In May 2020 I talked a bit about vaccines (posts Vaccines: part 1-5). With the push to release the Covid-19 (C-19) vaccine, in keeping with my current risk theme, here is a long update summary from what I have studying within and outside the mainstream. I am posting early this week to get the information out while the vaccines are still in transit.
I have been plowing through mainstream sites like JAMA Network, the CDC site, the WHO site, the NCBI site, and then alternate sites such as Stand for Health Freedom, GreenMedInfo, Health Freedom Advocacy, etc., to get a big picture. There are many good, rational and sound medical sites that have been censored or removed because they do not match the mainstream narrative. Don’t just take my word for it, do your own searching. When people ask, am I going to get the vaccine? My answer based on my conclusions given below – NO!!
Operation ‘Warp Speed (OWS)’ – is there informed consent? Recall I mentioned the Nuremberg Code of Ethics from 1947 decrying Nazi mistreatment and experimentation of concentration camp inmates (see Vaccines: part 2 {5/1/20}). Informed Consent for everything but not vaccines apparently. It seems you are now not allowed to question vaccines. Anyone asking for and expecting information about vaccines is labelled an antivaxxer. But before you get a jab, you do have the right to read the extremely lengthy and disturbing info sheet that comes with every vaccine. If you have the patience and comprehension you will be surprised that this sheet is quite honest about the vaccine restrictions and problems. But, do not forget that the vaccine manufacturers do not give a shit because they are immune to any and all lawsuits for any damages that occur (see Vaccines: part 1 {4/25/20}). Many medical websites that discuss real data are being de-platformed and censored to maintain a single viewpoint about vaccines and the C-19 one in general. What we hear on mainstream media seems more like a PR campaign for OWP and not full disclosure of information about the development and trials of the vaccine. Even just the hyped threat that the C-19 Vaccine may become mandatory is reason for caution. (e.g., Qantas Airlines has already announced they would be ready to mandate this vaccine just to travel on their planes, and many others are also considering this as part of government policy around the world.) Can they mandate it? In the U.S. there is The Model State Emergency Health Powers Act, Dec 21, 2001, that was enacted when manufactured fear of biological terrorism was at its height following 9/11 and the swiftly enacted Patriot Act. Most other countries followed in the same manner – look how airports travel everywhere changed.
I suppose the first question should be about the pandemic – was there a real one or was it hyped up for some nefarious reason? I’ll stay out of the realm of conspiracy here and just give the data as I see it.
Testing for C-19. Important to note that the use of the current vaccine will not prevent the transmission of the disease (Dr Fauci admitted as much and stated that it will only decrease the symptomology). It is important to note the words used during this pandemic – specifically, the use of ‘deaths’ and ‘cases.’ During the first wave of C-19, we were told about the deaths because that got our attention. At that time, I noted (see Vaccines: part 2 {5/1/20}) that flu deaths were incredibly low as C-19 deaths kept rising during the flu season and positive viral tests were mostly being attributed to C-19. (Note: according to the CDC’s latest data, C-19 fatalities are 1.5% of total C-19 cases since Jan 21, 2020, and that’s with all the usual deaths from flu being attributed to C-19 – deaths are bad but hardly a pandemic.) Notably, the testing was done (especially in the USA) mainly on people who already showed symptoms and those in hospital since there seemed a shortage of tests kits available. (Some countries, like South Korea, were testing their populations and not just sick patients.) Sometime during late August, the media stopped saying deaths and starting focusing on ‘cases’ as a way to validate the start of a second wave because the numbers of deaths from C-19 was leveling off despite the increase in cases. A major reason for the increase in cases was because of the now standardized test used – the real time RT-PCR DNA test. A good explanation of this test can be found at https://discoverysedge.mayo.edu/2020/03/27/the-science-behind-the-test-for-the-covid-19-virus/
In January 2020, a paper was submitted and passed with peer review in just one day (the Corman-Drosten (24 authors) paper in the Eurosurveillance journal), which is utterly amazing, since this process can take many weeks to years for most scientists. Someone in the journals hierarchy clearly wanted this paper up front and center for the upcoming pandemic for which the public as yet had little knowledge about. It was used by the WHO as the benchmark for CPR testing levels. In October, 2020, over two-hundred different European virologists and medical researchers did individual peer reviews of the paper and wrote a joint scathing letter critiquing the Corman-Drosten paper, listing over 21 major protocol, process, and data interpretation errors and many negative comments on other aspects of the research in the paper. The most crucial component of the critique of this PCR paper was the Cycle Threshold (Ct) number (the test amplification number) used to determine viral infection. The PCR is a clinical research technique used when the viral agent is clearly known, and not well suited to clinical diagnosis with unknown viral agents involved. Clinicians dealing with patients exhibiting diagnosed symptoms need to know, what is the specific viral infection based on the symptomology, and is the patient infectious?
Clinicians use the Ct number to give them specific information. It’s important to note that the PCR tests for specific sequences of DNA and not a whole virus or bacteria, and that the family of Corona viruses includes hundreds of agents including Flu and the Common cold in which the S (spike) protein is a common feature. (For instance, Sars-Cov2 (Covid-19) has just 12 more nucleotides than Sars-Cov1, and curiously they haven’t found a vaccine for Sars-Cov1 despite 17 years of trying.) So, a positive result is for a general coronavirus, and it is up to the clinician using specific symptoms to diagnose the specific disease, if they can.
To put it simply about the Ct, a positive test result at a Ct of 20 would indicate that the patient is severely infected with a coronavirus and probably quite infectious. A Ct of 30 would indicate the presence of infection and potential for infectivity even if the person was asymptomatic. A Ct between 30-35 would indicate potential of Viral particles in the person’s body but little likelihood of infectivity. A Ct of 40 is noise and meaningless – terms used by virologists. A Ct of 45 is garbage. Most virologists set the maximum Ct at 30, yet the WHO set the Ct as 45 and the US-FDA at 40 with some states and countries at 38. I’ll let you make your own conclusions.
OWS and the new C-19 vaccine. To protect the public during this time of OWS for a C-19 vaccine, the FDA meets regularly to determine progress. From the ‘CBER plans for monitoring COVID-19 vaccine safety and effectiveness, Steve Anderson, PhD, MPP Director, Office of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, CBER VRBPAC meeting Oct 22, 2020.’ Anderson was one of the speakers and in his presentation ‘Safety Surveillance of Covid-19 Vaccines: Working list of possible adverse outcomes.’ Slide 16 of his talk lists the following adverse outcomes of the C-19 vaccines: ‘Guillain-Barre Syndrome, Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis, Transverse Myelitis, Encephalitis/myelitis/Encephalomyelitis/menigoencephalitis/Mennigitis/encephalopathy, Convulsions /Seizures, Stroke, Narcolepsy & Cataplexy, Anaphylaxis, Acute Myocardial Infarction, Myocarditis/Pericarditis, Autoimmune disease. Death potential from Pregnancy and birth outcomes, Other acute demyelinating diseases, Non-anaphylactic allergic reactions, Thrombocytopenia, Disseminated intravascular coagulation, Venous thromboembolism, Arthritis and arthralgia/joint pain, Kawasaki disease, Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, and Vaccine enhanced disease.’ It should be noted that these side-effects of the vaccine also mirror the side-effects of severe symptoms of C-19!!
In my post Vaccines: part 1 {4/25/20} I state that vaccine development can take 5-10 years with three major stages of safety testing required – Phases 1-3. Pumping out a vaccine in as little as 6 months or less (it is being released for use even as I write this) means that the required safety trials are being bypassed with only phase 1 and 2 trials rushed if even completed successfully – there has been severe criticism for the protocols used. Not only that, but the FDA staff are clearly aware of the possibly lethal side-effects of the C-19 vaccines. In effect the long and complex phase 3 trials are us, the general public, with the regulatory agencies around the world merely looking out for “post-marketing surveillance” problems. We have absolutely no idea of the long term effects of the C-19 vaccines. This clearly violates the precautionary principle that demands any medical intervention be proven safe before being released onto the market, and stands out as a violation of the Nuremburg Code of 1947.
The initial release of the vaccine in the UK this past week has already shown problems. Two people vaccinated went into anaphylactic shock within 24 hours – so, the vaccine is not good for anyone with any allergies. The mRNA vaccine (by Pfizer) is an untested technology. The AstraZeneca vaccine has already been accused of causing severe neurological and psychological problems even as Moderna’s vaccine is getting approval. Vaccine efficacy figures published November 23rd are problematic to say the least. Phase 1-2 testing has been on select healthy participants that do not represent cross-sections of the general public. We do not know if the non-test participants got a true placebo. The values of 90-95% efficacy is ridiculously unusual for any vaccine let alone these new ones. The statistical numbers as the researchers-manufacturers present them are hard to follow. But in a nutshell, post vaccination observations (day one jab-1, day 21 jab-2) done after 42 days on just a few people (e.g., 196 out of the 30,000 in one study) showed 10-15% in the vaccine group already had symptoms before 42 days, which exceeded the symptoms seen in the non-vaccinated groups at any time.
Big Pharma (backed by Governments) will insist that the vaccines are safe but remember that they are not accountable for any problems arising from the vaccines as they rake in tens of billions of dollars in guaranteed long-term profit – apparently you will need continuous booster jabs. The government and those fearful of C-19 will insist you get vaccinated for the public good. You might want to read Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky. It’s eye-opening on how we get conned into accepting risk we would never normally accept.
We are sovereign beings, we have the right to make our own decisions without coercion. If you do intend to be vaccinated, please do your homework and be discerning with all the relevant information from a variety of sources, especially including non-mainstream sources, before you commit to your decision. Don’t’ allow yourself to be socially pressured because it is the social thing to do. Lemming leaping off a cliff is not a positive act. We have enough risks imposed upon us by corporate systems without having to add this supposed pandemic solution. To close this post, the mountains of data that show highly effective treatments for C-19 exist without the need for a risky vaccine (e.g. check out info on Ivermectin, Zinc (Potent inhibitor of Reverse transcriptase) and Zinc Ionophores).
0 Comments