the quantity of DNA, but the higher the number of cycles necessary to produce detectable “virus” material, the lower the reliability of the PCR — meaning its ability to actually “get” anything at all meaningful from the supernatant. Above 25 cycles the result tends to be meaningless, and all current circulating PCR tests or protocols always use way more than 25 cycles, in fact usually 35 to 45.)
To make matters worse, the primers are constituted of 18 to 24 bases (nucleotides) each; the SARS-Cov2 virus is supposedly composed of 30,000 bases; so the primer represents only the 0.08 percent of the virus genome. This makes it even less possible to select the specific virus you are looking for on such a minute ground, and moreover in a sea of billions of very similar particles.
But there is more. As the virus you are looking for is new, there are clearly no ready genetic primers to match the specific fraction of the new virus; so you take primers that you believe may be closer to the hypothesised virus structure, but it’s a guess, and when you apply the primers to the supernatant broth, your primers can attach to any one of the billions of molecules present in it, and you have no idea that what you have thus generated is the virus you are looking for. It is, in fact, a new creation made by researchers, who then call it SARS-CoV-2, but there is no connection whatsoever with the presumed “real” virus responsible for the disease.
THE “VIRUS GENOME” NOTHING BUT A COMPUTER MODEL
The complete genome of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been sequenced and was instead was “pieced together” on the computer. The Californian physician Thomas Cowan called this a “scientific fraud.” And he is not the only one by far!
Cowan wrote on October 15, 2020 [our emphasis]:
This week, my colleague and friend Sally Fallon Morell brought to my attention an amazing article put out by the CDC, published in June 2020. The purpose of the article was for a group of about 20 virologists to describe the state of the science of the isolation, purification and biological characteristics of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus, and to share this information with other scientists for their own research.
A thorough and careful reading of this important paper reveals some shocking findings.
The article section with the subheading “Whole Genome Sequencing” showed that “rather than having isolated the virus and sequencing the genome from end to end”, that the CDC “designed 37 pairs of nested PCRs spanning the genome on the basis of the coronavirus reference sequence (GenBank accession no. NC045512).
So, one may ask, how then did they sequence the virus, ie. analyse it genetically?
Supposedly to stop the spread of the alleged new virus, we are being forced to practice various forms of social distancing and to wear masks. Behind this approach is the idea that viruses and in particular SARS-CoV-2, believed to be responsible for the respiratory disease Covid-19, is transmitted by air or, as has been said more often, through the nebulized droplets in the air from those who cough or sneeze or, according to some, just speak.
But the truth is that all these theories on the transmission of the virus are only hypotheses that have never been proven.
Evidence for this was missing from the beginning. As reported by Nature in an article from April 2020, experts do not agree that SARS-CoV-2 is airborne, and according to the WHO itself “the evidence is not convincing.”
Even from an orthodox point of view, the only studies in which the transmission of a coronavirus (not SARS-Cov2) by air has been preliminarily “proven” have been carried out in hospitals and nursing homes, in places that are said to produce all types of infections due to hygienic conditions.
But no study has ever proven that there is transmission of viruses in open environments, or in closed but well-ventilated ones. Even assuming that there is this transmission by air, it has been stressed that, for the “contagion” to occur, it is necessary that the people between whom the alleged transmission occurs are in close contact for at least 45 minutes.
In short, all the radical distancing measures have no scientific ground.
NO ASYMPTOMATIC “INFECTION”
Since particle purification is the indispensable prerequisite for further steps, i.e. proof of causality and “calibration” of the tests, we have a diagnostically insignificant test and therefore the mantra “test, test, test” by the WHO’s Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, mentioned in our article from June 27, has to be called unscientific and misleading.
This holds especially true for testing people without symptoms. In this context even a Chinese study from Wuhan published in Nature on November 20, 2020, in which nearly 10 million people were tested and all asymptomatic positive cases, re-positive cases and their close contacts were isolated for at least 2 weeks until the PCR test resulted negative, found that:
All close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases tested negative, indicating that the asymptomatic positive cases detected in this study were unlikely to be infectious.
Even the orthodox British Medical Journal recently joined in the criticism.
Mass testing for COVID-19 is an unevaluated, underdesigned, and costly mess,
And:
Screening the healthy population for COVID-19 is of unknown value, but is being introduced nationwide
And that [our emphasis]:
“the UK’s pandemic response relies too heavily on scientists and other government appointees with worrying competing interests, including shareholdings in companies that manufacture covid-19 diagnostic tests, treatments, and vaccines,
When asked, the Robert Koch Institute was unable to send us a single study demonstrating that (a) “positive” asymptomatic persons made someone else sick (not just “positive”), that (b) “positive” persons with symptoms of illness made someone else sick (not just “positive”), and that (c) any person at all who tested “positive” for SARS-CoV-2 made another person “positive.” [4]
“IF YOU WOULD NOT TEST ANYMORE, CORONA WOULD DISAPPEAR”
Against this background, one can only agree with Franz Knieps, head of the association of company health insurance funds in Germany and for many years in close contact with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who stated in mid-January that “if you would not test anymore, Corona would disappear.”
Interestingly, even the hyper-orthodox German Virus-Czar and main government adviser on lockdowns and other measures, Christian Drosten, has contradicted himself on the reliability of PCR testing. In a 2014 interview regarding PCR testing for so-called MERS-CoV in Saudi Arabia he said:
The [PCR] method is so sensitive that it can detect a single hereditary molecule of the virus. For example, if such a pathogen just happens to flutter across a nurse’s nasal membrane for a day without her getting sick or noticing anything, then she is suddenly a case of MERS. Where fatalities were previously reported, now mild cases and people who are actually in perfect health are suddenly included in the reporting statistics. This could also explain the explosion in the number of cases in Saudi Arabia. What’s more, the local media boiled the matter up to unbelievable levels.”
Sound vaguely familiar?
And even Olfert Landt is critical about PCR test results, saying that only about half of those “infected with corona” are contagious. This is more than remarkable because Landt is not only one of Drosten’s co-authors in the Corman et al. paper — the first PCR Test protocol to be accepted by the WHO, published on January 23, 2020, in Eurosurveillance — but also the CEO of TIB Molbiol, the company that produces the tests according to that protocol.
Unfortunately, this conflict of interest is not mentioned in the Corman/Drosten et al. paper, as 22 scientists — among them one of the authors of this article, Stefano Scoglio — criticized in a recent in-depth analysis.
Altogether, Scoglio and his colleagues found “severe conflicts of interest for at least four authors,” including Christian Drosten, as well as various fundamental scientific flaws. This is why they concluded that “the editorial board of Eurosurveillance has no other choice but to retract the publication.”
On January 11, 2021, the editorial team of Eurosurveillance responded to Torsten Engelbrecht’s e-mail asking for a comment on this analysis:
We are aware of such a request [to retract the Corman/Drosten et al. paper] but we hope you will understand that we are currently not commenting on this. However, we are working towards a decision by the end of January 2021.
On January 27, Engelbrecht approached the journal once more to ask again: “Now is end of January. So please allow me to ask you again: What is your comment on the mentioned analysis of your Corman/Drosten et al. paper? And are you going to retract the Corman et al. paper – or what are you going to do?” Two days later, the Eurosurveillance editorial team answered as follows:
This is taking some time as multiple parties are involved. We will communicate our decision in one of the forthcoming regular issues of the journal.
BILLIONS UPON BILLIONS WASTED ON TESTS THAT COULDN’T MEAN LESS
Considering the lack of facts for detection of the alleged new virus and for the SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests to have any meaning, it is all the more scandalous that the costs of the tests are not publicly discussed, as they are enormous. Often, we hear politicians and talking heads state that meeting certain criteria the tests are free, but that is an outright lie. What they actually mean is that you don’t pay on the spot but with your taxes.
But regardless how you pay for it, in Switzerland, for example, the cost for a PCR test is between CHF140 and CHF200 (£117 to £167). So, let’s do the maths. At the time of writing, tiny Switzerland, with a population of 8.5 million, made about 3,730,000 SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests, besides about 500,000 antigen tests, which are a bit cheaper.
Considering an average price of CHF170 per PCR test, that’s a staggering CHF634 million, or £521 million. And despite the absurdity of testing asymptomatic people, just last week, on January 27th, the Swiss Federal Council called again on the people to get tested. Announcing that, starting the next day, the Swiss will have to pay with their taxes as well for mass testing of asymptomatic people. The Swiss Federal Council estimates that this will cost about 1 billion Swiss Francs.
Most PCR kits still cost more than £100 to obtain privately, for example, and the [UK] Government says it is now delivering 500,000 a day. But even these figures are dwarfed by the £100 billion the Prime Minister is prepared to spend on a ‘moonshot’ dream of supplying the population with tests [PCR and other kinds – ed.] more or less on demand—only £29 billion less than the entire NHS’s annual budget.
That is to say, billions and billions are spent — or downright “burned” — on tests that couldn’t mean less and are fuelling worldwide molecular and digital “deer hunting” for a virus that has never been detected.
Torsten Engelbrecht is an investigative journalist from Hamburg, Germany. The significantly expanded new edition of his book “Virus Mania” (co-authored with Dr Claus Köhnlein MD, Dr Samantha Bailey MD & Dr Stefano Scolgio BSc PhD) will be available in early February. In 2009 he won the German Alternate Media Award. He was a member of the Financial Times Deutschland staff and has also written for OffGuardian, The Ecologist, Rubikon, Süddeutsche Zeitung, and many others. His website is www.torstenengelbrecht.com.
Dr Stefano Scoglio, BSc PhD, is an expert in microbiology and naturopathy and is coordinating scientific and clinical research on Klamath algae extracts, and on microalgae-based probiotics, in cooperation with the Italian National Research Center and various Universities. Since 2004, he has published many articles in international scientific journals. In 2018, Scoglio was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Medicine.
Konstantin Demeter is a freelance photographer and an independent researcher. Together with the journalist Torsten Engelbrecht he has published articles on the “COVID-19” crisis in the online magazine Rubikon, as well as contributions on the monetary system, geopolitics, and the media in Swiss Italian newspapers.
One of Germany’s largest newspapers, Die Welt, has obtained evidence that the Interior Ministry hired scientists from the Robert Koch institute and several universities to justify the country’s strict lockdown measures.
The documents – more than 200 pages which were recovered after a legal battle with the Koch Institute, reveal internal correspondence between the Ministry of the Interior and the researchers.
In one exchange, State Secretary Markus Kerber asks the researchers to develop a model on which to base “preventative and repressive measures.”
In just four days, scientists working in close coordination with the ministry developed a working paper in secret, which described a “worst-case scenario” in which over one million people in German could die of COVID-19 if social life were to continue as it was before the pandemic.
Based on the dire projections, the German state responded with sweeping legislative changes to longstanding laws to enact strict measures – including unprecedented lockdowns that began in March. This triggered a flurry of lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the measures, ranging from lost income to isolation of the elderly, to mandating that people remain in their homes and avoid public places in violation of “fundamental rights of personal freedom.”
Meanwhile, German courts have been ruling against the restrictions.
In one case, a court granted interim relief after plaintiffs say the city of Gießen illegally prohibited a protest, despite detailed social distancing precautions outlined by organizers. The court held that the city’s ban violated the freedom of assembly, and that legal changes instituted in March do not apply to open-air assemblies.
In a second case regarding a COVID-19 protest in Stuttgart, the city was found in violation of the law when it told the organizer that it could not process requests to hold mass gatherings due to pandemic restrictions. Eventually a Constitutional Court held that the city similarly violated freedom of assembly.
And in a third case, Muslims petitioning to hold prayers at a mosque during Ramadan amid Lower Saxony’s strict ban on religious gatherings was overturned by the high administrative court (Oberverwaltungsgericht), which – while refusing to open all mosques – noted that infection risk depended on several details, and that a blanket ban was inappropriate.
In January, a German court in Weimar declared the prohibition on social contact unlawful and contrary to German Basic Law (Gründgesetz), finding the lockdown laws “unconstitutional because the Infection Protection Act was not a sufficient legal basis for such a far-reaching regulation as a contact ban,” according to the UK Human Rights Blog.
In this case a citizen of Weimar had been prosecuted and was to be fined €200 for celebrating his birthday together with seven other people in the courtyard of a house at the end of April 2020, thus violating the contact requirements in force at the time. This only allowed members of two households to be together. The judge’s conclusion was that the Corona Ordinance was unconstitutional and materially objectionable.
This is the first time a judge has dealt in detail with the medical facts, the economic consequences and the effects of the specific policy brought about by the Coronavirus pandemic…
In short, German officials paid the Koch Institute and others to produce dire pandemic models, which they then used to enact unconstitutional laws which are now being overturned by the courts.
A second New York Times article quotes doctors who say the mRNA technology used in COVID vaccines may cause immune thrombocytopenia, a blood disorder that last month led to the death of a Florida doctor after his first dose of the Pfizer vaccine.
For the second time in under a month, The New York Times has published an article about people who developed a rare autoimmune disease after receiving COVID vaccines.
Monday’s article featured two women, both of whom were described as healthy before they received the Moderna vaccine. The women, ages 72 and 48, are now being treated for immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), a condition that develops when the immune system attacks platelets (blood component essential for clotting) or the cells that create them, according to the Times.
On Jan. 13, the Times reported on the death of Dr. Gregory Michael, a Florida doctor who died 15 days after getting the Pfizer vaccine. Michael, who was 56 and described as “perfectly healthy” by his wife, developed ITP three days after being vaccinated. He died of a brain hemorrhage on Jan. 3. As The Defender reported on Jan. 13, Dr. Jerry L. Spivak, an expert on blood disorders at Johns Hopkins University, said it was a “medical certainty” the Pfizer vaccine led to Michael’s death.
Spivak, who was interviewed for Monday’s article in the Times, reiterated the link between the vaccine and ITP. Two other doctors, Dr. James Bussel, a hematologist and professor emeritus at Weill Cornell Medicine who has written more than 300 scientific articles on the platelet disorder, also said he thinks there is a “possible” association between the vaccines and ITP.
Bussel told the Times:
“I’m assuming there’s something that made the people who developed thrombocytopenia susceptible, given what a tiny percentage of recipients they are. Having it happen after a vaccine is well-known and has been seen with many other vaccines. Why it happens, we don’t know.”
Bussel and a colleague, Dr. Eun-Ju Lee, have identified 15 cases of ITP in COVID vaccine recipients by searching the government’s database — the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) — or by consulting with other physicians treating patients, and have submitted an article about their findings to a medical journal, according to the Times.
In a statement provided to the Times, Pfizer said it was aware of ITP cases in vaccine recipients and that the company is “collecting relevant information” to share with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
The vaccine maker added, however that “at this time, we have not been able to establish a causal association with our vaccine.” Moderna also provided a statement, but didn’t address cases of ITP, only saying that it “continuously monitors the safety of the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine using all sources of data” and routinely shares safety information with regulators.
Directly following Michael’s death, Pfizer said there was “no indication — either from large clinical trials or among people who have received the vaccine since the government authorized its use last month — that it could be connected to thrombocytopenia.”
The vaccine most often implicated in ITP is the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, where the disease occurs in approximately 1 in every 25,000 to 40,000 doses of the vaccine, Redwood said.
According to the Times, ITP is “generally treatable” but can persist for months or become chronic and last for years. The American Hematology Society advises patients who already have ITP go ahead and get vaccinated, “but after consulting with their hematologists.”
Meanwhile, the two women featured in the Times yesterday are recovering. Luz Legaspi, 72, was hospitalized in New York City on Jan. 19 with a severe case of ITP, but is home now, being cared for by her daughter.
A 48-year-old Texas woman who asked that the Times not use her name spent four days in the hospital, receiving platelet transfusions, immune globulins and steroids to restore her platelet count — a situation she described as “terrifying.” She said her doctor told her to go ahead and get the second dose of the Moderna vaccine, but she has not yet decided if she will.
The Defender reached out to the Florida Department of Health for an update on the investigation into Michael’s death, but did not hear back by deadline. Florida health officials and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are investigating the death.
cover image credit parentingupstream / pixabay
The Evil Deception: Giving the Covid-19 Jab Without Informed Consent
Original video available at Dr Vernon Coleman BrandNewTube channel.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Transcript:
I had to have a molar removed the other day. It wasn’t giving a lot of trouble but an X-ray showed it was rotten to the core and in too bad a state to try to fill and repair. So it had to come out before it caused serious pain. You have to deal with these things when you can, these days. You don’t want raging toothache if they decide to lock us all in our bedrooms like naughty children.
Before he got out the hammer and chisel, the dentist talked to me about the possible complications – the things that could go wrong.
Naturally, when removing a tooth things don’t always go smoothly.
The tooth can break, leaving part of it behind.
Removing the tooth involves a good deal of wiggling to start with. I don’t mean the dentist wiggles. He has to wiggle the tooth – move it from side to side to loosen it. And this can result in accidental damage to adjoining teeth.
My rotten molar was in my upper jaw and occasionally the removal of the tooth can create a fistula into the sinuses with the result that when you have a drink, the fluid comes down your nose instead of, or as well as, going down your throat. When this happens a bit of sewing up may be required.
And, of course, there’s the risk of a dry socket. You don’t want one of those.
So my dentist gave me lots of excellent advice. Don’t eat hard foods. Don’t eat on that side. Don’t brush the tooth and dislodge the clot. Then the next day rinse gently with salt in warm water. All that sort of stuff. He told me what to do if the bleeding started again. And suggested sleeping on an extra pillow.
And then he took the tooth out and made a great job of it.
The point is that that is what is meant by informed consent.
Before the treatment began I knew what to expect. I knew what problems there might be and what would need to be done about them if they happened.
Doctors are very careful to ensure that patients don’t start a new treatment without being properly informed.
They do this not just because they’re as kindly and thoughtful as my dentist.
They do it because it’s a legal protection.
If you take a drug which turns you blue or makes your ears fall off and you weren’t warned that it might do this then the prescribing doctor may well be sued.
Informed consent is a vital part of any medical procedure.
Except one.
And I bet you could sit there all day and not be able to work out what it is.
Vaccination.
When they give you a vaccination there isn’t a doctor in a million who will tell you exactly what could go wrong.
And that has never been truer than it is with the covid 19 vaccine.
They don’t tell you for three reasons.
First, they don’t know what will go wrong. Vaccines aren’t really properly tested. The nasty side effects don’t usually become obvious for a year or two – by which time the drug company making the stuff has made a fortune. If they know about problems they’ll probably cover them up, lie about them and make sure that any scientific papers exposing the dangers aren’t published. If you think I’m exaggerating you obviously haven’t watched my videos about some of the big vaccine companies and the bad, bad things they’ve got up to. They don’t know what will happen if you have the vaccine but are also taking some other medication – heart pills, cancer pills, arthritis pills, whatever. They haven’t tested to see what happens if you have the vaccine and then go home and take prescribed or non-prescribed medication. They have no idea. They can’t warn you about the potential problems because they don’t know what they are.
Second, the list of adverse events is so long that it would take too long to go through. And if they gave you a leaflet listing all the adverse effects – which include heart attack, stroke and death by the way – most people would roll their sleeves back down and hurry home to have a nice cup of tea and a biscuit instead.
Third, informed consent isn’t necessary with the covid-19 vaccine because Bill Gates insisted that the vaccine companies were given indemnity. You can’t sue them. If you have the vaccine and you die then that’s hard luck. If you are paralysed because of the vaccine then you won’t get a penny in compensation. The drug companies can’t be sued. And nor can anyone else associated with the vaccine. I bet the car companies and the tobacco companies wish they had that sort of deal.
So vaccines, particularly the covid-19 vaccine, are unique in that respect.
And not only do they not warn you about all the potential adverse events, but governments are hiring people to tell you that the vaccine is perfectly safe and that you should rush along and have one as soon as your name comes out of the hat.
My name came out the other day, by the way. Before declining I explained about the number of deaths and serious injuries that had been recorded.
`Did you know any of that?’ I asked.
The woman said she didn’t, then paused and added `I’ll put you down as `declined, then.’
And carried on filling the booking sheet with the names of deceived patients destined by ignorance to take part in the biggest experiment in medical history.
And if you don’t believe that this is an experiment, consider this:
The US government website clinicaltrials.gov contains details of the study to describe the safety, tolerability, etc. of mRNA vaccine candidates against covid-19 in healthy individuals.
And the trial, which was designed in April 2020, will continue for two years from the first vaccinations.
Note that: the trial will continue for two years.
No one knows how safe the vaccinations will be because the trials aren’t finished yet.
This is clear proof anyone having the covid-19 jab is taking part in an experiment.
So anyone who says that the vaccine is perfectly safe – even if it’s the Archbishop of Canterbury, who has said that the vaccine is safe – cannot possibly know what they are talking about.
It’s not just the Archbishop, of course.
Scores of celebrities have announced that the covid-19 vaccines are perfectly safe.
They can’t possibly know.
No one knows.
No doctor knows. No one in the Government knows if it’s safe or not.
It’s the world’s biggest experiment.
And for all anyone knows, the vaccine could kill or permanently damage the health of 50% of the people who have it.
So why are hundreds of celebrities and journalists lying about the vaccine?
Well, I can offer you one reason.
Maybe they’re being paid to say it’s safe.
How do I know?
Well the UK Government’s Cabinet Office is advertising for someone to persuade social media influencers to help promote the global warming lie in preparation for the conference being held in Glasgow in November 2021.
The persuader will be paid £65,000.
But here’s the thing: the Government has already paid £63,000 to 42 social media influences to promote the covid-19 test and trace service. TV celebrities and sports players have been paid.
So, how many of the witless morons promoting the lies about the vaccine have been paid?
I’m sure they didn’t put a few quid in the Archbishop’s back pocket.
They wouldn’t do that, would they?
But how many vaccine supporters have been paid with our money?
How many newspapers and journalists have been paid to promote the vaccine?
I would remind you, by the way, that so far at least 14 journalists around the world have been arrested for what the authorities called `unfair’ coverage of this fake pandemic. You can guess what they meant by `unfair’.
Finally, I leave you with a question: if the vaccine is so safe, why did Bill Gates insist the drug companies – including those with which he has financial links – be given legal indemnity to make sure that they couldn’t be sued?
And we should remember that Gates has financial links with many media companies – including the BBC and The Guardian.
If our people could actually create one—highly doubtful—they would have no idea what it would do. All viruses mutate rapidly. You never end up with what you started with. But selling A STORY ABOUT A VIRUS—that’s a winner. That’s all we need.
How do we sell it? Won’t people catch on right away?
Are you kidding? Our people will develop a diagnostic test for the virus. How they build that test determines the outcome. It’ll register positive much of the time, along with some negatives. And here’s the important point: the technical details involved in constructing the PCR test are very dense. Even many professionals don’t understand them. It’s like speaking Icelandic to a South American tribe in the rain forest. Don’t worry, we’ll get away with it.
And the lockdowns? The quarantines?
They’ll come, trust me. The Chinese will start the ball rolling. They have the force to pull it off. They’ll lock down a few cities right away. Wuhan, for example. Maybe 60 million people. Overnight. It’ll be a startling development. The UN and the WHO will climb on board quickly and praise China for its handling of the crisis. China will become THE MODEL for the rest of the world. Other countries will follow suit.
Who is going to step forward in the West? Italy?
Yes. They’re next in line for big lockdowns. The Chinese regime has enormous clout with the Italian government. So Italy will become the first beachhead in the attack on the West.
America is the key. If they join the club, we’re in. How do we convince Trump to play along?
He’ll cave. We’ll feed him a computer projection of deaths in America. Something huge, like two million. Trump isn’t good with details. He’ll buy in.
But the lockdowns will decimate the US economy. Trump’s whole presidency rests on economic success.
He’ll give in to Fauci and Gates.
Why?
Because he doesn’t have the stomach for this battle. He won’t go up against the medical experts. He’s bold in some respects, but on this issue, he’s a wobbler. That’s our calculation.
The news media are ready?
With wall to wall messaging, 24/7. PANDEMIC. Cases. Deaths. There are no dissenters among them. We’ve got that all sewed up. Medical experts pontificating on-air. Fear.
I’m nervous about this. Will it really sell? I mean, how can they construct a PCR test if they don’t have a virus, if there is no virus?
It’s easy, trust me. We’ve done it before. Anyway, your part of the operation comes after the lockdowns. You’ve made a few hundred million doing business with China. You’ll be able to make a few BILLION soon, buying up distressed properties after the lockdowns gain traction.
I’m going to bankroll social justice movements. You know, protests, riots, burning, looting, assault, in major cities across America. It’s a terrific issue, and it’ll be a major distraction from the lockdowns.
I know all about that. I’m copied in on every aspect of the operation. Just make sure all those riots are focused on racism and police brutality. We don’t want any leakage about inner city gangs and drug cartels and banks.
No problem. The gangs distribute drugs for the cartels, the cartels wash their money through banks. It’s a tight fit. Nobody is going to prosecute the gangs as continuing criminal enterprises. That’s off the table completely. The protests will have no mention of gangs as a problem. We’ve got the foot soldiers all sewed up. Hell, some of them ARE gang members. Are you sure the 2020 presidential election is in the bag?
Absolutely. Trump has no chance. By the time we’re through with him, he’ll be persona non grata. Biden is our man. We need someone with SEVERE cognitive deficits in the Oval Office. Only a completely dim bulb, mentally speaking, would sign some of the orders we’re going to put in front of him. Harris is being prepped to step in if Biden has to resign for health reasons. She knows enough of the score. She won’t try to go off on her own. Give her a whiff of the presidency and she’ll do somersaults for us.
Here’s the thing. Forget about Trump. The real danger is all the people who support him. The millions of deplorables out there. They still think the American Republic and freedom are on the table.
I agree. They’re a problem. But there are solutions. We’re going to put a label on all their heads. ‘They’re very bad people. They all want to destroy the government.’ That’s how we’re going to paint them. Our modelers believe there are enough Americans who are beholden to the federal government…they’ll view Trumpers as a serious threat. Very serious. We’ll have that issue covered.
Is the QAnon op going to keep going?
We’ll keep it going forever. After Trump leaves the White House, we’ll have people saying he’s still president and he’s arresting every high-level evil person in the world.
BLACKOUT
The lights come back up.
Wow, THAT was a hell of a dream—who are you?
Agent Jones. Federal Domestic Terrorism Task Force.
What are you doing in my bedroom?
I’ve been recording your dream.
What?
We have it all. Two pandemic planners. Why were you dreaming about them?
I have no idea. Who—
It reflects a certain state of mind. A dangerous mindset. Why weren’t you dreaming about a television show or a garden in the forest? Have you been reading conspiracy literature?
I read newspapers. WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE?
Something in you must have triggered this dream. A psychological predisposition. A latent dissatisfaction.
I’m not dissatisfied.
That was not the dream of a normal man. Thoughts and dreams lead to conclusions, and conclusions lead to action.
I once had a dream about jumping off a building. I haven’t jumped.
Not yet.
Why are you here?
Checking up on a potential defector.
A defector from what?
What the rest of us know.
I’m like everybody else.
Everybody else doesn’t dream about a plan to make billions of dollars buying up distressed properties.
Is that a joke? I wouldn’t know where to start, even if I had that ambition. Which I don’t.
You start from where you are. A man with his thoughts. We need to explore your life thoroughly. You may have connections you’re unaware of. A distant relative. A casual acquaintance. Something may have slipped through the cracks.
I have to be at the office in a few hours. And I want to speak with a lawyer.
About your dream?
About you. This situation. Am I being charged with a crime?
No.
Then I’m free to—
You’re not free. Your status is “suspended, depending on outcome.”
What status?
Who told you Kamala Harris would cooperate in a plot to subvert the government?
No one.
Where did you get the idea that Biden is disabled?
Nowhere. It was a just a statement a man in my dream made. I wasn’t speaking at all. I was watching and listening.
I wouldn’t advise trying to deny responsibility. I didn’t have the dream. Your neighbor didn’t. You did.
Do you dream?
No.
Never?
The kind of dream you had was aberrant. What makes you think there’s going to be a pandemic and it’s some sort of plan?
Why do you care about my dream?
Because some fantasies are dangerous.
And some are meaningless.
The key is the content. You were constructing a conspiracy scenario. Do you have an opinion about viruses?
No.
I’m going to leave now. By tomorrow, you’ll wonder whether this conversation actually took place. If you reject me, think of this event as a warning from your subconscious.
What are you going to do?
You’re on a list.
Meaning what?
A more thorough background investigation. Increased surveillance.
Even while I’m asleep?
Listen carefully, sir. You’re always asleep. In the dream, you woke up for a minute or two.
From Michigan to Germany, courts are beginning to rule in favor of constitutional freedoms infringed by worldwide lockdowns. But will we ever see the Draconian leaders responsible for these infringements face the music?
501 Deaths + 10,748 Other Injuries Reported Following COVID Vaccine, Latest CDC Data Show
The numbers reflect the latest data available as of Jan. 29 from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System website. Of the 501 reported deaths, 453 were from the U.S. The average age of those who died was 77, the youngest was 23.
VAERS is the primary mechanism for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before confirmation can be made that an adverse event was linked to a vaccine.
As of Jan. 29, about 35 million people in the U.S. had received one or both doses of a COVID vaccine. So far, only the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines have been granted Emergency Use Authorization in the U.S. by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). By the FDA’s own definition, the vaccines are still considered experimental until fully licensed.
According to the latest data, 453 of the 501 reported deaths were in the U.S. Fifty-three percent of those who died were male, 43% were female, the remaining death reports did not include the gender of the deceased. The average age of those who died was 77, the youngest reported death was of a 23-year-old. The Pfizer vaccine was taken by 59% of those who died, while the Moderna vaccine was taken by 41%.
The latest data also included 690 reports of anaphylactic reactions to either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines. Of those, the Pfizer vaccine accounted for 76% of the reactions, and the Moderna vaccine for 24%.
As The Defender reported today, a 56-year-old woman in Virginia died Jan. 30, hours after receiving her first dose of the Pfizer vaccine. Doctors told Drene Keyes’ daughter that her mother died of flash pulmonary edema likely caused by anaphylaxis. The death is under investigation by Virginia’s Office of the Chief Medical Examiner and the CDC.
Last week, the CDC told USA TODAY that based on “early safety data from the first month” of COVID-19 vaccination the vaccines are “as safe as the studies suggested they’d be” and that “everyone who had experienced an allergic response has been treated successfully, and no other serious problems have turned up among the first 22 million people vaccinated.
The Moderna vaccine lot numbers associated with the highest number of deaths were: 025L20A (20 deaths), 037K20A (21 deaths) and 011J2A (16 deaths), 025J20A (16 deaths) . For Pfizer, the lot numbers associated with the most reports of deaths were: EK5730 (10 deaths), EJ1685 (23 deaths), EL0140 (19 deaths), EK 9231 (17 deaths) and EL1284 (13 deaths). For 135 of the reported deaths, the lot numbers were unknown.
While the VAERS database numbers are sobering, according to a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services study, the actual number of adverse events is likely significantly higher. VAERS is a passive surveillance system that relies on the willingness of individuals to submit reports voluntarily.
According to the VAERS website, healthcare providers are required by law to report to VAERS:
Any adverse event listed in the VAERS Table of Reportable Events Following Vaccination that occurs within the specified time period after vaccination
An adverse event listed by the vaccine manufacturer as a contraindication to further doses of the vaccine
The CDC says healthcare providers are strongly encouraged to report:
Any adverse event that occurs after the administration of a vaccine licensed in the United States, whether or not it is clear that a vaccine caused the adverse event
Vaccine administration errors
However, “within the specified time” means that reactions occurring outside that timeframe may not be reported, in addition to reactions suffered hours or days later by people who don’t report those reactions to their healthcare provider.
Vaccine manufacturers are required to report to VAERS “all adverse events that come to their attention.”
Historically, fewer than fewer than 1% of adverse events have ever been reported to VAERS, a system that Children’s Health Defense has previously referred to as an “abject failure,” including in a December 2020 letter to Dr. David Kessler, former FDA director and now co-chair of the COVID-19 Advisory Board and President Biden’s version of Operation Warp Speed.
A critic familiar with VAERS’ shortcomings bluntly condemned VAERS in The BMJ as “nothing more than window dressing, and a part of U.S. authorities’ systematic effort to reassure/deceive us about vaccine safety.”
CHD is calling for complete transparency. The children’s health organization is asking Kessler and the federal government to release all of the data from the clinical trials and suspend COVID-19 vaccine use in any group not adequately represented in the clinical trials, including the elderly, frail and anyone with comorbidities.
CHD is also asking for full transparency in post-marketing data that reports all health outcomes, including new diagnoses of autoimmune disorders, adverse events and deaths from COVID vaccines.
Children’s Health Defense asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps.
Children’s Health Defense – California Chapter Sends Letter to All California Superintendents Regarding Medical Ethics, Emergency Use Products, Voluntary Testing & Vaccine Safety
Today, Children’s Health Defense – California Chapter sent a letter to 1,100 California Superintendents to let them know that Emergency Use Authorization products, like the RT-PCR test and COVID vaccines, cannot be mandated, as they are investigational and experimental. They must be voluntary. Further, according to both the CDC and WHO, if RT-PCR testing is offered voluntarily, it must only be offered to those with symptoms through their own doctor. This letter also contains science showing that children are not asymptomatic carriers of COVID, and that COVID vaccines have not been proven to prevent person-to-person transmission. Please share this letter, either using the article’s link or the PDF (CDE Superintendent Letter from Childrens Health Defense – California Chapter) with your own school district to educate them on medical ethics, the science, and the law.
Dear Superintendent,
Children’s Health Defense is a global leader in science, law, public policy and medical ethics. I am the President of the California Chapter of Children’s Health Defense, a 501(c)(3), and I write on behalf of our organization.
The purpose of this letter is to help you to understand the science, law and policy as summarized below and in the PDF enclosure. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to open safely, legally and ethically.
As the world learns to navigate COVID-19, opening schools safely is in everyone’s best interest. We have learned some California public school districts, such as LAUSD, and the California Department of Education (CDE) intend to mandate frequent Reverse-Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) testing¹ on students and, when investigational COVID-19 vaccines are available to children, intend to mandate students and employees be vaccinated before they can return to campus. We are also monitoring CDE efforts to set up testing and vaccination centers on campuses.
Protracted school closures have created an educational and mental health emergency among students, due to learning loss from remote learning and isolation from their peers, sports, cultural activities, jobs and other support systems. Teen suicides are at an all-time high.² One of many tragic losses, teenager Dylan Buckner had “depression worsen significantly after COVID hit,” which led to his suicide. His father stated, “The family believes that had COVID not happened, or the country’s response to COVID had been more effective, Dylan would still be alive today.”³ In contrast, we invite you to learn more about how Alsea School Superintendent Marc Thielman opened schools in an Oregon county in Fall 2020 without incident.4
Mandating products approved for emergency use violates federal and state law since Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) means the products are investigational and experimental. Federal and state law is very clear that mandates are illegal for EUA products. Both the RT-PCR test and all COVID vaccines are not FDA-approved; they are available under an EUA.
The right to fully-informed consent has roots in the Nuremberg Code, which states the consent of the individual is “absolutely essential.”5 If an intervention causes greater harm, is ineffective for the stated aim, and illegal, as such you must re-evaluate implementing the proposed interventions as a condition for students to return to in-person learning.
Below we address the issues with your intended approach in four sections:
The law surrounding Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA), under which both the RT-PCR and COVID investigational vaccines are being used on the public;
Peer-reviewed science regarding
(2a) The RT-PCR test, demonstrating that it is not a diagnostic tool and cannot determine if someone is sick or infectious, and;
(2b) Emerging issues with the investigational COVID vaccine;
Creation of on-campus COVID testing and vaccination centers; and
Your institution’s real legal liability should you proceed with any plans to mandate investigational testing protocols or vaccines.
Note that while vaccine manufacturers may be shielded from liability by 42 USC 300aa-11 and 42 USC 300aa-22, your institution is not protected.6
You are hereby officially on notice that if you illegally or irresponsibly mandate products on students or public school employees, we may have no recourse but to take legal action. As an example, Children’s Health Defense has initiated a related suit in New York against the NYC Department of Education and Mayor de Blasio for arbitrary school closures and coerced PCR testing as a condition to in-person learning privileges.7 (Aviles, et al. V. de Blasio, et al. 20-CV-09829 (PGG))
(1) Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA): Illegal to Mandate Products Under EUA
PCR testing and COVID vaccines are not fully licensed products. They are EUA products,8 which by their very nature are legally considered investigational. As these are experimental medical products, it is unlawful and unethical for schools to mandate either the RT-PCR test or any currently available COVID vaccine. Federal law confirms explicitly that an EUA product must be voluntary because the federal statute requires “the option to accept or refuse administration of the product.”9
Mandating the RT-PCR and experimental COVID vaccines also violates California State law (CA Health & Safety Code § 24172).10 Federal and State law on this matter rest on the first principle of the Nuremberg Code requiring that the human subject be “so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choicewithout undue inducement or any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress or other forms of constraint or coercion.” This is a bright line that cannot be blurred.
Of note, specific laws such as the US Federal Regulations, notably the National Research Act [Title II, Public Law 93-348],11 Regulations for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research [45 CFR 46]12 and revisions of various regulations, rules, and laws ([21 CFR 50]13, [21 CFR 56]14, [45 CFR 46 Subpart D]15, [10 CFR 745]16, [45 CFR 46 Subpart B]17, [45 CFR 46 Subpart D]18) specifically and permanently guarantee that all persons in the United States are entitled to exercise the right of informed consent to accept or to refuse to enroll in any medical experiment.
The CDC admits that it is illegal and unethical to mandate PCR testing in schools.19 Moreover, the States, and therefore public schools, cannot mandate the PCR test or COVID vaccines because the FDA and courts have found the federal preemption doctrine prevents States, and therefore public schools, from going outside the bounds of the Emergency Use Authorization law.20
This was also confirmed again last year at a CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meeting in August 2020, where ACIP Executive Secretary Amanda Cohn, MD stated:
“I just wanted to add that, just wanted to remind everybody, that under an Emergency Use Authorization, an EUA, vaccines are not allowed to be mandatory. So, early in this vaccination phase, individuals will have to be consented and they won’t be able to be mandated.”21
In conclusion, the law is clear that States, and therefore public schools, cannot mandate experimental products and are preempted from mandating an EUA product.22 The soonest the Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech experimental vaccines could be considered by FDA for full licensure (in adults only) is when the trials are expected to conclude, on October 27, 2022 and January 31, 2023, respectively.
(2) The Faults with RT-PCR Testing and Emerging Dangers of the COVID Vaccines
The FDA may someday grant full licensure to the RT-PCR test and some COVID vaccines. For now, these products are approved for investigational emergency use only, as described above, so the problems with the reliability of the test and vaccine efficacy and safety are not technically relevant to the illegality of mandates.
Since the FDA may grant full licensure at some point, which may make it legal to consider mandating them, we must also advise you of the medical and scientific issues that make school mandates dangerous to the health and safety of the educational community under any circumstances.
Below we detail (a) documented issues with the reliability of the PCR test; and (b) COVID vaccine science showing no disruption of person-to-person transmission, concerning safety data, and other issues regarding COVID vaccines and children.
(a) Issues with PCR Testing as a Condition for In-person Learning or Teaching
We understand that California Public Schools intend to mandate regular RT-PCR testing on children, with the penalty of withholding access to in-person education if testing is not completed. The CDC has declared mandatory PCR testing unethical and illegal.
The RT-PCR test does not confirm infectiousness. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) guidance states the RT-PCR test must only be used in the presence of symptoms. As such, the RT-PCR should never be used on healthy people, and should only be used in a clinical setting combined with an exam by a licensed medical professional.
On July 17, 2020 and updated on July 20, 2020, the CDC recommends a symptoms-based strategy for testing, meaning only those with symptoms should consider being tested.23
The EUA for the Roche PCR test states “positive results are indicative of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA; clinical correlation with patient history and other diagnostic information is necessary to determine patient infection status.”24
The Roche EUA also states “positive results do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses.” Any positive PCR test is unconfirmed if the patient is not also tested for flu, pertussis, tuberculosis, or many of the other 1400 human pathogens associated with symptoms similar to COVID-19. Skipping this standard differential diagnosis results in confirmation bias, attributing all symptoms like cough or a fever to COVID.
Since the RT-PCR test Cycle threshold (Ct) in the U.S. is set too high – at a Ct of 40 – it can amplify a low viral load and be erroneously conflated with infectiousness.25 On January 21, 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) further clarified that “careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed. The Ct needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different nucleic acid test (NAT) technology.”26
Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institutes for Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health, acknowledged in July 2020 that a positive RT-PCR test above a 35 Ct is meaningless.
(“[I]f you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more, …the chance of it being replication-competent are [sic] miniscule. And we have patients – and it’s very frustrating for the patients as well as for the physicians – somebody comes in and they repeat their PCR, and it’s like 37 cycle threshold, but you almost never can culture virus for a 37 cycle threshold. So I think if someone does come in with 37-38, even 36, you got to say, ‘You know, it’s just dead nucleotides, period.”27
In fact, 97% of PCR positives are false positives if the cycle threshold is higher than 35. A critical review of the seminal Corman-Drosten study which established PCR testing standards concluded:
“In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture; if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%.”28
If you only read one reference in this entire letter, it should be the above to the Corman-Drosten Review: www.cormandrostenreview.com. This paper describes in detail most of the shortcomings of the PCR test that is driving the fear of SARS CoV-2, the virus said to cause the symptoms called COVID-19.
Returning to the most egregious problem with the RT-PCR test, a scientific literature review study by Tom Jefferson MD found specific Ct values correlate with infectiousness or lack thereof, and suggests that a Ct of 35 is still too high: “The inability of PCR to distinguish between the shedding of live virus or of viral debris, means that it cannot measure a person’s viral load (or quantity of virus present in a person’s excreta.” In the review, all tests with Ct >30 resulted in non-infectious specimen. Jefferson also stated “weak positives (those with high Ct) are unlikely to be infectious, as a whole live virus is the prime requirement for transmission, not the fragments identified by PCR.”29
The RT-PCR test being set at a Ct of 40 in the United States is indeed far too high and creates what has been termed a “casedemic,” disrupting all of society but especially children’s education and mental health. We do not think California public schools should be furthering this problem by requiring a test that the scientific community has found to be utterly unreliable.
Even if RT-PCR tests do gain full licensure someday, California schools must certify to the students, staff and family the following, before our education system is further disrupted by a test that delivers a majority of false positives and doesn’t measure infectiousness:
Provide all students and staff with fully informed consent and advise them of their right to decline taking a test, and the right for asymptomatic students and teachers to be in the classroom. In other words, testing must be voluntary.
Refer symptomatic children and staff to their primary care physician for voluntary testing and treatment. Students and staff can return to in-person learning or work when they are symptom-free or have quarantined for the recommended 7 to 10 days.
The primary care physician must rule out – via antibody or PCR testing – the other human pathogens that can cause symptoms similar to COVID-19.
For any tests run on a student or staff member by the primary care physician, confirm the RT-PCR Cycle threshold is 28 or less, since that is the highest Ct with proof of replication-competent virus.
Confirm with a DNA or RAT test that the presumptively ‘positive’ sample is positive and not just picking up dead RNA fragments or background noise by using Sanger sequencing on every potentially positive test, and then confirming any potential positives with a human cell culture to verify the existence of replication competent virus. If the sample is unable to be cultured, then the individual is not infectious.
Demand that the test report includes viral load information, and not just a binary reading.
Per the 1/21/21 WHO guidance, perform a second test if the first one is positive.
Do not rely on antigen tests which are also fraught with issues of false positives and false negatives.
Current CDC guidance on testing in school settings states:
If a school is implementing a testing strategy [i.e. testing healthy and sick, not based on symptoms,] testing should be offered on a voluntary basis. It is unethical and illegal to test someone who does not want to be tested, including students whose parents or guardians do not want them to be tested.30
Please also keep in mind that according to the CDC, schools should be the first to reopen and the last to close.31
Given the above, the best course of action for the CDE and Districts is to ensure that sick students stay home, as has been the policy for pre-COVID times. There are already many other evidence-based protocols in place to allow safe return to in-person schooling, such as: hand washing, temperature-taking, suggesting sick students stay home until symptoms have resolved, classroom disinfection, and improved HVAC systems. Students should not be the victims of an experimental test, which will lead to a furthering of the Educational Emergency and even more social isolation that leads to mental health issues and suicide.
(b) Children are Not Asymptomatic Vectors; Science Shows COVID Vaccines are Risky
It is well-accepted that children have a statistically zero chance of dying from COVID. The CDC shows the K-12 mortality rate from or with COVID is .00003.32 Any intervention, especially one that is prophylactic, must cause fewer harms to the recipients than the infection. Since children have the lowest death rate from COVID infection, the cost-benefit of administering to children an investigational vaccine with emerging safety issues is especially difficult to justify. Therefore, it is clearly irrational to vaccinate children with a COVID vaccine to protect them from death.
Given these facts, an unfounded theory has emerged to use students as pawns who, if vaccinated, could somehow stop transmission to teachers and school staff. However, the data show: students are not asymptomatic carriers, they and teachers have far lower rates of COVID diagnosis than the general population, and the vaccine does not prevent person-to-person transmission.
Contrary to popular opinion, asymptomatic transmission is unfounded. Students are not disease reservoirs and are clearly not COVID vectors. The School Response COVID Dashboard shows that students and staff are among the least likely to be diagnosed with COVID. Compared to the positivity rate of 8.1% in the general California population in the most recently available data period (12/13/20), only 0.56% of California students tested positive for COVID, and the staff positivity rate was only 1.46%, even though teachers are daily interacting with students. This proves it is a significant mistake to assume children are asymptomatic vectors.33 In fact, in Germany, students are valued as the “brakes” to COVID transmission.34
A recent CDC-funded study in Wisconsin concluded no staff members were infected by children, and transmission rates were very low:
In a setting of widespread community SARS-CoV-2 transmission, few instances of in-school transmission were identified among students and staff members, with limited spread among children within their cohorts and no documented transmission to or from staff members. Only seven of 191 cases (3.7%) were linked to in-school transmission, and all seven were among children.35
You may be surprised to learn that Sweden – the country that famously did not lock down – had an excellent outcome among children. “Despite Sweden’s having kept schools and preschools open, we found a low incidence of severe Covid-19 among schoolchildren and children of preschool age during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Among the 1.95 million children who were 1 to 16 years of age, 15 children had Covid-19, MIS-C, or both conditions and were admitted to an ICU, which is equal to 1 child in 130,000.”36
A meta-analysis of 54 studies on transmission amongst almost 78,000 participants found that only 0.7% of cases attributed to “household transmission” could have spread from pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic carriers in the household.37
Additionally, a study among 10 million residents of Wuhan China demonstrated that asymptomatic transmission was non-existent.38 Among 300 possible carriers, “virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and re-positive cases, indicating no “viable virus” in positive cases detected in this study. All asymptomatic positive cases, re-positive cases and their close contacts were isolated for at least 2 weeks until the results of nucleic acid testing were negative. None of detected positive cases or their close contacts became symptomatic or newly confirmed with COVID-19 during the isolation period.”
In contrast, a widely-quoted CDC-endorsed study claiming 59% of cases were due to asymptomatic transmission enrolled no subjects and is merely a mathematical model.39 To further clarify, here is a side-by-side comparison of the Wuhan study compared to the CDC study:
In a 2020 Health & Human Services press conference, Dr. Fauci stated “even if there is some asymptomatic transmission, in all the history of respiratory-borne viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks.40 The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person. Even if there’s a rare asymptomatic person that might transmit, an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers.”
Given the statistically zero COVID death rate in children, the low rate of COVID positivity in children, and the lack of asymptomatic spread, there is absolutely no case for the vaccination of children to protect them or others from COVID.
Should COVID vaccines become fully licensed in the future and still be (inexplicably) under consideration for schoolchildren and staff after reviewing the above, we explain below how the COVID investigational vaccines do not prevent person-to-person transmission and are fraught with mounting safety issues as reported in the media, in the V-Safe App (used post-vaccination by study participants,) and in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS.) Most significantly, the investigational vaccines have not been tested in children.
Since the COVID vaccines do not prevent person-to-person transmission, it is irresponsible to think this medical product could somehow protect adults by vaccinating children. Dr. Anthony Fauci admitted in October the goal of COVID vaccines is to provide personal protection only, not to prevent death, or person-to-person transmission. Fauci said he and his colleagues would “settle for … the primary endpoint to prevent clinically recognizable disease.”41 Moderna Chief Medical Officer Tal Zaks stated “our trial will not demonstrate prevention of transmission, because … you have to swab people twice a week for very long periods, and that becomes operationally untenable,” citing the need for a five-to-ten times longer trial length and even higher costs.42
Through January 15, 2021, 181 U.S. deaths43 have been reported after COVID vaccination to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS.)44 There are almost 8,000 total COVID vaccine reactions reported to VAERS so far, including 764 reports for serious adverse events.45 A CDC-funded study at Harvard Pilgrim concluded that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported” to VAERS, a passive reporting system.46 Therefore, it is reasonable to multiply any reported events by 100 to approximate the actual number of deaths and adverse events after any vaccination. In fact, the COVID vaccine serious injury rate, based on the December Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices meeting covering the first five days of COVID vaccination is 2.8%.47 Note that all approved COVID vaccines require two doses, so these data are mostly based on one dose. In the trials, the second dose was much more reactogenic, so we expect the serious injury rate to be much higher after the second dose.
In addition to these government-documented safety issues, hundreds of catastrophic injuries – like life-threatening anaphylaxis and a bizarre shaking syndrome – and deaths have been reported in the media and on social media.48 Most recently baseball great Hank Aaron died 18 days after receiving the first of two experimental COVID vaccines.49 These vaccines use brand new mRNA technology with known complications — and we can certainly anticipate many more unforeseen complications.50
In fact, today there are about two dozen vaccines in use in the United States and another 66 have been withdrawn, most for safety issues, such as LymeRix, RotaShield and DTP.51 These fully licensed vaccines were judged as safe with government approval. This shows a vaccine withdrawal rate of 73%. If three-quarters of fully licensed vaccines are withdrawn, the probability of a warp speed experimental vaccine being withdrawn is far higher.
We urge you not to put schoolchildren in harm’s way with an untested new technology in a quixotic attempt to prevent them from being asymptomatic vectors. COVID vaccines are more like a high-risk prophylactic drug that might only benefit the recipient, not anyone around them. There is no place for medical mandates, especially not for interventions that only provide personal protection. That is an individual choice. As mentioned above, manufacturers enjoy full liability protection when people are injured or killed by vaccines. The school district does not.
(3) On-Campus COVID Testing and Vaccination Sites
The CDE and some public school districts in California are contemplating or attempting to create COVID testing sites on school campuses. For all the reasons stated above, there should be no such sites established on any California public school campuses or school properties. While voluntary community or school testing might initially seem benign, these sites could easily be converted into vaccination centers for students, staff and the public. Again, because of the experimental nature of the vaccine, this too would be highly inappropriate.
(4) School District and California Department of Education Legal Liability
In summary, mandating EUA products is illegal. Mandates do not allow for informed consent, which is spelled out clearly in California Health and Safety Code (CA Health & Saf Code § 24172).52 Relying on the RT-PCR or any other investigational testing product will lead to over-diagnosis and avoidable harms to many students and staff, including a discriminatory system where those who test negative can move freely while those who do not wish to be tested or those who test positive – even falsely positive – are denied their rights to an education and to work.
Those who are forced to learn remotely do not have equal access. Remote learning disadvantages the poor: some may not have a fast internet connection, and students may not have a quiet room with a computer to learn away from family distractions and household/neighborhood noise. Administering to students and staff a vaccine with known safety issues is reckless and will cause injury and death for which school districts and the CDE will be liable.
Being in the unenviable position of defending an illegal program in a Court of Law would certainly prove to be a distraction from your important work.
It is our sincere hope that your district would never seriously consider such mandates.
We respect your position and fully appreciate your duty to educate children safely. Children’s Health Defense – California Chapter will follow up with you to ensure you understand both the law and science. We aim to help you make the right decisions for the children of California. Please contact us at ca.team@childrenshealthdefense.org or 415-496-5301 should you need more information or if you would like scientific and legal help to operate lawfully and ethically.
Sincerely,
Alix Mayer, MBA
President & Board Director, Children’s Health Defense – California Chapter
Board Director, Children’s Health Defense
“The most serious disorders may be provoked by the injection of living organisms into the blood, into a medium not intended for them, may provoke redoubtable manifestations of the gravest morbid phenomena.” ~ Antoine Bechamp
Generally speaking, medicine in this country, and in fact in most all the western world, has been mostly relegated to the promotion of treatment and surgery for mass profit. It has little if anything to do in today’s society with real health, prevention, and education, and has everything to do with causing ill health, sustaining sickness, long-term treatments, invasive and foreign intervention instead of natural healing, and seeks a monopoly over all health and medical matters at the expense of humanity. The totality of this current system has complete disregard for the most magnificent healing structure ever to exist in life, that of the natural human immune system. This is all due to forces in the past that purposely promoted “Germ Theory” instead of natural health in order to use people as fodder for this now multi-billion dollar industry.
With any consideration whatsoever of the current fraudulent ‘pandemic,’ the only conclusion to be reached is that the entirety of this mainstream medical system is based on money, power, and control. Those are the same agendas of the ruling class and the state, and this is no coincidence. In order to get the medical profession on board, all that was necessary was the incentive of money. Every ‘Covid’ procedure, from common checkups, testing, supplies, laboratory analysis, hospitalization, and treatment at every level, brought huge sums of money to doctors and hospitals. All they had to do was to use bogus testing, and then falsely codify the cause of death in order to help perpetuate a non-existent ‘virus pandemic.’ Once this false flag gained strength, the pharmaceutical giants began preparing toxic and poisonous ‘vaccines’ that would only cause more sickness and death. Again, this would perpetuate the Germ Theory nonsense, and would allow for many generations of intentionally cultivated subjects to become customers for this tainted industry. Big pharmaceutical companies were given a guaranteed market, and face no liability for their criminal actions, so the race to gain market share accelerated. That is after all, the basis of modern medicine.
Do not confuse what I am saying by assuming that I include every doctor, health worker, or medical scientist in this overview of a very corrupt system. In general terms, and considering the enormity of this horrible situation, the bulk of medical practice from the top down is complicit in what is happening today, but there are always those that do not comply, and that speak out about this travesty. Unfortunately, the American Medical Association (AMA) is the pinnacle of corruption and criminal behavior in this country, so its power and manner of conduct trickles down to every level of the medical system. The progression begins with the WHO and the CDC, but does not end there, as collusion among government bureaucracies, health organizations, medical insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and every other form of fascist partnership in this organized medical crime syndicate, is like a giant web of deceit with a mission to harm and kill for profit.
Germs are not our enemies; they simply alert us to problems in our bodies that need attention. Getting sick is just the way our bodies rid us of toxins, and alert us that something is wrong inside in our internal environment if you will. Germs do not cause disease, but all the government interventions and mandated precautions do. Disease comes from within, not from outside, so those wearing masks are trapping all the toxins attempting to escape the body and then rebreathing them. In addition, the escaping germs are now contaminating the very mask said to be protecting you. Now you are being told to wear multiple masks, when just one mask can steal up to twenty percent of your oxygen intake. Imagine the harm that can come from blocking even more oxygen for you body that is wholly dependent on it?
Every government medical precaution issued due to this fake ‘virus’ enhances the risk of sickness and death. Every isolation, lockdown, mask mandate, distancing; every business closing, and every order that leads to stress, causes great harm to health. So do disinfectants, hand sanitizers, vaccines, disruption of food supplies, and malnutrition due to economic destruction at the hands of those claiming to protect you from germs. So why are the so-called medical authorities attempting to do you harm? The answer is clear, because sickness, dependency on government and health officials, and perpetual fear is what allows them to seek and gain money, power, and control.
The medical profession will not tell you the truth. Taking care of your body and mind, exposing yourself to as much as possible, being around other people, eating a good diet, listening to your own body, being outdoors, staying away from toxic foods, chemicals, radioactive frequencies, and invasive foreign injections such as vaccines, is what is necessary for good health. None of that is very costly, and huge profits are not generated for thieves when one takes care of their own health.
The state and the criminal medical system survive by lying and deceit in order to use you to generate profit. They care nothing about you, they care nothing about your health; in fact, the unhealthier you are, the better off they are. They only have incentive to harm you, so ignore their mandates, and their orders, and regain your freedom.
“If the Germ Theory were true, no one would be alive to believe it.” ~ BJ Palmer, D.C.
A COUGH, or CHILLS AND FEVER, for example. Either of these is sufficient for a diagnosis of COVID.
The requirement of a positive PCR test for the virus—even that isn’t absolutely necessary.
Besides which—as I’ve been demonstrating in many articles—the PCR is riddled with irreparable flaws, leading to millions of false-positives.
On top of all this, as I’ve been writing (with details), the very existence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is unproven.
So there is a perfect recipe for a false pandemic.
A person who, in 2018, would be diagnosed with the flu turns into a person who, in 2020, is diagnosed with COVID-19.
Ordinary pneumonia suddenly turns into COVID pneumonia.
All sorts of other lung infections are now COVID.
“I have a cold, Doctor.”
“No, it’s COVID.”
“It’s a sniffle.”
“A COVID sniffle.”
STAR ATHLETE: “Thanks to all my fans who supported me through this time. After my COVID diagnosis, I was really sick for three days. I mean, it was really bad. I could hardly get out of bed.”
SPORTS REPORTER (who will be fired five minutes after submitting this interview to his editor): Have you ever had a bad case of the flu, Charlie?”
STAR ATHLETE: “Well, sure. Back in 2015, I was really sick for three days. I mean, it was really bad. I could hardly get out of bed.”
SPORTS REPORTER: “That’s called a clue, pal. Think it through.”
STAR ATHLETE: What? Oh…you mean…?”
The disease labeling and relabeling game has been going on since the dawn of priest classes. Modern medicine has refined it somewhat, but it’s still a quite obvious con.
I first encountered the modern version in 1987. In Central Africa, there was “wasting disease.” Then it was called “Slim disease.” And finally, AIDS.
Actually, it was a relabeling of protein-calorie malnutrition, hunger, and starvation.
But the truth was too stark. It implicated local dictators and predatory transnational agriculture corporations who specialized in stealing good farmland from the people.
Today, COVID-19 is a label that conceals another stark truth: the real “disease” is an assault on national economies and every human who works for a living, through lockdowns.
Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: This is a powerful, moving video presentation by Dr. Vernon Coleman.
You may find yourself sharing tears with him near the end as he speaks from his heart.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
I see that David Lammy, MP, a British politician, now says that the covid-19 vaccine is safe and it works. He is the latest in a long and growing list of celebrities who are enthusiastically endorsing the vaccine – though I rather fear that they have probably spent as much time looking into the facts of the vaccine as I have spent learning about flower arranging.
Just how Mr Lammy claims to know that the vaccine is safe and works is beyond me.
Let me tell you about Mr Lammy.
When he appeared on a television quiz show, he was asked to give the married name of scientists Marie and Pierre who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1903 for their work on radium. Lammy’s reply was Antoinette. He got Marie Curie mixed up with Marie Antoinette.
When he was asked for the name of the building used as a prison by Cardinal Richelieu, he named Versailles instead of the Bastille. Versaille, for heaven’s sake! This is a man who served as a government minister.
He was asked who succeeded to the English throne after Henry VIII and offered Henry VII which showed a singular lack of mathematical skills.
And he once criticised the BBC for wondering whether the smoke from the Vatican would be black or white. He seemed to think there was an element of racism in this well-known way of announcing if a new Pope had been elected.
The thing about Lammy is that to me he doesn’t seem aware of the extent of his ignorance. He knows the covid-19 vaccine is safe and works because maybe he read it on a beer mat. Or maybe he has been conducting secret private clinical trials in his purpose built laboratory. Maybe he’s got a time machine which enables him to see into the future?
No, he says the covid-19 vaccine is safe and it works because someone in the Government says it’s safe and it works. Lammy is supposed to be a member of Her Majesty’s Opposition. His job is to question the Government and to protect his constituents. But he has rolled over and let Bill Gates, Prince Charles and Karl Schwab tickle his tummy.
Incidentally, I am well aware that a decent part of the medical and scientific community doesn’t believe that the stuff currently being promoted like a new brand of crisps is a vaccine at all. For the record I agree with them. It’s a form of gene therapy. I’d rather die than have that stuff in my body. But if I don’t call it a vaccine people who trust David Lammy, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the rest of the `roll over tickle my tummy and I’ll say whatever you want me to say’ celebrities won’t know what I’m talking about.
The fact is that even the WHO only expects these vaccines to help reduce the extent of the symptoms. They’re not promising that the vaccine will stop people getting covid-19 and they’re not expecting the vaccine to stop people spreading the infection if they do get it. If David Lammy and the Archbishop of Canterbury had done a little research they would know that.
They would also know that the vaccine is experimental.
The enthusiastic celebrities are promoting an experimental vaccine – or an experimental whatever it is.
The United States National Library of Medicine published details of the vaccine programme currently under way and they say that the trial will last two years.
Anyone having the vaccine is themselves taking part in an experiment. David Lammy and the Archbishop of Canterbury want your granny to take part in an experiment. And your granddad. And you too.
The medicines agency in the UK knows that it’s an experiment. They advertised for special software so that they could keep track of the high number of adverse events they were expecting.
For two years.
Of course, even after two years we still won’t know what’s going to happen to people who have the vaccine. Or what might happen to any children they might manage to have.
It’s all a mystery – though we do know that there are very real risks of changes to the immune system of those having the vaccine.
But it’s OK, David Lammy and the Archbishop of Canterbury say it’s OK.
They read it somewhere. Or someone told them. Or they saw a government advertisement. I bet you a pound to a peanut that they didn’t actually look through scores and scores of scientific papers before coming to that conclusion. I bet they didn’t make up their own minds before telling millions of people to take the bloody vaccine. They just repeated the garbage they were told. Garbage in, garbage out.
The fact is that no one – not even David Lammy – can possibly know if the vaccine is safe and effective because the trial is still under way. You can look at the paper yourself. It’s in the US National Library of Medicine. Look for clinicaltrials.gov. And you’ll see, on page 3 of 14, that the trial, or study, is expected to be completed on 31st January 2023.
Can you understand that, David? It’s an experiment. It’s not over yet. No one knows what is going to happen in two years. But vaccine loving Bill Gates – whose foundation is making a fortune – wants seven billion people to take part in the experiment.
We do know, however, that thousands of people who have had the vaccine have died or been seriously injured by it. That’s an undeniable fact.
Elderly people in care homes are dying in huge numbers. We’re told it’s the infection but it’s not, of course. It’s the damned vaccine they’re being given.
Now, let me tell you something else. And this should strike terror into every doctor, nurse or boy scout currently involved in giving or promoting these vaccines.
The Nuremberg Code on medical experimentation, written in 1947 for reasons which I hope I don’t have to explain even to David Lammy, stated that explicit voluntary consent from patients is required for human experimentation.
That means that patients must be told that they are taking part in a trial. And they must be warned of all the possible adverse events. That’s what informed consent means.
How many doctors and nurses jabbing people with this stuff are telling patients that it is a trial? How many are giving people the information they need to make a judgement?
I would guess somewhere close to none.
And so, legally, all those people giving vaccinations are war criminals.
War criminals never think they are war criminals, of course. At the end of World War II, the Nazis mostly claimed they were doing important work. Or just obeying orders. Doing what they were told.
None of that cuts the mustard, as they say.
Just doing what you’re told doesn’t stop you being a war criminal.
Let me be clear, everyone giving the covid-19 vaccines without explaining that it’s an experiment, and without listing all the possible adverse events, is a war criminal.
That’s not rhetoric. It’s not opinion. It’s fact.
If you don’t believe me, check it out for yourself.
War crimes are still taken fairly seriously, these days.
A lot of doctors and nurses are going to find themselves in the dock. And the people who endorsed the work they were doing may well find themselves there too. What’s the punishment, I wonder, for aiding and promoting the activities of a war criminal?
Meanwhile, those who believe David Lammy, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other celebrities who have said that the covid-19 vaccine is safe and effective should know that the vaccine is turning out to be just as dangerous as I and other doctors warned it would be.
It was obvious before Christmas that these vaccines would kill and injure millions. For the proof, watch my previous videos or read the transcripts on my website www.vernoncoleman.com
Governments and government agencies are, of course, saying that the people who are dying and suffering awful neurological problems just happened to die or fall ill. They are claiming that the vaccine isn’t responsible.
Aint that odd?
They claim that if you die within 28 days of a fake test for covid-19 then you died of covid-19. The bus that ran you over had nothing to do with it. But they claim that if you die within 28 hours of having the jab then it’s a coincidence.
What bastards these people are. They lie, lie and lie again. This is genocide. When is the world going to wake up?
In America, courts have confirmed that deaths that occur 30 or even 50 years after an injury can be the result of the injury. To give but one example, in 1982, James Brady was shot by a man called Hinckley who tried to assassinate Ronald Reagan. Brady died in 2014 and his death was put down as a result of homicide.
It isn’t for government agencies to decide that deaths are coincidental. Coroners should be making the decision. There should be inquests on every patient who dies within 28 days or even longer of having a covid-19 vaccination.
But there won’t be.
Meanwhile, we have a horrifying avalanche of evidence showing that these damned vaccines are killing and maiming people – all for a disease which is proved to be no more dangerous than the annual flu.
I have read many, many reports of the deaths caused by the vaccines.
You can see details of the deaths on my website under the heading `How Many Are the Vaccines Killing’. The list also appears on Richie Allen’s website.
There is no doubt in my heart or in my mind.
This is global genocide.
How much longer are people going to be silent?
How many must die? How many must be crippled?
When will people like David Lammy admit that they’re wrong and stop promoting a deadly vaccine?
Official COVID Death Numbers: The Fraud, the Killing
There are several reasons to reject and ignore ALL COVID statistics. Chief among the reasons—no one has proved that the virus, SARS-CoV-2, exists.
But for purposes of this discussion, and to show, once again, that the medical cartel is deeply mired in fraud and killing, let’s have a look at official COVID death numbers in the US.
Death numbers are a significant metric, because, obviously, all other so-called “cases” recover and live.
AARP: Oct. 30, 2020: “In a pandemic filled with grim statistics, one of the grimmest has gone largely unnoticed: 95 percent of COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. have occurred among people who were 50 or older. This even though the majority of coronavirus cases have been reported in people under age 50.”
“The unnerving numbers don’t end there. About 8 in 10 deaths have been among people 65 and older, according to the latest demographic data available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).”
Let’s move forward in time. From statista.com, “Number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) deaths in the U.S. as of January 23, 2021”:
“Between the beginning of February 2020 and January 23, 2021, of 359,352 deaths caused by COVID-19 in the United States, almost 115,700 had occurred among those aged 85 years and older.”
Statista goes on to report the COVID death numbers among other age groups. Age 75-84: 99,342 deaths. Age 65-74: 76,404 deaths. Age 55-64: 42,031 deaths.
Adding up all the COVID deaths in the 55-and-older age groups, we get 333,477—out of 359,352 total COVID deaths registered at the time of the Statista report.
93% of all COVID deaths in the US have occurred in people 55 years old and older.
I’ll build on that analysis: Most of these people who died had multiple long-term health conditions. They had been treated, for years, perhaps decades, with toxic medical drugs.
Buying into COVID propaganda, most of these elderly people were terrified they might receive a diagnosis of COVID-19. Then they DID receive that diagnosis.
THEN they were put into isolation, cut off from contact with family and loved ones—and they folded up and died.
NO VIRUS REQUIRED.
Note: Some of these elderly and frail people were heavily sedated and put on breathing ventilators. In a large New York study of hospitalized COVID patients, 97.2% of all patients 65 and older who were put on ventilators died. 97.2 PERCENT.
Whether ventilated or not, in these 55-and-older patients, we are talking about FORCED PREMATURE DEATHS—through terror induced by the COVID diagnosis, plus isolation from friends and family, on top of their prior serious health conditions and long-term toxic medical treatments.
NO VIRUS NECESSARY.
No need for a fairy tale virus to explain their deaths.
Therefore, using official death numbers, roughly 93% of all US COVID deaths are explained with no reference to a virus.
“Well, we killed as many old people as we could. That gives us the necessary COVID numbers…”
Perhaps you think the 55-64 age group is “too young.” I shouldn’t include them. All right. If we just consider 65 and older, the deaths in that group are 81% of all US COVID deaths. Still a staggering figure.
There is no pandemic.
Manifesto: Stop Covid-19 Vaccination and Discrimination Against Unvaccinated Persons
‘We must ensure that citizens are informed that the vaccination is NOT
mandatory and that no one is politically, socially, or otherwise pressured
to get themselves vaccinated, if they do not wish to do so themselves’
THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE IN STRASBURG,
JANUARY 27th 2021
FACT: COVID-19 VACCINATION IS NOT AN ACT OF SOLIDARITY, IT’S BLIND FAITH
The current Covid-19 ‘vaccines’ are not true vaccines but genetic engineering ‘injectables’
These products are injectables based on new experimental technologies that introduce genetic material into human cells.In France, over 5000 citizens and doctors have filed a complaint against the use of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.
mRNA Covid-19 injectables are a form of genetic hacking
This is a procedure in which foreign genetic material is inserted into our cells to give them new instructions.Dr. Stephen Hoge, President of Moderna, has even compared this technology to the installation of new ‘software’.
Covid-19 ‘injectables’ are not legally required to undergo any type of GMO risk assessment
On July 15th, to accelerate the production of Covid-19 ‘vaccines’, the EU voted through a special waiver for these products, now not subject to EU GMO regulations.The impact of these genetic engineering devices on our genome, or on the environment, will therefore not be assessed.Manufacturers have ‘carte blanche’.Children’s Health Defense Europe and several other NGOs have requested the annulment of this decision in the European Court of Justice.
Covid-19 ‘vaccines’ have not been shown to prevent transmission of the virus
In its press conference (at 18min) in early January 2021, on the vaccine roll out in Europe, the EMA confirmed that there is currently no data to show that the virus would block transmission.The EMA ‘hopes’ that these injections will work but they just DO NOT KNOW.This information was also repeated in a WHO press conference on January 28th.
Covid-19 ‘vaccines’ might slow down transmission OR might also accelerate spreading of the disease
In fact, countries such as the UK, Israel and South Africa, who have started mass vaccination campaigns, are now experiencing a surge of cases.Reason asks to halt these campaigns and analyse the data before going on.
Taking a Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ is not an act of solidarity
You do not know what effect it will have on others.Current Covid-19 vaccine clinical trials will not be completed until 2022 (EMA press conference). The only thing one can say is that you will be participating in a global experiment.
Some Covid-19 ‘vaccines’ have a very high rate of injury
22 severe side effects have been listed by the FDA, including anaphylactic shock, facial paralysis, permanent neurological damage, autoimmune reactions and cardiac arrest.Significant numbers of deaths are tragically being reported such as in California, in Norway, in Gibraltar, in France and in the UK.
Many doctors refuse to take or administer these Covid-19 ‘vaccines’
Doctors have filed an official motion at the EMA to halt the Covid-19 vaccine clinical trials (and vaccination campaigns).Doctors around the world are expressing their concerns about the safety of this vaccine and the requirement to respect free and informed consent: e.g. in California, in the USA, in France, in the UK.
There is a specific death risk associated with coronavirus vaccines
It is called Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) or immune facilitation or pathogenic priming and was observed in all previous attempts to develop a coronavirus vaccine.ADE occurs when a vaccinated individual encounters the natural virus, which triggers an overreaction leading to organ failure and death.
The number of people who have died after a Covid ‘vaccine’ is alarming
In fact, several countries such as Germany and Norway are now hesitating to recommend the vaccine for the elderly or even reconsidering the use of these products at all.The manufacturers contracted special deals to be exempt from liability so in the event of vaccine injury or damage, it is likely that nobody will be legally responsible and no one will pay any compensation.
PRINCIPLES: INFORMED CONSENT, NO PRESSURE, NO MANDATE
The Covid-19 vaccination campaign is a breach of the Nuremberg Code
Signed in 1947, after the horror of Nazi experimentation, this code has “identified informed consent as an absolute prerequisite for the conduct of research involving human subjects”
The Covid-19 vaccination campaign is a breach of the Oviedo Convention
“for the protection of human rights and the dignity of the human being with regard to biology and medicine”.
Coercion to take Covid-19 ‘vaccines’ would violate constitutional rights
In most countries, there are laws to enshrine each citizen’s free and informed consent to medical intervention.For example, in France, the 2002 Kouchner law states that “no medical procedure or treatment may be performed without the free and informed consent of the individual, which consent may be withdrawn at any time”.
Coercion to take a Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ is a breach of the European Convention of Human Rights
On January 27th 2021 the Council of Europe, which advises the European Court of Human Rights in Strasburg, stated: ‘We must ensure that citizens are informed that the vaccination is NOT mandatory and that no one is politically, socially, or otherwise pressured to get themselves vaccinated, if they do not wish to do so themselves’.
Our decision-makers seem lost and confused
The “powers that be” are poorly informed, serving us with an incoherent discourse in constant contradiction with the epidemic reality.We do not live in fear, guilt or contempt for alternative methods or the professionals who advocate them.
The Freedom We Demand Is a Lucid, Responsible and Evidence-Based Stance
In this article, I continue to trace the implications of the missing virus; I’m referring to the fact the no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists.
Here I take a wider look at the situation.
Apparently, the notion of a virus was born when germ theorists ran out of bacteria to explain illnesses. So they claimed there had to be a smaller invisible particle, which came to be called “virus.”
Since that fateful choice, researchers have encountered various problems. Chief among them: how do you to prove, in specific instances, that these viruses exist and cause illness?
Flashing forward—two modern avenues of proof have been invented. One, twist and reverse the meaning of “isolation.” And two, sequence the genetic structure of viruses by using pre-set computer programs to build, out of thin air, without justification, collections of genetic information, ending up with nothing more than virtual entities.
In past articles, I’ve analyzed and rejected both avenues of “research.”
In the first case, there is the unjustified presumption that the virus is contained in a soup in a dish in a lab, and this is called “isolation,” when it is actually non-isolation. In the second case, there is no true sequencing. It’s all made up out of unmerited supposition and guesswork.
However, 99.9% of mainstream scientists are true believers in their own methods and fabrications. They actually accept what they’re doing as science.
Therefore, in virology labs all over the world—including bio-weapons facilities—THE RESEARCHERS HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THEY’RE DOING. THEY DON’T KNOW HOW FAR FROM REALITY THEY ACTUALLY ARE.
THEY HAVE NO CLUE AS TO THE ABSURDITY OF THEIR OWN WORK.
They’re taken in and fooled and bamboozled by their own theories.
It’s as if explorers tasked with mapping the moon, on site, up close and personal, are carrying out their jobs in underground coal mines. And they don’t recognize there is a problem.
The tenth of one percent of the researchers who do see a problem understand they have to keep their mouths shut.
Am I claiming, with finality, that ALL “viruses” have no physical existence? No. At least, not yet. That’s an open question.
In the case of SARS-CoV-2, I see no legitimate evidence for its existence.
And what’s worse, scientists are hypnotized by their own assumptions; and therefore, they’re immune from re-thinking what they’re doing.
It certainly wouldn’t be the first time a system trapped the practitioners working inside it.
It’s how you train humans to be robots.
At first, the humans follow the rules that define the system. Then they graduate to enforcing the rules. Their minds become excessively literal. They view alternatives as heresies.
“Sir, you have no idea what you’re doing. You think you’re discovering new viruses. You think you’re manipulating them to create new forms.”
“Don’t bother me, I’m busy.”
“You’re saying non-isolation is isolation. You’re using algorithms to invent ‘viruses’ made up of irrelevant data. They’re data constructs, nothing more.”
“You’re a blasphemer. Don’t bother me, I’m busy.”
“You’re fiddling with processes that have nothing to do with what you think they have to do with…”
“How did you get into my lab?”
“I brought a camera crew. We want to film and document every single step you take to ‘discover a new virus’.”
“Absolutely not. You’re not official. This is a high-security facility.”
“In other words, sight unseen, we have to accept your claims as if they were law.”
“Yes, that’s the rule. We’re not running a debating society. We’re doing science.”
“But you see, that’s the point. You’re NOT doing science.”
“What are you saying?”
“You have no idea what you’re doing. You THINK you’re discovering new viruses. You BELIEVE you’re manipulating them. But you’re only working with self-generated fantasies.”
“I’ll tell you what. I’ll inject you with one of these fantasies and let’s see what happens.”
“You don’t possess an actual specimen of an isolated and purified virus, separated from all other material.”
“Here it is, in this dish.”
“No. LOOK AT IT. In that dish, there’s a soup. It contains human and monkey cells, toxic drugs and chemicals, and other genetic material. It’s the furthest thing from ‘isolated’.”
“We know the virus is there. Some of the cells are dying. The virus must be doing the killing.”
“No. The toxic drugs and chemicals could be doing the killing. Furthermore, the cells are being starved of nutrients. That alone can explain their death. Think it through.”
“There’s nothing to think about. Our procedures have been verified by thousands of studies and published scientific papers.”
“Consensus is not the same thing as truth.”
“Security, come to the lab. We have a non-certified intruder. Escort him from the premises.”
“That’s your bottom line?”
“Our work is classified. You’re a civilian. We pronounce; you obey.”
“And that’s science?”
“Absolutely. Didn’t they teach you that in school?”
“YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU’RE DOING IN THIS LAB. You’re a prisoner of your own illusions.”
“Security, hurry it up. This man is a subversive…”
“Suppose you believe you’re working with viruses, but you’re only working with IDEAS AND STORIES ABOUT VIRUSES?”
“What do you mean?”
“You’re not really isolating anything. And you’re not sequencing anything. The sequences are just INFORMATION cobbled together from genetic reference libraries by computer programs. It’s all, at best, a digital metaphor for what you believe exists. You’re generating fairy tales.”
“Even if that were true, it would be the closest we could come to reality. Nothing is perfect.”
“A rock is perfect. You see it, you kick it, you sit on it.”
“Viruses are very small.”
“Even more reason to be sure you’re dealing with something actual.”
“We use PCR technology.”
“But it only looks for a piece of RNA you ASSUME comes from ‘the virus’. Since you don’t have an isolated and purified virus, you have no reason to assume the RNA comes from ‘the virus’.”
“Security, take this man to his car. Take the film crew with him. They have no right to be here. This is a government-funded facility. Private citizens have no access to government.”
CHIEF SECURITY OFFICER: “Actually, I’d like to hear the rest of the conversation. My sister just took the vaccine to protect her against ‘the virus’, and now she’s in the hospital…”
What’s in the COVID Tests? — Ongoing Deception & Horrific Crimes Against Humanity
In a week where it was reported that the New York State Attorney General admitted that nursing home deaths in New York State for 2020, already recorded as numbering tens of thousands, were undercounted by as much as 50% with Governor Andrew Cuomo reportedly stating “Who cares?”, and where numerous reports all over the world have recorded hundreds of seniors dying in assisted care facilities this week after the roll out of the experimental COVID mRNA injections, something truly amazing happened in Vancouver, Washington last night.
The people of the community, many members of “People’s Rights Washington,” turned out in mass to rescue a 74-year-old woman at Legacy Salmon Creek Hospital where she had been medically kidnapped, and was being held against her will, and against the will of her daughter who has medical power of attorney for her mother.
This group of 40-50 citizens, 90% of whom were women (mothers) and their children, stared down an army dispatched from the Clark County Sheriff’s department in full riot gear, endured being grabbed by the throat and pepper sprayed, and refused to leave the hospital until 74-year-old Gayle Meyer was released back into the custody of her daughter, Satin.
Satin took her mother to the hospital the night before to get treatment for a urinary tract infection (UTI), and had been with her until 4 a.m. before returning home to get a few hours of sleep before heading back to the hospital the next day.
Their primary care physician had already written a prescription for an antibiotic, and Gayle was supposed to be released and sent home with her daughter, who is also her medical power of attorney.
But when Satin arrived at the hospital, she was told that not only could she not take her mother home, but that she could not even see her mother, because she refused to take a COVID test.
That’s when Satin called her friends, who responded by heading to the hospital to find out what was going on. The nursing staff allegedly changed their story a few times, first saying that Gayle had refused to take a COVID test and was therefore being quarantined, but then later allegedly changing their story and stating that Gayle did in fact take a COVID test, and had to remain in the hospital for at least 24 hours until the results of the test came back.
Her daughter Satin, who had been in the hospital with her mother the day before until 4 a.m., had made it clear that her mother did not need nor want a COVID test, since she only had a UTI and was only in the hospital to be put on fluids.
The nurses allegedly also stated to Satin that they had also put her mother on oxygen, which greatly surprised Satin and her friends who were now showing up at the hospital to support her and her mother. Her mother, Gayle, allegedly has never before had to be put on oxygen, and certainly a UTI does not warrant oxygen.
As we have documented many times since COVID started last year, many deaths blamed on COVID in fact are caused by improper treatment, especially when a patient is intubated and put on a ventilator, where the death rate is over 90%.
Obviously becoming very concerned at this point that her mother who had a simple UTI was now being medically kidnapped and forced to stay in the hospital against her will and receive treatments she did not want, Satin and her friends called the County Sheriff office to come and assist them get Gayle out of the hospital.
The woman who filmed the entire ordeal, Kelli Stewart, explained that she had spoken to the Sheriff dispatcher, and she was told that the Sheriff was not going to respond and get involved.
However, as they were talking, the dispatcher allegedly stated that now the hospital had also called, so they were sending officers to the scene.
As you will see in the video below, the Sheriff deputies and officers were there to protect the hospital and Big Pharma, and NOT to represent their constituents and fulfill their oath of office to protect their constituents, and in this case, to prevent a medical kidnapping.
In fact, at one point Satin attempts to enter the hospital behind another patient who was entering, and an officer grabs her by the throat, and pushes her back.
The officer then used pepper spray on the people who were standing outside, who were all unarmed and primarily women and children.
Everything was captured on video, and I have watched the entire 2 hours of film footage, and condensed it down to under 53 minutes. This is from our Rumble account, and it is also available on our Bitchute Channel.
People across this country and around the world are having horrible adverse effects or dying after taking this injection called an mRNA “vaccine.” It is not a vaccine at all, it is a bioweapon meant to cause any number of problems and death in order to satisfy the agendas of those few that claim to be the ruling class.
The elderly have been the hardest hit so far, because they are the first to be targeted with this weapon, and they already have in many cases, co-morbidities and compromised immune systems. The perpetrators of this “vaccine” policy fully understand this, and are attempting to claim that this injection has nothing to do with the very high percentage dying very quickly after taking the shot. This is the easiest group to target, because the state can manipulate the narrative much more effectively due to the age and weakened health condition of this targeted group. In addition, they are a captured control group that can be used for experimental purposes, and in the process, also be made much more vulnerable due to this captured state and close contact situation. This is by design. The evil Andrew Cuomo was able to take advantage of this tactic when he forced most all the people in nursing homes in New York to remain locked up together, even moving very many sick patients into these homes. That was simply a type of premeditated murder.
Mass injection at nursing homes is causing high percentages of deaths in a very short amount of time. The injection itself seems to be causing fatal sicknesses in these patients, causing stark changes in their health immediately, all leading to death.
These mRNA shots are not vaccines, but delivery systems meant to harm, control, and kill. No one knows the long-term and gene-altering effects of these poisons, so beginning with the elderly for this experiment was planned all along, and for obvious reasons. When the old and infirmed die, little attention is paid by this now indifferent and frightened population. Months or years from now when the long term effects begin to cause death in the younger and healthier crowd, it will all be blamed on some new or mutated virus strain, when in fact, it is likely that the fatal effects will have been due to vaccination of this bioweapon.
By using false PCR testing at high cycle rates, the old will be said to have Covid, when no such thing has ever been purified, isolated, or identified, and therefore does not exist. After testing positive, the deadly “vaccine” is given, and when the inevitable death occurs, it will be blamed on Covid. The narrative (propaganda) will then be that they had Covid so could not have died from the injection. How convenient for the state. They kill these poor people, and then use the deaths to further their agendas of fear in order to control all. These are evil psychopaths without any conscience or soul.
The highest percentage of deaths to date have been in nursing homes, but these deaths due to the state and its criminal partners in the pharmaceutical industry are being caused in most part by this toxic mRNA concoction that is more akin to a bioweapon than a vaccine.
Brian Shilhavy, editor at Health Impact News, has written about and described this situation thoroughly in his article titled:
There is much research and information in this article, and what should be taken from all that is going on is to avoid this deadly bioweapon called a “vaccine” at all costs!
A LANDMARK legal decision declared that regional containment policies – including lockdowns, social distancing, prohibitions on gatherings by family or friends are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The judge called the lockdowns a “catastrophically wrong political decision with dramatic consequences for almost all areas of people’s lives.”
The judge ruled that the government violated the “inviolably guaranteed human dignity” under basic German law. This momentous, affirmative, liberating decision was handed down by a court of law in Weimar, Germany; the city whose name was adopted by the first German republic: 1919—1933, until it was overturned by the Nazi regime. Hundreds of thousands of German people have demonstrated throughout the summer and fall of 2020, some protesters compared their struggle to anti-Nazi resistance; which led Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas to bristle.
Forensic analysis of official data convinced the court that the epidemic situation that was used to justify the lockdown laws does not exist. The judge ruled that the government lacked sufficient legal grounds to impose the restrictions since there was no “epidemic situation of national importance.” He declared that the measures were an attack on the “foundations of our society.”
Dr. Reiner Fuellisch
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, the lawyer who initiated the first German and American complaints and procedures stated:
“We consider this judgment to be extraordinary and of fundamental importance. It is transferable to all violations of Covid19 measures. It is also transferable to the current Renewed Containment and all applicable coronavirus regulations. Because the “numbers of cases” are decreasing, as are patients in intensive care units! The judge confirms this with an excellent demonstration.”
The battle over government dictatorial overreach and the assault on the rights and dignity of citizens in a democracy will be won in the courts of law.
The decision has been described by German media as “politically explosive”!
Below Dr. Nicole Delépine, MD, provides an in-depth analysis of the body of evidence that supports this momentous decision. She notes that one factor that helped Germany resist the epidemic better than other countries – such as France – is probably due to the early treatment of patients with hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics, vitamins, etc. She concludes that This crisis is purely political with a health pretext.
* Dr. Delépine is a member of the Distinguished Advisory Board of the Alliance for Human Research Protection.
Nicole Delepine, MD
After PCR tests, the principle of confinement condemned by justice. Published on 1/26/2021 3:50 PM
German court declares regional lockdown UNCONSTITUTIONAL, politically major decision
Author (s): Nicole Delépine for FranceSoir
Tribune: German court declares regional containment UNCONSTITUTIONAL, politically major decision [1]
Will Weimar again be the site of legal revolutions as at the time when the constitution ending the empire was drawn up after the First World War? [2] In any case, the judgment declaring confinement unconstitutional caused a stir in Germany and gave rise to several articles. Let us hope that it will also awaken French consciences, giving them the courage to take legal action against these liberticidal and unjustified measures inspired by the WHO which guides our governments [3] and promises them financial aid via the IMF like the President of Belarus has clearly stated [4] .
The Weimar judgment considered major
The social distancing rules imposed by the Thuringian government are deemed incompatible with the country’s Constitution. Thanks to forensic analysis of official data, the judgment affirms that the epidemic situation used to justify the law does not exist. The lawyer Reiner Fuellmich who initiated the first German and American complaints and procedures comments as follows [5] : “ We consider this judgment to be extraordinary and of fundamental importance. It is transferable to all violations of Covid19 measures. It is also transferable to the current Renewed Containment and all applicable coronavirus regulations. Because the “numbers of cases” are decreasing, as are patients in intensive care units! The judge confirms this with an excellent demonstration . ”
Story
On the occasion of a judgment of a man having according to the accusation “violated” (here is a very big word), the strict confinement imposed by the government of the central state of Thuringia last spring, the legality of the measures imposed in Germany to curb an epidemic of questionable severity is back in the headlines. This is all the more interesting given that some countries, including ours talk about containment while the epidemic is stagnating or decreasing, that there are effective early treatments and that the overwhelming majority of hospitals are not full, contrary to what our authorities announce here and there.
Facts
This gentleman had celebrated a birthday with his seven [6] friends. On 24.04.2020, the person concerned was in the evening with at least seven other people in the backyard of the house X-Straße 1 in W. to celebrate the birthday of one of the participants. The eight participants in total were distributed among seven different households. However, a stay in public space is only authorized alone, in the circle of members of his own household and, moreover, at most with another non-domestic person ”according to local regulations.
The Weimar judge condemned a restriction limiting private gatherings to members of the same household and to a person outside of the same household, a rule which the accused had not respected. The judge said that the regional government itself had violated the “inviolably guaranteed human dignity” guaranteed by Article 1 of the German Basic Law by imposing such restrictions.
The accused was acquitted and relieved of the need to pay a fine of 200 euros ($ 243).
No sufficient reason for confinement
According to the court, the government did not have sufficient grounds to impose these restrictions since there was no “epidemic situation of national importance” at the time and the health system was not at risk of failure. collapse, the Robert Koch Institute having reported that the multiplication coefficient of Covid-19 had then fallen below 1.
At no time is there any real danger that the health service will be overwhelmed by a “wave” of patients with COVID-19. According to the register established on March 17, 2020, an average of at least 40% of intensive care beds in Germany were permanently available. In Thuringia, 378 beds were registered occupied on April 3, 36 of which were in covid-19 patients. During this time, there were 417 vacant beds. On April 16, two days before the publication of the regulation, 501 beds were recorded occupied, 56 covid-19, and 528 beds were vacant … Thuringia recorded its highest number of covid-19 patients notified in the spring at 63 (April 28). Thus, at no time has the number of patients with COVID-19 reached a level that could have justified fears of an overflow of the health system.
This estimate of the real dangers of COVID-19 in spring 2020 is confirmed by an assessment of data from 421 clinics belonging to the Qualitätsmedizin Initiative, which found that the number of cases of acute respiratory infections (severe ARI) hospitalized in Germany in first half of 2020 was 187,174 – lower than the figure for the first half of 2019 (221,841 cases), even though that figure included cases of ARI caused by covid. The same analysis showed that the number of cases in intensive care was lower in the first half of 2020 than in 2019 …
The judge also said that the regional government did not have the right to introduce such far-reaching measures since it was for the legislator to do so (parliament and not district courts).
The Weimar court said the spring containment of Thuringia was a “catastrophically flawed policy decision, with dramatic consequences for almost every area of people’s lives . ” [7]
Health situation and confinement: disproportionate decision
The confinement imposed in Thuringia represents “the most complete and deepest restrictions on fundamental rights in the history of the Federal Republic, ” the court said, calling these measures a ” disproportionate ” attack against the ” foundations of our society. ”
Consequences of a regional ordinance
The decision is not legally binding outside of Weimar, although each German court can render a judgment on the constitutionality of orders issued by any authority other than the Bundestag, federal parliament or regional parliament. Unless a law has been passed, each court can contradict the regulations if they appear unjustified
Impact of the Weimar judgment among some officials and local media
Like the other countries submitted to the WHO’s international health council, containment measures are regularly re-imposed, and clearly unrelated to the virulence of the epidemic, which varies depending on the region, but faithfully following Ferguson’s scheme, which had been planned in March 2020 (report 9) the succession of six confinements, in order to be able to move on to the major reset planned by the economic and world forum in Davos (read Klaus Schwab’s brief available on the internet of the same name ). This crisis is purely political with a health pretext.
Germany is once again applying strict containment quite similar to that imposed by the federal government in November and which has been extended and reinforced several times since then [8] . Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cabinet extended the restrictions until mid-February.
Neil Ferguson Dire Prediction
Appeal of the region against the judgment of the Weimar court
The Thuringian Regional Public Prosecutor’s Office lodged a complaint against the court decision, requesting that it be reconsidered and possibly overturned, with the case being handed over to another judge. The judgment must be “revised to develop the law and ensure a unified jurisdiction” regarding the containment and its violation, a spokesperson for the prosecutor’s office, Hannes Gruenseisen, told local media.
Containment is going badly in Germany, especially since the country has resisted the epidemic much better than France, probably due to the early and discreet treatment of patients with hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics and vitamins, etc., from the start, isolation patients, and consequently suffers [9] a lower mortality rate (622 / million at 26/1, according to the WHO. France on the contrary has prohibited early treatment and practiced so-called blind confinement because mixing patients and healthy leading to an explosion of direct (1113 / M) and indirect mortality due to lack of care and other complications of confinement.
Comparison of Mortality — France vs Germany
Germany has seen protests against this measure on several occasions in various cities during the fall and winter of 2020. At one point, protesters even compared their struggle to anti-Nazi resistance, which did not go over well with Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas.
Rationale for quashing the charge
The person concerned had to be acquitted for legal reasons because the articles on which the accusation was based are unconstitutional and therefore canceled. [10]
The court itself decided on the constitutionality of the norms, since the obligation of submission according to the consistent case law of the Federal Constitutional Court applies only to official federal and state laws, but not to district statutory orders.
The judge concluded that there were no “unacceptable gaps in protection” that could have justified resorting to general regulations. These measures “violate the inviolable guaranteed human dignity” in article 1, paragraph 1 of the Federal Constitution. “
“Devastating accusation against the federal government .
It is striking how coldly Judge Weimar concluded this months-long discussion: the blanket contact ban is a harsh civil rights intervention. It is part of the fundamental freedoms of the individual in a free society to determine for himself with whom (on presumption of consent) and under what circumstances he or she will come into contact.
The free encounter between people for all conceivable ends is also a fundamental basis for society.
The state’s obligation in this case is categorically to refrain from any intervention that deliberately regulates and limits that measure. Questions of how many people a citizen can invite to their home or how many people a citizen can meet in a public place to walk, play sports, run errands or sit on a park bench have absolutely no legitimate interest for the state.
By imposing a blanket ban on contact,the state – albeit with good intentions – attacks the foundations of society by imposing physical distance between citizens (“social distancing”).
No one, even in January 2020, could have imagined, in Germany, to be prevented by the state under penalty of a fine from inviting their parents to their home without banning other members of their family from the house, while that they were there. No one could have imagined that it would be forbidden to sit with three friends on a park bench. Never before in Germany had the state had the idea of imposing such measures to counter an epidemic.
Even the 2013 risk analysis “Pandemic caused by the SARS-like virus” (Bundestag publication 17/12051), which described a scenario of 7.5 million deaths in 3 years, does not consider a general ban on contacts (or ban on leaving home or general suspension of public life). Besides the quarantine and isolation of infected people, the only anti-epidemic measures he speaks of are the closure of schools, the cancellation of mass events and the question of hygiene recommendations (BT 17/12051, p . 61f).
“Although it appears that a shift in values has taken place over the months of the Covid crisis, with the consequence that many people find procedures once considered absolutely exceptional more or less ‘normal’ – which, of course, also changes the outlook on the Constitution – there is no doubt that by imposing a blanket contact ban, the democratic parliament has broken what was previously considered an obvious taboo.
“It should also be noted – as an aspect worthy of special attention – that the state, by imposing its general ban on contact in order to protect itself against infection, treats every citizen as a potential health threat. of third parties. If every citizen is seen as a threat from which others must be protected, that citizen is also deprived of the possibility of deciding what risks to take – which is a fundamental freedom.
A citizen’s choice to visit a cafe or bar at night and run the risk of respiratory infection in the name of social interaction and fun in life, or to exercise caution because he has a weakened immune system and therefore prefers to stay at home, is suppressed under the provisions of a general contact ban. “
The report then details the judge’s examination of the collateral damage caused by the confinement.
– Declines in profits, losses suffered by companies, traders and independent professionals as direct consequences of the restrictions imposed on their freedoms. Losses for suppliers of directly affected companies; losses resulting from disruption of supply chains leading to production stoppages; losses resulting from travel restrictions.
-Wage losses due to reduced hours or unemployment
– Bankruptcies and destruction of livelihoods and consequent costs of bankruptcies and destruction of livelihoods ”.
For Berlin, the Senate administration reported a 23% increase in child abuse for the first half of 2020 [12] .
According to a representative survey (Steinert / Ebert), during the spring confinement period, around 3 percent of women in Germany were victims of physical violence at home, 3.6 percent were raped by their partner, and in 6 , 5 percent of all children’s homes were severely punished.
The number of statistically recorded suicides in Germany is not yet available for 2020, but the Senate administration in Berlin has reported a potentially significant increase in the number of suicides.
During the spring containment, more than 908,000 operations were canceled in Germany, not only so-called non-emergency operations, such as implantation of knee and hip joint prostheses, knee arthroscopy, cataract surgeries, etc., but also 52,000 cancer operations. [13]
According to a meta-analysis published (British Medical Journal) in November [14] this delay already increases the risk of death by 6 to 13% depending on the type of cancer, an eight week delay for breast cancer of 13%, a twelve-week deferral of 26 percent. Without being able to quantify in more detail, there is no doubt that the cancellation of the operations also resulted in deaths in Germany.
A study conducted by the Clinique du Haut-Rhin Waldshut-Tiengen [15] examined excess mortality in the district of Waldshut (170,000 inhabitants) in April 2020. On average, 165 people died there between 2016 and 2019 in April, compared to 227. in 2020, an excess mortality of 37%. Of the 62 additional deaths, only 34 could be associated with covid19, 28, or 45% of excess mortality are due to other causes of death . The study authors attribute these cases to reduced use of emergency medical facilities. Twice as many people have been found dead in their homes than the comparative average. These figures indicate that deaths are due to underutilization or delay in the use of health care.
Short, medium and long term damages were pointed out by the court
(1) Loss of schooling, teaching and impairment of psychosocial development of children due to failure or restrictions of school education or closure of other educational institutions
(2) Loss of cultural suggestions or experiences due to the closure of theaters, concert halls or opera houses and many other cultural institutions
(3) Loss of possibilities for artistic development by prohibitions which prohibit common music in orchestras or choirs.
(4) loss of community experiences / personal social cohabitation by banning meetings in associations, demonstrations, gatherings, closing bars, etc.
(5) Reduction of social development opportunities for children by closing kindergartens
(6) Isolation of children in accommodation without contact with other children by closing schools, kindergartens and play areas
The judgment report emphasizes that school is not only a place for the transmission of knowledge, but a place of social learning. School closures virtually suppress social learning and hinder the integration of children and young people.
Teaching by parents is difficult, particularly in certain disadvantaged areas. The social divide is therefore reinforced. The learning of German among children of migrant families is also seriously disrupted. “Knowledge of German? Catastrophic for a third of the pupils [16] .
Economic consequences of containment According to the Weimar judgment, we note
“(1) Aid provided by the Federal State and the Länder to economic agents
(2) Tax losses due to the limitation of economic activity due to confinement
(3) Partial unemployment benefits and unemployment benefits that had to be paid following confinement
(4) Social assistance for people dependent on social assistance
The “coronavirus shield”, a legislative package adopted on March 27, 2020, in Germany alone represented 1.173 billion euros (353.3 billion euros in aid, 819.7 billion euros in guarantees). The latest federal budgets were 356.4 billion euros (2019) and 346.6 billion euros (2018). Even if the guarantees provided are not per se “lost”, the overall charges are expected to reach the aggregate level of several federal budgets.
Health and economic damage in southern countries secondary to confinements in rich western countries
The collateral damage already occurred or to be expected is enormous. The reasons are the interruption of tuberculosis control programs, childhood disease immunization programs, interruptions in food supply due to collapsed supply chains, etc.
The UN predicts the famine of more than 10,000 children per month during the first year of the pandemic (more than 10,000 children die of hunger each month due to covid19 [17]
In Africa alone, according to Federal Development Minister Müller,400,000 additional victims are expected from malaria and HIV and half a million deaths from tuberculosis as a result of confinement (more victims by confinement than by virus: In Africa, crises have been dramatically worsened, according to an article by John Ioannidis [18] 1.4 million more deaths from tuberculosis are even expected over the next five years .
In the long term, containment-related excess mortality will likely be significantly larger than the death toll from COVID 19.
Since the containment policy in Thuringia is part of a general policy of almost all western industrialized countries, this damage is the indirect consequence also attributable to the pro rata and is therefore in principle linked to the examination of proportionality .
For this reason alone, the standards to be assessed here do not meet the requirement of proportionality. Added to this are the direct and indirect restrictions on freedom, gigantic financial damage, immense damage to health and spiritual damage.
The word ” disproportionate ” is too colorless to indicate the dimensions of what happened. The containment policy implemented by the Land government in the spring (and today again), of which the general ban on contact was (and remains) essential, is a catastrophic political error, with dramatic consequences for almost all sectors of human life, for society, for the State and for the countries of the South of the whole world ”.
Constitutionality of standards
In the case of legal ordinances which have not been adopted by the Bundestag or a regional parliament, each court is authorized to decide for itself their constitutionality. The articles cited [19] by the prosecution are not constitutional, because they are not based on a law passed in parliament.
They are unconstitutional for formal reasons, as provisions which deeply infringe on fundamental rights are not covered by the legal enabling basis in the Infection Protection Act.
The legislator must himself take all the essential decisions in fundamental normative fields, in particular in the field of the exercise of fundamental rights – insofar as this state regulation is accessible – and must not delegate them to the executive. regional.
The more essential legal regulations or other executive acts interfere with fundamental rights, the more specific the provisions of the implementing law must be.
Attack on human dignity
Thus with regard to isolation and prohibition of contact with people outside the family, a general prohibition of contact poses – at least – the question of the violation of the guarantee of human dignity.
Here the prohibition poses a problem because it constitutes a serious attack on the general freedom of action and also on the freedom of assembly, association, religion, profession and art, not only because it is addressed to all citizens, regardless of whether or not they are suspected of disease or contamination.
By prohibiting all citizens from meeting with more than one person outside the household, by prohibiting it not only in the public space, but also in freedoms in the family nucleus, the general prohibition of contact inevitably leads to other restrictions on fundamental rights.
Federal law provides that if persons suspected of disease, contamination of a communicable disease have been identified, the restriction can only be taken “to the extent necessary to prevent the spread of the disease”, the latter not being nothing more than an explicit reference to the principle of proportionality already in force.
These are only absolute minimum conditions. The law can only carry individual measures, such as the closure of (individual) seaside resorts and not a general ban on contact.
To the extent that a general contact ban can be constitutionally compliant, at least precise regulation of the organizational conditions should be required in order to concretize precisely the necessary dangerous situation, but concrete provisions would also be necessary from the point of view legal consequences.
The principle of the rule of law is the imperative of precision in legislation. Laws cannot simply impose general regulations, which would give the authorities the license to act on whims, which would amount to an arbitrary rule.
According to the Federal Infection Protection Act (API), “competent authorities” must impose “the required security measures”. Normally, this means that spreaders or those suspected of spreading infection may be placed isolated or contaminated areas closed.
The more a legal act of the executive intervenes in fundamental rights, the more the regulations of the enabling law must be PRECISE.
Intervention-intensive measures which, in themselves, require a specific regime, can only be authorized in the context of “unforeseen developments” using general clauses, this condition is not fulfilled as it stands.
Responsible local containment in proportion to the consequences in industrialized countries, linked to the proportionality test .
“There is no doubt that the number of deaths attributable to the measures of the containment policy exceeds by several times the number of deaths avoided by it. For this reason alone, the standards to be assessed here do not meet the requirement of proportionality. Added to this are the direct and indirect restrictions on freedom, gigantic financial damage, immense damage to health and spiritual damage”.
The word “disproportionate” is too colorless to indicate the dimensions of what happened.
[2] Nom donné au régime de l’Allemagne après la Première Guerre mondiale (1919-1933).
Née de l’effondrement du régime impérial, la première république allemande, proclamée par le social-démocrate Scheidemann à Berlin, le 9 novembre 1918, ne prend forme qu’après l’écrasement de la révolution spartakiste (novembre 1918-janvier 1919). Elle tire son nom de la ville où se réunit en février 1919 une Assemblée nationale dominée par les sociaux-démocrates et les modérés, dont les travaux aboutissent à la promulgation (août 1919) d’une Constitution qui fait de l’Allemagne un État fédéral, le Reich, composé de 17 États (Länder) autonomes, eux-mêmes représentés au Reichsrat.
Encyclopédie Larousse en ligne – République de Weimar
[4] 950 Millions d’euros lui furent promis s’il confinait son pays. Il a dit non et raconté que d’autres pays avaient refusé mais soupçonnait que les plus obéissants avaient cédé au mirage de l’argent facile.
[6] pas une rave partie à 2000 qui au passage n’a d’ailleurs pas entrainé aucune vague de malades du Covid, ni même de poussée de contaminations, ni le moindre cluster
[9] Nous n’en avons eu confirmation que très tardivement
[10] Le tribunal a décidé lui-même de la constitutionnalité des normes, car l’obligation de soumission selon l’article 100 Abs.1 GG selon la jurisprudence constante de la Cour constitutionnelle fédérale (BVerfG, arrêts du 20 mars 1952, 1 BvL 12/51, 1 BvL 15/51, 1 BvL 16/51, 1 BvL 24/51, 1 BvL 28/51) s’applique uniquement aux lois officielles fédérales et des États, mais pas aux ordonnances statutaires.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
The German virologist Pf. Dr. Christian Drosten is the face of the corona crisis we are going through. In March 2020, the weekly magazine Stern even published an article entitled “The corona virus has made Prof. Christian Drosten the most sought-after man in the Republic” and made him a star. For it was Christian Drosten who, in January 2020, developed the PCR test for corona, which has become the standard method for detecting the Covid-19 coronavirus worldwide. As Director of the Berlin Charité Institute, he is a very influential advisor to the German Federal Government, and has participated as an expert at numerous government press conferences. His evaluation has thus had a decisive influence on important political decisions such as the compulsory wearing of masks, the interruption of regular education or the closure of all cafés, bars and restaurants. He has received numerous awards, including the Bundestverdienstkreuz (Cross of Merit) in 2005 and the first-class Bundestverdienstkreuz in 2020.
This programme will open a 4-part dossier that shows a completely different face of Christian Drosten and sheds light on little-known but far-reaching circumstances. The Drosten dossier, part 1: Christian Drosten and his false predictions
Due to his many high distinctions, one would expect his various estimates and forecasts to come true. Here are two examples of his forecasts, which are always worrying compared to the actual evolution: Forecast 1: 2003 / SARS
“If the epidemic cannot be postponed in the near future, it is possible that there will always be new cases of SARS. If lung diseases of this kind were to break out regularly in some countries, this could have serious effects on their economies. An effective vaccine can be expected in one or two years at the earliest.”
Actual developments: According to the WHO, since the beginning of the so-called SARS epidemic in 2003 there were only 8,096 cases of SARS worldwide with 774 deaths. Germany had a total of nine cases of SARS and not a single death. Forecast 2: 2009, swine flu
“It is a widespread viral infection with side effects far more severe than anyone could imagine from the most dangerous vaccine.”
Although there are no reliable indications on the number of people who are ill, Drosten urged people to get vaccinated against swine flu.
Actual development: The prophesied epidemic never happened. In spite of this, Western governments bought vaccines for several hundred million euros, which the vast majority of the population refused, despite Drosten’s insistent recommendations. What’s more, the vaccines caused far more serious damage than swine flu itself. Conclusion: Drosten’s frightening predictions, which always aimed to impose the “standard vaccine solution”, turned out to be fatal errors of assessment, resulting in enormous economic damage. How is it possible that Drosten, with his multiple horror predictions, continues to appear credible as THE government’s advisor? The Drosten dossier, part 2: Christian Drosten and his doctorate
As the coronavirus crisis has made Prof. Dr. Christian Drosten probably the best known scientist in Germany, his doctoral thesis has been requested many times. Strange contradictions then came to light: 1st contradiction:
Dr. Drosten claims to have written his thesis in 2003 at the Goethe University in Frankfurt. Surprisingly, the Frankfurt University Library was initially unable to provide a single copy of his thesis. 2nd contradiction:
At the request of Dr. Markus Kühbacher, a scientist specialising in scientific fraud, the university’s press officer stated that the copies had been damaged by water damage. According to Kühbacher, the press officer later had to confess that he had given him false information about Drosten’s work. Nor did the German National Library have a single copy of the thesis until 2020, which is normally compulsory for every promotion. 3rd contradiction:
It is also very strange that the catalogue of the German National Library – which is obliged to list all theses – does not contain any entries concerning Christian Drosten for the years 2000-2003. 4th contradiction: On 15 October 2020, the Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main published a statement of clarification regarding the “false statements concerning the admission procedure of Prof. Dr. Christian Drosten”. The statement shows that Dr. Drosten has been entitled to use the title of Doctor of Medicine since 4 September 2003. This is very surprising, as a WHO document mentions him as early as April 2003 – i.e. 5 months earlier – with the title of Doctor. This and many other contradictions led Dr. Reiner Füllmich to refer to Drosten as “Captain von Köpenick” (a German swindler of the late 19th and early 20th century) in the context of the extra-parliamentary commission on coronavirus. Kühbacher filed a complaint with the Stuttgart District Court on 2 December 2020 about the “compulsory copies of Mr. Drosten’s thesis and their allegedly excessively wet storage”. This court case has brought to light further surprising contradictions. The situation could, however, become even more unpleasant for Drosten, as lawyer Dr. Füllmich has already addressed a first claim for damages to Drosten on behalf of one of his clients who has suffered damage as a result of the measures taken against the coronavirus. A class action is being prepared in the USA. Finally, the issue at stake is not Christian Drosten’s doctorate, but his credibility. Why has he persisted for months in remaining silent and not clarifying these serious allegations? His behaviour certainly does not enhance his credibility! The Drosten dossier, part 3: Christian Drosten and his PCR test for the coronavirus
The PCR test for coronavirus developed in haste by Drosten in January 2020 for the detection of coronavirus is “the test of the year”! The results of this test are used by governments around the world to legitimise the most massive restrictions of fundamental rights against their citizens!
As early as 2014, Drosten said about this PCR test method: “The method is so sensitive that it can detect even a single molecule of the virus genome. If such a pathogen has, for example, spent one day on the nasal mucosa of a nurse, without her getting sick or noticing anything, she suddenly becomes a case of MERS. Where previously there were reports of people who were sick to death, the statistics now contain mildly ill people and people who are in fact perfectly healthy. This is how the explosion in the number of cases in Saudi Arabia could be explained. In addition, the media on the spot have inflated the matter incredibly. “Doesn’t Drosten’s statement accurately reflect the current status of the coronavirus? “The statistics suddenly have people in perfect health, which distort them! “The number of cases is exploding! “The media have inflated this incredibly! “Did Drosten choose this PCR method in a calculated way to trigger a “test pandemic”? Ongoing scientific research by 22 top scientists reinforces this suspicion, as it denies the scientific basis for Drosten’s study, which served as the basis for the WHO’s implementation of the test. Initial court decisions confirm the unscientific basis of Drosten’s study and his coronavirus test! With his non-scientific study and his unsuitable PCR test based on it, one man played a decisive role in the whole coronavirus scenario: Christian Drosten! Not only him, but also the test he developed, turns out to be not very credible under closer examination! The Drosten dossier, part 4: Christian Drosten and his many links
Neutrality and objectivity are decisive indicators for the credibility of scientists!
1. Is neutrality and objectivity on the part of Drosten possible – in view of his links with Olfert Landt?
Olfert Landt is one of the regular co-authors of the Drosten studies – also of the study of the coronavirus in question. In addition, he is the owner of the Berlin-based biotech company TIB Molbiol Syntheselabor GmbH, which manufactures tests for the coronavirus. Drosten and Landt seem to have discovered a successful business model: in the event of a pandemic and the emergence of the most diverse viruses, they jointly develop the corresponding PCR test. This was already the case in 2002/2003 for SARS, in 2011 for EHEC, in 2012 for MERS, in 2016 for zika virus, in 2017 for yellow fever. The same pattern is still in place, which they have now also used for coronavirus. Landt admitted this to the Berliner Zeitung newspaper: “The testing, design and development came from the Charité. We simply implemented it immediately in the form of a kit. And if we don’t have the virus, which originally only existed in Wuhan, we can make a synthetic gene to simulate the genome of the virus. That’s what we did very quickly. “From the start of the coronavirus crisis, the Landt biotech company was making test kits for 1,500,000 tests a week and by February had tripled its turnover. In the meantime, these tests must have brought it huge profits. It is doubtful whether Landt received all the profits and left only the glory to Drosten. Irrespective of the question of the personal benefits that Drosten might have derived from it, the question arises: how is it possible that developments are made with public money and then private companies profit from them to such an extent?
1. Is neutrality and objectivity on the part of Drosten possible – in view of his links with the pharmaceutical industry?
Drosten has been awarded among others:
– the “Förderpreis für Klinische Infektiologie” (Prize for Clinical Infectiology) awarded by Aventis Deutschland Pharma GmbH with a prize of 5,000 euros,
– the “Diagnostics Award of the European Society for Clinical Virology” from the pharmaceutical company Abbott Laboratories, endowed with €2,500 and linked to other privileges of interest to the recipient, and
– through the Charité de Berlin, an institute of which Drosten is currently the director, in December 2019 and March 2020, a sum of approximately US$ 335,000 from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This foundation is by no means disinterested, but it is known for its proximity to the vaccine industry. Have these awards and grants created conflicts of interest for Drosten that have led him in the past to always advocate for vaccines as a solution? The current coronavirus crisis seems to confirm this suspicion, as Drosten does not even shrink from a violation of the code of ethics of the medical order by recommending certain vaccine manufacturers. Shouldn’t Drosten’s statements and studies be completely revised from the point of view of objectivity? Who would believe a scientist who propagates the fact that smoking is safe and at the same time receives awards and subsidies from the tobacco industry? CONCLUSION:
Fatal erroneous predictions, numerous unclarified contradictions about his doctoral thesis, a hastily developed “PCR corona test” with fundamental scientific flaws and an unsuspected swamp of financial entanglements take away all credibility from Christian Drosten! If the key person at the centre of the entire coronavirus crisis proves to be uncredible after closer examination, this raises serious questions:
1. Should we not finally, because of these non-scientific foundations, analyse all the events linked to the coronavirus, with the inescapable economic and financial collapse that threatens entire peoples, to find those who are pulling the strings and profiting from this situation in the shadows?
2. Could the aim not be a staging for a power grab and even, under the pretext of fighting the pandemic, lead to the setting up of digital surveillance of entire peoples?
3. Why don’t the mass media, which has the task of providing critical media coverage, reveal the “Drosten dossier”, but keep it under wraps?
Dear spectators, do you also think that these facts should be known to everyone? Then help us to make the “Drosten dossier” public as soon as possible. Only a movement of the people themselves can break the silence of the monopolised media, which all sound the same, and lead to a public discussion! You can contribute to this by making these hidden links public! To do so, share this video! Inform as many of your acquaintances as possible by email, via WhatsApp, Twitter, Vimeo or put the video on Facebook. Here is the link to this show: https://www.kla.tv/17877. Sources/Links :
Since the beginning of this false pandemic, I’ve been offering compelling evidence that no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists.
Then people ask, “So why are all these people dying?”
I have explained that, many times, and in this article I’ll explain it again.
First of all, the whole notion that COVID-19 is one health condition is a lie. COVID IS NOT ONE THING.
This is both the hardest and simplest point to accept and understand.
Don’t reject the existence of the virus and then say, “So what is THE cause of people dying?” There is no ONE CAUSE. There is no one illness. There is no “it.”
By far, the biggest sources of illness we are dealing with are lung conditions: various kinds of pneumonia; flu and flu-like disease; TB; other unnamed lung/respiratory problems.
THESE ARE BEING RELABELED “COVID.” It’s a repackaging scheme. People are dying for those traditional reasons, and their deaths are being called “COVID.”
Thus, the old is artificially made new. It’s still old.
In this wide-ranging group of people who have traditional lung conditions, by far the largest component is the elderly and frail.
They are dying in nursing homes, in hospitals, in their houses and apartments. In addition to their lung problems, they have been suffering from a whole host of other conditions, for a long time, and they’ve been treated with toxic drugs.
They’re terrified that they might receive a diagnosis of “COVID,” and then they are given that diagnosis. THEN they’re isolated, cut off from friends and family. They give up and die.
This is forced premature death.
Some of these elderly and frail people are heavily sedated and put on breathing ventilators—which is a killing treatment. In a large New York study, it was discovered that patients over the age of 64, who were put on ventilators, died 97.2 % of the time. Staggering.
Some of these elderly and frail patients are now dying from reactions to the COVID vaccine—and of course, their deaths are listed as “COVID.”
Why else are people dying? In many cases, it’s a simple matter of bookkeeping. They die in hospitals for a variety of reasons, and staff write “COVID death” on their files. In the US, states receive federal money based on these statistics.
Let’s say that, in certain places around the world, there are clusters of deaths (being called COVID) that can’t be explained in the ways I’ve just described.
In those situations, you would have to examine EACH situation closely. For example, just prior to an outbreak in Northern Italy, was there a vaccination campaign? What was in the vaccine? A new breed of toxic substances?
You have to consider each cluster independently.
Getting the picture?
None of the “COVID deaths” anywhere in the world requires the existence of a new virus.
For instance, in Wuhan, where the whole business began, the first “COVID” cases of pneumonia occurred in a city whose air is HEAVILY polluted. In China, every year, roughly 300,000 people die from pneumonia. That means millions of cases. None of those deaths need to be explained by invoking a new virus.
Now, add to all this the fact that the PCR test for the virus is irreparably flawed and useless (for a variety of reasons I’ve explained in other articles). The test spits out false-positives like a fire hose. Thus, the high case numbers. If the authorities have to go to such extremes to paint a picture of a spreading viral epidemic…
There is no evidence that an actual germ is traveling around the world felling people. The “evidence” is invented.
The “pandemic” is invented.
The fraud is promoted.
During these fake epidemics (there have been many), someone will say: “But my neighbor’s son, who was very healthy, died suddenly. It must be the virus.”
No. People who appear to be healthy do die. Not just today, but going back in history as far as you want to go. No one has an explanation. They might have an explanation if they looked very closely, but they don’t look closely.
Favoring the “virus explanation” is a bias, a knee-jerk reaction, a response to propaganda.
If you think there must be other major reasons to explain “why all these people are dying,” keep in mind that “lung conditions” is a category that expands all over the globe. For instance, there are about one BILLION cases of flu-like illness EVERY YEAR on planet Earth.
Repackaging/relabeling just a small percentage of those cases alone would account for all official COVID death numbers.
What’s new about COVID is the STORY. That’s what’s being sold: a STORY about a virus.
Dr. Tom Cowan w/ Dr. Andrew Kaufman: We Have No Scientific Proof That Viruses Cause Disease — A Response to Dr. Judy Mikovits
This content features a discussion of the (lack of) scientific evidence for the proof of viruses alleged to cause disease in the context of a recently aired debate between Judy Mikovots, Ph.D. and Andrew Kaufman, M.D.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute and Brighteon channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
The original discussion between Dr. Kaufman and Dr. Judy Mikovits may be seen here:
“Physicians following their Hippocratic Oath must resolutely stand up for the well-being of their patients.”
Gerlinde Laeverenz-Foti, M.D., is a holistic physician and has been dealing with the issue around vaccination for many years. She turns to her colleagues on this occasion, stating that if physicians in particular are not attentive in this crisis, they will become complicit in a policy that makes a mockery of all human values and scientific standards.
Here is what she has to say:
“I urge all physicians in this country and indeed around the world, without exception, to think outside the box of what we have been taught in medical school and beyond our further education.
Use your common sense, question and explore connections with a desire to know the truth. Trust in your gut feeling, something that every good doctor should be capable of. Do not be satisfied with what is written in your textbooks, but go one step further – on behalf of the human being, on behalf of your patients.
Being a doctor means being independent of any system, of opinions, of politics, of guidelines and directives, even of every (man-made) law. The only guideline that counts is to be found within yourself and your patient.
I would be very surprised if even one doctor could and would sign that vaccinations cannot pose a threat to a person’s health or life.
Why are vaccinations so trivialized and complications often neither recognized, let alone noted in the patient’s file?
And to those physicians who consider vaccinations to be useful – how many of you have studied them in depth, have delved deeper into immunology, studied the scientific and well-researched literature and listened to the testimonials of parents and patients?
To all of those who have seen or experienced as much suffering through vaccinations as I have, affecting children and their families, and to all of those who do not dismiss it from the outset with the sentence “this cannot come from the vaccine”. All of those that can no longer help but ask the questions and take a critical look at allopathic medicine.
Do not be complicit in this so-called “health policy” that neither respects the dignity and true development of man, let alone his soul and his being. Do not sell yourselves and the people entrusted to your care for fear of being defamed or because you believe that your professional existence will be threatened. This is an illusion anyway, because no one can take your vocation away from you except yourself. Rather work on rehabilitating the patients’ trust in the medical profession, which many people have now lost, and rightly so. Put your patients back in the centre of attention, listen to them with interest and a healthy curiosity. Take their concerns, doubts and fears seriously and take steps to educate yourselves independently. Especially in the context of vaccines and the current mask obligation!
Let us work together to ensure that we retain our sovereignty and independence. It is not up to politicians or a school principal to decide what is medically justifiable and how to assess a health risk to the individual! We as physicians should remain the decision makers here. Likewise, the patient entrusted to us must remain protected, and should not be made to discuss their personal health issues with a manager of a supermarket or their employer! This is degrading and shameful at the same time. This is a novel and absolutely unjustifiable disregard of human dignity, which we simply cannot accept!
And what about our children? We must protect them instead of handing them over to state measures! Right now, political fears and moves are being played out on the backs of our children – we physicians must not allow this under any circumstances, let alone accept it silently!
We must rise up, it is high time!
Dear colleagues, if you haven’t already done so, I urge you to come back to the ground of facts, to the real basis of medicine. Remember your Hippocratic Oath, the oath that you once took, and by which you committed yourselves to the well-being of the patient! Remember the reason for which you – hopefully – once became a doctor. Remember what is essential in life and what is really important in medicine. It is about the individual. And thus it is about the health of our society.
Remember what is essential when it comes to your medical responsibility.
You do have a great responsibility. Please be very serious about it. And, if you cannot do so because of fear or other reasons, then you should give up your license to practice medicine.”
