Doctor testifies that the health authorities have been blackmailing doctors to provoke their medical licenses if they issue exemptions. The full video can be viewed at https://rumble.com/vt62y6-covid-19-a-second-opinion.html Discussion begins around 40 minute mark. Sen. Ron Johnson moderates a panel discussion, COVID-19: A Second Opinion. A group of world renowned doctors and medical experts provide a different perspective on the global pandemic response, the current state of knowledge of early and hospital treatment, vaccine efficacy and safety, what went right, what went wrong, what should be done now, and what needs to be addressed long term. Comments provide more insight. More at www.ronjohnson.senate.gov.
The Corona Committee, formed by four lawyers have a conversation with Riccardo Umberto Guerrino Bosi (Leader of the Australia One party) at this Link a must listen video. The Committee is conducting an evidence review of the crimes against humanity.
Professor Martin Pall on the insanity of 5G and how EMF’s cause cellular damage.
Airlines Across US Cancel, Reschedule Dozens of Flights Amid 5G Wireless Technology Rollout Concerns
By Katabella Roberts
January 19, 2022Updated: January 19, 2022
Multiple airlines across the United States have been scrambling to reschedule or cancel flights to the country ahead of a planned 5G wireless technology rollout on Jan. 19 that has sparked safety concerns among officials.
The cancellations come as Verizon and AT&T are finally set to roll out their next-generation 5G wireless technology despite ongoing concerns as to how the technology could affect flights.
Air India on Jan. 18 announced on Twitter that four flights scheduled for Jan. 19 and departing from India and arriving at U.S. airports including the John F. Kennedy International Airport, Newark Liberty International Airport, O’Hare International Airport, and San Francisco International Airport would be canceled.
“Due to deployment of the 5G communications in USA, we will not be able to operate the following flights of 19th Jan’22,” the airline stated, listing four India-to-U.S. flights.
In a statement, Dubai-based Emirates airline said it was also suspending flights to nine U.S. destinations from Jan. 19 due to “operational concerns associated with the planned deployment of 5G mobile network services in the U.S. at certain airports.”
The airline said the affected destinations were Boston, Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Miami, Newark, Orlando, San Francisco, and Seattle, and the flights would be suspended until further notice.
Emirates flights to New York JFK, Los Angeles (LAX), and Washington (IAD) will continue to operate as scheduled.
“We are working closely with aircraft manufacturers and the relevant authorities to alleviate operational concerns, and we hope to resume our U.S. services as soon as possible,” Emirates stated.
Atlanta-headquartered Delta stated it was planning for the possibility of “weather-related cancellations caused by the deployment of new 5G service in the vicinity of dozens of U.S. airports, starting as early as Wednesday.”
“The FAA [Federal Aviation Administration], which regulates airlines, has issued numerous notices that restrict flight activity near airports where this new deployment of 5G service in the C-band spectrum could cause limited interference with altitude instruments on aircraft under various weather conditions that aircraft safely operate in today. As such, Delta is taking the necessary steps to ensure safety remains the priority in compliance with FAA guidelines,” the company stated.
Meanwhile, Japan’s All Nippon Airways Co. Ltd. said in a statement that the FAA “has indicated that radio waves from the 5G wireless service may interfere with aircraft altimeters.”
“Boeing has announced flight restrictions on all airlines operating the Boeing 777 aircraft, and we have canceled or changed the aircraft for some flights to/from the U.S. based on the announcement by Boeing,” the company stated.
The company canceled 20 flights to the United States including to the cities of Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York.
Of particular concern in the 5G rollout appears to be the Boeing 777.
Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. similarly stated that it had been informed by Boeing that “5G signals for U.S. mobile phones, which will begin operating in the U.S. on January 19, may interfere with the radio wave altimeter installed on the Boeing 777.”
The company had canceled some flights to the United States on Jan. 19, but after receiving confirmation from the FAA “that there is no longer a problem with the operation of the Boeing 777” it would resume service to the United States with the Boeing 777 starting Jan. 20.
“We will continue to monitor the situation closely and if there is any impact on our flight operations, we will promptly announce it on our website,” the airline stated.
Multiple other companies including Korean Air, Hong Kong’s Cathay Pacific, and German airline Lufthansa stated they had switched some of their Boeing 777s scheduled to fly into the United States for other aircraft.
The Epoch Times has contacted Boeing for comment.
It comes after CEOs from some of the biggest airlines in the United States warned of potential flight issues to air passengers if 5G C-band technology isn’t deployed in a safe manner around airports.
In a letter to White House National Economic Council Director Brian Deese, FAA Administrator Steve Dickson, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, the CEOs warned that the nation’s commerce could essentially “grind to a halt” and there could be “significant operation disruptions.”
The letter was signed by the chief executives of American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, United Airlines, Southwest Airlines, Alaska Airlines, and others.
On Jan. 18, both AT&T and Verizon agreed to temporarily delay their 5G rollouts near certain airports amid ongoing flight safety fears.
“The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and our nation’s airlines have not been able to fully resolve navigating 5G around airports, despite it being safe and fully operational in more than 40 other countries,” Verizon said in a statement.
AT&T told The Hill in an email that it had “temporarily deferred turning on C-Band transmitters within a two-mile radius of the airport runways specified by the FAA,” but didn’t state which airports were affected.
On Jan. 16, the FAA stated that it had cleared an estimated 45 percent of the U.S. commercial airplane fleet to perform low-visibility landings at many airports where 5G C-band will be deployed on Jan. 19.
Katabella Roberts is a reporter currently based in Turkey. She covers news and business for The Epoch Times, focusing primarily on the United States.
Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) speaks to reporters in Washington in a file photograph. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
FBI Raids Home, Campaign Office of Rep. Henry Cuellar
By Zachary Stieber
January 20, 2022Updated: January 20, 2022
FBI agents were seen at the home and campaign office of Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), a frequent critic of President Joe Biden, on Wednesday.
Photographs shared by local reporters showed agents at the residence in Laredo removing bags, bins, and at least one computer.
Federal agents also went to Cuellar’s campaign office.
In a statement to news outlets, the FBI said the bureau “was present in Laredo conducting court-authorized law enforcement activity,” adding that “The FBI cannot provide further comment on an ongoing investigation.”
“Congressman Cuellar will fully cooperate in any investigation. He is committed to ensuring that justice and the law are upheld,” a Cuellar spokesperson told media.
Cuellar, 66, has represented Texas’s 28th Congressional District since 2005.
The district includes land that touches the U.S.-Mexico border.
Cuellar, considered a moderate, has been a frequent critic of Biden’s lax immigration enforcement policies, which experts say have contributed to the explosion in illegal immigration recorded since Biden took office one year ago.
Under the Democrat, the most illegal immigrant apprehensions at the southwest border were recorded for both a fiscal year and a calendar year.
Biden shortly after being sworn in halted construction of the border wall, curbed use of pandemic-era expulsion powers, and directed officials to end the “Remain in Mexico” program, which forced many asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their claims to be heard.
Some of the administration’s moves have been blocked or reversed by courts, but December arrests were higher than the month before, according to preliminary figures provided in court documents by the Customs and Border Protection agency.
Jessica Cisneros, a lawyer, and educator Tannya Benavides are challenging Cuellar in the Democratic primary for the seat he holds.
Cueller beat Cisneros in the last primary by about 2,700 votes.
Cisneros has targeted Cuellar’s reputation and voting record, calling him “Trump’s favorite Democrat” and criticizing his willingness to work with Republicans on legislation.
Benavides offered a similar critique, saying the district should be represented by a more progressive Democrat.
Klaus Schwab – World Economic Forum Headquarters Full 
‘Founder and Executive Chairman, presents the World Economic Forum from its headquarters in Geneva. Klaus Schwab talks about the Annual Meeting in Davos and its different stakeholders.’
Klaus Schwab opens World Economic Forum’s virtual “Davos Agenda” by introducing China’s Xi Jinping.
“It is my distinct honor and great privilege to introduce his excellency…”
Top U.S. health officials, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, scrambled in early 2020 to respond to public reporting of a potential connection between COVID-19 and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
This response, which included a secret Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference, was loosely detailed in previously released and heavily redacted emails. Those emails strongly suggested that Fauci and a small group of top scientists sought to promote the natural origin theory, despite having evidence and internal expert opinions that pointed to the possibility of a leak from the Wuhan lab.
Unredacted versions of some of the emails made public by lawmakers on Jan. 11 further confirm this.
The newly unredacted emails, released by House Oversight Committee Republicans, confirm and illustrate a pattern of lies and coverup. From the emails, it appears the effort was spearheaded by Fauci himself but also involved his boss, recently retired National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Dr. Francis Collins, as well as Jeremy Farrar, the head of the British Wellcome Trust.
It was previously revealed that at least two scientists, both of whom had received funding from the NIH, had told Fauci during the teleconference that they were 60 to 80 percent sure that COVID had come out of a lab.
The most significant new revelations in the unredacted emails come from two of these scientists, Robert Garry and Mike Farzan, who both noted the difficulties presented by the presence of a furin cleavage site in the COVID-19 virus—a feature that would later be cited as the defining characteristic of the virus.
‘Bothered by the Furin Site’
Farzan, an immunologist who in 2005 discovered the receptor of the original severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) virus, sent his post-teleconference notes to Farrar, who then shared them with Collins, Fauci, and Lawrence Tabak—top officials at the NIH. In those notes, Farzan wrote that he was “bothered by the furin site” and had difficulty explaining it “as an event outside the lab.” Farzan noted that it was theoretically possible the virus’s furin cleavage site could have arisen in nature but that it was “highly unlikely.”
The furin cleavage site is the defining feature that gives COVID-19 the ability to easily infect humans and has long been puzzled over by scientists, since no such site has ever been observed in naturally occurring SARS-related coronaviruses.
Farzan, like scientist Kristian Andersen, who has received funding from Fauci’s NIAID, works at the Scripps laboratory. As was already known from previously released emails, Andersen had privately told Fauci on Jan. 31, 2020 that the virus looked engineered. Andersen would later spearhead Fauci’s efforts to promote a natural origin narrative.
Farzan told the senior members of Fauci’s teleconference group that “a likely explanation could be something as simple as passage SARS-live CoVs in tissue culture on human cell lines” for an “extended period of time,” which could lead to the accidental creation of “a virus that would be primed for rapid transmission between humans.” This mutated virus would likely have specific “adaptation to human ACE2 receptor via repeated passage.”
A recent study in the science journal Nature noted that the COVID-19 virus was uniquely adapted to infect humans, as it “exhibited the highest binding to human (h)ACE2 of all the species tested.”
In layman’s terms, Farzan concluded that the pandemic likely originated from a lab in which live coronaviruses were passed through human-like tissue over and over, accelerating virus mutations with the end result being that one of the mutated viruses may have leaked from the lab. Farzan placed the likelihood of a leak from a Wuhan lab at 60 to 70 percent likely.
The emails indicate that Farzan was cognizant that the Wuhan lab conducted these types of dangerous experiments in Level 2 labs, which have a very low biosecurity standard. This fact was later admitted by the Wuhan lab’s director, Shi Zhengli, in July 2020. Notably, since the start of the pandemic, Farzan has received grants totaling almost $20 million from Collins’s NIH and Fauci’s NIAID.
‘Can’t Figure Out How This Gets Accomplished in Nature’
Further revelations in the newly unredacted emails came from Garry, another scientist funded by Fauci’s NIAID, who told the senior members of the teleconference group in no uncertain terms that “I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario where you get from the bat virus” to COVID-19.
Garry cited the remarkable sequences that would have to occur naturally, telling the group that “I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature. Do the alignment of the spikes at the amino acid level – it’s stunning.” He noted that a lab-created virus would readily explain the data he was seeing, telling Fauci’s group that “Of course, in the lab, it would be easy to generate the perfect 12 base insert that you wanted.”
Along the same lines of what Farzan had said, Garry was telling Fauci’s group that it was extremely unlikely that the furin cleavage site could have evolved naturally, whereas creating it in a lab was easy.
The primary difference between Farzan’s and Garry’s view lies in whether the lab created the furin cleavage site through serial passage in human-like tissue or through direct insertion of the site. In either case, both scientists thought it was likely that the virus came out of the Wuhan lab rather than having originated in nature.
Scientist’s Private Views Conflicted With Public Statements
Garry’s privately stated view is even more remarkable because only a day earlier, on Feb. 1, 2020, Garry had helped to complete the first draft of the Proximal Origin paper that promoted the idea that the virus had originated in nature. That paper became the media’s and the public health establishment’s go-to evidence for a natural origin for the COVID virus.
It was published online on Feb. 16, 2020, and firmly excluded the possibility of a lab leak.
One of Garry’s co-authors for the Proximal Origin paper, Andrew Rambaut, also is cited in the newly redacted emails. In congruence with the other two scientists, Rambaut told Fauci’s teleconference group that he also was bothered by the unusual furin cleavage site. But unlike Garry or Farzan, he speculated that the virus might have arisen in another animal, a so-called intermediate host.
Two years later, no such host has been identified. In the case of the original SARS virus as well as the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) virus, the intermediate host was found within a few months. Rambaut also recognized immediately the peculiar fact that the furin cleavage site “insertion has resulted in an extremely fit virus in humans—we can also deduce that it is not optimal for transmission in bat species.”
Rambaut lamented the lack of data being shared by Wuhan scientists and concluded that only the Wuhan Institute of Virology knew what had happened.
Fauci’s Group Misleads National Academy of Sciences
The day after these three scientists shared their views with the senior members of the group, on Feb. 3, 2020, Fauci attended a meeting at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). That meeting had been urgently convened at the behest of White House Director of Science and Technology Kelvin Droegmeier, who wrote that he was seeking answers about the origins of COVID-19.
The meeting, which included a presentation by Fauci, was also attended by Peter Daszak–the person through whom Fauci had funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology–and Kristian Andersen. Fauci and his group promoted the natural origin theory to the Academy, despite having just been told on the teleconference and in subsequent emails that a lab leak provided the most likely explanation for the virus.
While they were pushing their natural origin narrative to NASEM, and by extension to the White House, Fauci and his group made no mention of their private discussions—which were taking place at the same time—that the virus most likely originated in a Wuhan lab.
NIH Hiding Behind Unjustifiable Redactions
The new emails fill some of the gaps left by previous redactions, but still only cover a small portion of the many emails that remain redacted. A close examination of the newly unredacted emails reveals that none of the usual justifications for redactions, such as private information about people or threats to sources and methods, apply. Instead, it appears that all of the redactions were made solely on the basis of shielding the NIH from scrutiny over its coverup of the virus’s origins.
These efforts at obfuscation tie in with the fact that we only found out about these new emails after a months-long battle between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the parent organization of Fauci’s NIH and NIAID, and House Republicans.
In order to obtain this information, House Republicans were forced to avail themselves of a rarely used law from 1928, the so-called Seven Member Rule. Under this law, an executive agency, such as HHS, is required to provide requested information when requested by seven members of the House Committee on Government Operations (now called the Committee on Oversight and Reform).
It isn’t known why Republicans haven’t used this law earlier or with greater frequency.
Eventually, HHS allowed the House Republicans’ congressional staffers to view the unredacted emails in person. The staffers then transcribed what they saw, which is how we came to know about these new revelations.
NIH Silences Dissenting Views
These new emails are crucial in that they confirm that by Feb. 2, 2020, Fauci’s teleconference group had identified evidence pointing to a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. These scientists knew that the virus’s unique furin cleavage site was very likely the result of experiments conducted at the Wuhan lab. Notably, they also knew that these experiments were being conducted in minimum biosecurity Level 2 labs.
These facts presented a major problem for the heads of the NIH, who had funded the experiments.
As the new emails confirm, their response was to cover up the lab leak evidence and push a natural origin narrative.
Then-NIH Director Collins, who would later call for the public “takedown” of the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, asked his group for a “swift convening of experts” in order to prevent the “voices of conspiracy” from doing “great potential harm to science and international harmony…” through public discussion of a lab leak theory.
Collins’s view was mirrored by another participant in Fauci’s teleconference, Dutch virologist Ron Fouchier, who told the group that “Further debate about such accusations would unnecessarily distract top researchers from their active duties and do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular.”
Jeff Carlson co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He is a CFA-registered Charterholder and worked for 20 years as an analyst and portfolio manager in the high-yield bond market. He also runs the website TheMarketsWork.com and can be followed on Twitter @themarketswork.
Hans Mahncke co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He holds LL.B., LL.M. and Ph.D. degrees in law. He is the author of numerous law books and his research has been published in a range of international journals. Hans can be followed on Twitter @hansmahncke
Dietrich Bonhoeffer argued that stupid people are more dangerous than evil ones. This is because while we can protest against or fight evil people, against stupid ones we are defenseless — reasons fall on death ears. Bonhoeffer’s famous text, which we slightly edited for this video, serves any free society as a warning of what can happen when certain people gain too much power.
Dr. Bruce Lipton explains we have been programmed since birth and it has continued through Operation Mockingbird. Our education, media, political and religious systems play an integral part of who we have become. We have been guided daily through a world wide messaging system and are now learning they are using addictive “Brain Hijacking” to control us.
Addictive “brain hijacking” methods used by social media giants to keep users on their platforms have harmful effects, particularly on children, according to industry insider Rex Lee, who says the companies may be violating child protection laws and consumer protection laws by employing such techniques.
Lee, who has over 35 years of experience in the tech and telecom industry, recently testified before Congress, speaking to members about some of the deceptive practices used by social media networks—in particular, “brain hijacking.”
“The first time I’d ever heard of brain hijacking, I thought it was something from a science fiction movie,” he recently told EpochTV’s Crossroads program.
He said that social media apps, including those developed by Google, Meta, and Bytedance, are intentionally developed to be addictive.
Part of what makes these platforms addictive is associated with brain hijacking technologies, which involve suggestive and manipulative advertising, he explained.
Lee, who works in the tech industry for an enterprise app and platform developer, said that he was shocked after coming across an admission in a 2017 Axios interview by Sean Parker, who served as the first president of Facebook.
In the interview, Parker said that Facebook was intentionally developed using addictive technologies associated with something he described as a “social validation feedback loop.”
“That in itself is what is at the heart of brain hijacking,” Lee said. “And what that does is that reassures the end user that what they’re posting on the platform is being accepted by a lot of people. In other words, a social validation feedback loop would be associated with a thumbs up, or confetti or emojis, and that sort of thing after they do a post.”
Lee said these are addictive qualities that developers put into their app and platform designs, which ultimately end up harming the user.
“Sean Parker actually admitted this during the Axios interview when he said, ‘God only knows what it’s doing to our children’s brains,’” Lee said. “But it’s not only the brains of children, it’s the brains of the end user, whether it’s an adult, teen, child, or business and user.
“This is why people are checking their smartphones up to 150 times a day.”
Lee added that Parker expressly told Axios that the feedback loop was “exactly the kind of thing that a hacker like myself would come up with, because you’re exploiting vulnerability in human psychology.”
Lee has been providing to congressional committees, as well as senators and House members, insider information on how these platforms are developed.
The cybersecurity and privacy adviser also highlighted the harmful effects these social media platforms have on young teenagers, describing the platforms as “no different than tobacco companies making bubblegum-flavored cigarettes to sell to children.”
“These social validation feedback loops are what’s at heart, and why young teen girls as well as boys who utilize this technology can be harmed by it—they get addicted to it, they never can find fulfillment in it,” Lee said.
“And then, they end up depressed and they end up always constantly having to look for that validation, not only from the technology, but from the other end users on the platform.”
“This also is dangerous because it contributes to cyber bullying,” said Lee, explaining that cyberbullies themselves may become addicted to bullying others online.
“They [cyberbullies] get a few thumbs up from that post where they’re bullying somebody and then more thumbs up comes. And then that person, the bully, becomes addicted to actually harming people, as well as the recipient starts getting harmed,” he explained. “And we all know what that leads to anxiety, self harm, as well as suicides. And all of those are up among teen and young adult adult users, especially young girls who utilize the platform.”
“It’s actually illegal for a child under 13 to use any type of technology that’s supported by predatory apps that are developed to exploit the user for financial gain through methods such as data mining and surveillance,” Lee said of the law.
Lee said he analyzed the legal language on a Samsung Galaxy Note smartphone that was pre-installed with over 175 apps created or developed by 18 companies, including Chinese tech company Baidu.
This includes the application permission statements and application product warnings “which describe in great detail how much surveillance and data mining that the tech companies can conduct on you.”
“But they don’t want that online. They hide that within the devices, and some of those application permission statements actually contain product warnings,” Lee said.
“So again, another cigarette analogy would be, it would be like the warning for cigarettes being printed on the inside of the package,” he explained. “So that after you consume the product, you understand then that it commit that it can cause cancer, it’s the same thing.”
He added, “They’re hiding the product warnings within the application permission statements, which can only be accessed from within the device and not online.”
Lee said the FTC should be taking action to investigate these companies for related harm reported by their consumers, and enforce existing customer laws, particularly since former senior executives, such as Parker, have admitted that they developed these technologies to be addictive, “even at the expense of the end user safety.”
“We not only had these platforms weaponized against the end user to exploit them for financial gain through harmful technology, such as addictive apps, but now they’re using them to oppress people and spread misinformation, censorship, crush freedom of the press, and in other things,” Lee added. “It’s unbelievable.”
The Epoch Times has reached out to Meta, ByteDance, and Google for comment.
If you’ve had COVID-19, even a mild case, major congratulations to you as you’ve more than likely got long-term immunity, according to a team of researchers from Washington University School of Medicine. In fact, you’re likely to be immune for life, as is the case with recovery from many infectious agents — once you’ve had the disease and recovered, you’re immune, most likely for life.
The evidence is strong and promising, and should be welcome and comforting news to a public that has spent the last year, 2020, in a panic over SARS-CoV-2.
Increasingly evidence is showing that long-lasting immunity exists.
Initial Reports That COVID Immunity Was Fleeting Were Flawed
Seasonal coronaviruses, some of which cause common colds, yield only short-lived protective immunity, with reinfections occurring six to 12 months after the previous infection. Early data on SARS-CoV-2 also found that antibody titers declined rapidly in the first months after recovery from COVID-19, leading some to speculate that protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 may also be short-lived.
Senior author of the study, Ali Ellebedy, Ph.D., an associate professor of pathology and immunology at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, pointed out that this assumption is flawed, stating in a news release:
“Last fall, there were reports that antibodies waned quickly after infection with the virus that causes COVID-19, and mainstream media interpreted that to mean that immunity was not long-lived. But that’s a misinterpretation of the data. It’s normal for antibody levels to go down after acute infection, but they don’t go down to zero; they plateau.”
The researchers found a biphasic pattern of antibody concentrations against SARS-CoV-2, in which high antibody concentrations were found in the acute immune response that occurred at the time of initial infection.
The antibodies declined in the first months after infection, as should be expected, then leveled off to about 10% to 20% of the maximum concentration detected. In a commentary on the study, Andreas Radbruch and Hyun-Dong Chang of the German Rheumatism Research Centre Berlin explained:
“This is consistent with the expectation that 10–20% of the plasma cells in an acute immune reaction become memory plasma cells, and is a clear indication of a shift from antibody production by short-lived plasma cells to antibody production by memory plasma cells. This is not unexpected, given that immune memory to many viruses and vaccines is stable over decades, if not for a lifetime.”
When a new infection occurs, cells called plasmablasts provide antibodies, but when the virus is cleared, longer lasting memory B cells move in to monitor blood for signs of reinfection.
Bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) also exist in bones, acting as “persistent and essential sources of protective antibodies.” According to Ellebedy, “A plasma cell is our life history, in terms of the pathogens we’ve been exposed to,” and it’s in these long-lived BMPCs were immunity to SARS-CoV-2 resides.
Long-Term Immunity Likely After COVID-19 Infection
For the study, blood samples were collected from 77 people who had recovered from COVID-19, about one month after the onset of symptoms; most had experienced mild cases. Additional blood samples were collected three more times at three-month intervals to track antibody production; memory B cells and bone marrow were also collected from some of the participants.
Levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S) antibodies declined rapidly in the first four months after infection, then slowed over the next seven months. The most exciting part of the research is that, at both seven months and 11 months after infection, most of the participants had BMPCs that secreted antibodies specific for the spike protein encoded by SARS-CoV-2.
The BMPCs were found in amounts similar to those found in people who had been vaccinated against tetanus or diphtheria, which are considered to provide long-lasting immunity.
“Overall, our data provide strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans robustly establishes the two arms of humoral immune memory: long-lived BMPCs and memory B cells,” the researchers noted. This is perhaps the best available evidence of long-lasting immunity, Radbruch and Chang explained, because this immunological memory is a distinct part of the immune system that’s essential to long-term protection, beyond the initial immune response to the virus:
“In the memory phase of an immune response, B and T cells that are specific for a virus are maintained in a state of dormancy, but are poised to spring into action if they encounter the virus again or a vaccine that represents it. These memory B and T cells arise from cells activated in the initial immune reaction.
The cells undergo changes to their chromosomal DNA, termed epigenetic modifications, that enable them to react rapidly to subsequent signs of infection and drive responses geared to eliminating the disease-causing agent.
B cells have a dual role in immunity: they produce antibodies that can recognize viral proteins, and they can present parts of these proteins to specific T cells or develop into plasma cells that secrete antibodies in large quantities.
About 25 years ago, it became evident that plasma cells can become memory cells themselves, and can secrete antibodies for long-lasting protection. Memory plasma cells can be maintained for decades, if not a lifetime, in the bone marrow.”
In addition, in 2020 it was reported that people who had recovered from SARS-CoV — a virus that is genetically closely related to SARS-CoV-2 and belongs to the same viral species — maintained significant levels of neutralizing antibodies at least 17 years after initial infection. This also suggests that long-term immunity against SARS-CoV-2 should be expected. Ellebedy even said the protection is likely to continue “indefinitely”:
“These [BMPC] cells are not dividing. They are quiescent, just sitting in the bone marrow and secreting antibodies. They have been doing that ever since the infection resolved, and they will continue doing that indefinitely.”
Doctor Scott M. Jensen is an American politician, physician, and former member of the Minnesota Senate. A member of the Republican Party of Minnesota, he represented District 47 in the western Twin Cities metropolitan area. He is seeking the Republican nomination in the 2022 Minnesota gubernatorial election.
The Great Reset explained
No Mandates in the Cards? The Federal Government is the Virus
Any time one even mentions a story, data, or even VAERS numbers showing serious injury or death resulting from the vaccine, the bio-medical state lobby close their ears and shout while their censors in Big Tech label it as misinformation. But now we have it from the horse’s mouth – Pfizer’s own vaccine injury data – a shocking amount of death and injury that is likely under-reported. This means that the FDA knew from day one these vaccines were unsafe to the point that they would typically be denied authorization, and certainly not funded, mandated, and marketed with a budget and energy that have never been placed behind a product since the dawn of time.
Pursuant to an agreement based on a FOIA lawsuit, the FDA has agreed to release 500 pages of vaccine data documents per month. There is a total of 329,000 pages of documents containing the information the agency relied upon to approve the shots, but they have asked a court to give them 55 years to release them. Last week, the FDA released the first five documents to a group of scientists suing for the information, and one of them reveals Pfizer’s data on adverse events through Feb. 28. The 38-page document details the cumulative post-authorization safety data reported to Pfizer’s system during the early days of the mass vaccination campaign.
In total, Pfizer discloses the existence of 42,086 adverse event case reports containing 158,893 total events, including 1,227 deaths. 25,957 of the events were classified as “Nervous system disorders.” So for those who think that somehow VAERS is not accurate or is overreporting deaths, these are numbers straight from the horse’s mouth just through February. Remember, it is extremely hard to trace many serious events back to the vaccine, including death, especially if there is a few weeks’ lag time, and most especially with people already in advanced age. So these are just the ones that were “submitted voluntarily, and the magnitude of underreporting is unknown.”
Full stop right there. Under any other circumstance, such a vaccine would have been removed from the market right away, certainly not fully endorsed, marketed, funded, and mandated by government. It was so bad that Pfizer reveals, “Due to the large numbers of spontaneous adverse event reports received for the product, the MAH has prioritized the processing of serious cases” and also had to hire more full-time employees to handle the reporting. How was it ethical for the FDA to withhold this information from the public, and how can it ever be ethical to mandate such a shot, even if one believes that, in general, a government could wield such authority? This is especially true now that we know its efficacy is minimal at best and downright enhances the virus at worst.
Imagine if there were a third-party audit of vaccine adverse events by someone other than the manufacturer. Let’s not forget that according to the lawyer for the de Garay family, whose 12-year-old daughter suffered a debilitating injury from the shot during the actual clinical trial, Pfizer and the feds tried to do everything possible to deny that the vaccine caused the injury. This is for someone in the supposedly carefully monitored trial and this is for a 12-year-old. You can imagine how many seniors got the shots and were injured or died, yet the families never reported it because they chalked it up to end-of-life health decline or morbidity.
The time has come for Republican governors to stop denying the problems with these shots and pick up the slack of regulatory oversight where the feds have engaged in criminal negligence. It is impossible to deny the safety signals and refrain from taking investigative and regulatory actions to provide state residents with informed consent. The safety signals for blood disorders and cardiac issues alone are enormous. Consider the fact that researchers from the University of Hong Kong bluntly concluded, “There is a significant increase in the risk of acute myocarditis/pericarditis following Comirnaty vaccination among Chinese male adolescents, especially after the second dose.” Now remember that this is the only shot even approved for teenagers, while Moderna, which has a stronger dose, is banned in many European and Asian countries for those under 30.
At some point the concerning safety signals have to matter. One of the most troubling signals is the inordinate number of professional athletes around the world collapsing suddenly shortly after having gotten the shots. Israeli researchers found a list of 183 professional athletes or coaches who died suddenly this year, well beyond the normal baseline over the past 20 years. Most were very young, and 80 of them collapsed on the field. Most of the reported causes were heart-related, including myocarditis, pericarditis, heart attacks, or cardiac arrest, as well as blood clotting.
Again, if we are seeing this magnitude of disturbing safety signals and this degree of short-term deaths and injuries, what does that portend for long-term safety for millions of people? It’s one thing to not study long-term effects of a vaccine because of the imminence of a pandemic, and then we see no short-term safety problems. But now that we are experiencing an unprecedented number of short-term injuries, how can we assume this is safe long-term?
Republican leaders are happy that the courts are enjoining Biden’s federal mandate. This way they can wash their hands of having to fight against it politically in a way that will actually endure. The reality is that most large corporations will still impose the mandates because the government has removed the ultimate market-based check and balance against dangerous products by exempting the manufacturers from any liability, including for willful misconduct. This is why every Republican governor and legislature has an obligation to impose workplace injury liability on any employer that mandates the shots. They can’t have it both ways. If it’s truly safe and effective, they should have no problem applying the same standard of workplace injury liability we apply to all other workplace requirements imposed by employers.
When state legislatures convene in January, they have an obligation to pick up the slack on oversight of these shots. If they fail to do so, our Constitution will be replaced with the balance sheets of Pfizer.
Ghislaine Maxwell and the Terramar Project child trafficking links.
Victim of vaccine damage pleads with regulators at Senator hearing.
Congressman Jim Jordan Ask Immunity Questions to Doctor. Natural Immunity is 27 times better than any Jab!!!
Operation Mockingbird is an large-scale program of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that began in the early years of the Cold War and attempted to manipulate the media for propaganda purposes. Apparently the program is ongoing and part of Mainstream and Social Media today
The risk of developing a form of heart inflammation is higher for people younger than 40 after receiving Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine than it is from contracting COVID-19, according to a new study.
Researchers found 15 excess cases per 1 million people who received a second dose of the vaccine compared to 10 extra cases of myocarditis following a positive COVID-19 test. Moderna’s vaccine is typically taken in a two-dose regimen.
The risk of myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation, was much higher following the second dose of the Moderna vaccine, but there were still eight excess cases per 1 million people following the first dose as well.
“Time to abandon the belief that COVID-19 myocarditis risk is always higher than mRNA vaccine myocarditis risk. For some individuals, myocarditis risks of the vaccine(s) are higher than those of the disease,” Euzebiusz Jamrozik, an infectious disease expert who works at the University of Oxford, wrote on Twitter.
The elevated risk stood out against what researchers found for the Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccines. People were found to be more at risk of contracting myocarditis from COVID-19 than from either of those vaccines, regardless of age.
“This population-based study quantifies for the first time the risk of several rare cardiac adverse events associated with three COVID-19 vaccines as well as SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 in adults was associated with a small increase in the risk of myocarditis within a week of receiving the first dose of both adenovirus and mRNA vaccines, and after the second dose of both mRNA vaccines. By contrast, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a substantial increase in the risk of hospitalization or death from myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmia,” the researchers wrote.
The study was published in Nature and was carried out by professors from multiple colleges, including the University of Oxford, which helped develop the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.
Researchers utilized data from the English National Immunization database, which includes information on all people vaccinated in England. The database featured information on 38.6 million people through Aug. 24.
Limitations on the study included not breaking down the data further—previous studies indicate that teenagers are at much higher risk of myocarditis from vaccines than older people—and Moderna’s vaccine not being available in the UK until April.
Representatives for Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Myocarditis and another form of heart inflammation, pericarditis, have been identified as serious side effects following vaccination with the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines, which are both built on messenger RNA technology. A U.S. study analyzing reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System found that teenage boys were more likely to suffer heart inflammation from the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines than they were from COVID-19 hospitalization.
Some countries, including Finland, paused their administration of Moderna’s vaccine to youth because of concerns about the side effect.
“The preliminary data showed that among those under 30, the myocarditis and pericarditis incidence was higher than expected,” Dr. Hanna Nohynek, chief physician of the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare’s Unit Infectious Diseases Control and Vaccines, told The Epoch Times in November.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration pushed back a decision in late October on whether to authorize the Moderna vaccine for children aged 17 and younger. Moderna stated that this was done so that drug regulators could more closely analyze the risk-benefit calculus.
Moderna stated in a November call that its vaccine, which is administered at a higher amount than Pfizer’s, offers better protection, but also brings more myocarditis risk.
A Canadian pre-print study published last week found that the incidence of heart inflammation was 5.1 times higher for males between 18 and 24 who got a second dose of Moderna’s vaccine versus those in the same population who received a second dose of Pfizer’s vaccine.
The risk of myocarditis following vaccination was much lower in youth who received the second dose at a longer interval, researchers found. Some countries have stretched the time between the first and second vaccine dose as a result of similar studies.
Zachary Stieber covers U.S. news and stories relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. He is based in Maryland.
GOD IS WITHIN YOU
Jean Claude Koven
15 October 2009
When people ask me if I am religious, I tell them I love God far too much to be religious. “Oh, then you must believe in God?” they inevitably God is within you ask. “Of course not,” I reply with a smile, “does a fish believe in water?” For me, God is all there is. What’s to believe?
Although all the world’s major religions agree that God (however they define the term) is omnipresent, it seems that very few of their followers including their clerical hierarchy actually understand what omnipresence really means. And therein lies the source of the world’s ills.
For a start, we take our relationship with God far too seriously. We bring so much solemnity to the way we view God awe, veneration, obedience, and the like that we end up creating distance between us and the object of our worship.
Expressions such as “God is my judge,” “God forbid,” and “God bless you” creep into our language, and consequently our thoughts. People are actually proud to call themselves God-fearing folk. For too many of us, God is somewhere out there, watching and judging us as we struggle through our imperfect lives.
And consider this: Some religions consider the name of God so holy that it is never pronounced. Instead they create a litany of substitute terms so they can talk about God without having to commit the blasphemy of actually using his name.
When practitioners of these religions write about their deity, they are instructed to omit the vowel: G-d. Other religions take the opposite tack. They encourage their devotees to chant or meditate on the name of God for hours at a time.
To their way of believing, focusing on God leads to a state of bliss that opens the door to transcendence and enlightenment. But if God is truly all that is, what can possibly make one of his names more powerful than any other?
For that matter, what is the purpose of naming him (or her or it) in the first place?
Naming anything creates a subject/object relationship between you and the thing named, and that in and of itself means a separation. Every name of God, no matter how holy, drives a wedge between the creator and the created which includes you and me.
This separation is the primal breeding ground for fear, for we then see ourselves as tiny beings, abandoned (or evicted from Paradise) and living on the fringe of an incomprehensibly huge cosmos.
But what if the phrase “God is all that is” were literally true? This is what R Buckminster Fuller must have understood when he said, “God, to me, it seems, is a verb not a noun.” His words, when I first read them, lodged in my mind.
But I didn’t get their full import until many years later, during my first visit to Findhorn, the renowned spiritual community in northeast Scotland.
It was there, sitting in a circle with my fellow newbies, that the penny dropped. One young man in our group, Peter, suddenly exclaimed, “Oh, wow, I finally see it. It is not that God is in all things; it’s that God is all things.”
His exclamation triggered two remarkable realisations for me. First, the obvious is obvious only to those who are sufficiently present to see it. The delivery of Peter’s life-changing epiphany had virtually no effect on the rest of the group.
Our facilitator was so consumed by his orientation agenda that he missed the moment completely. Thanking Peter for his contribution, he simply asked the group if anyone else had anything to share.
Second, what Peter said is literally true. In an instant, Bucky’s words became crystal clear. God is indeed a verb. He is not the creator. He is the ongoing unfoldment of creation itself. There is nothing that is not a part of this unfolding. Thus there can be nothing separate from God. God is infinite and infinity is One.
From that moment, everything in my life began to change. It wasn’t immediate; it was rather like a giant oil tanker slowly making a U-turn. As if I were facing in a new direction, I looked at the world in a new way “How,” I asked myself, “do we dupe ourselves so completely? How come so few people see what Bucky and Peter see? How could I myself have been so blind?”
When we perceive God as a noun, we envision him as the creator, the architect of, and therefore separate from, his creation.
Identifying ourselves as part of that creation, we see ourselves not only separate from our source but separate from each other and all other manifest things as well. This is the fatally flawed axiom underlying virtually all of the world’s faiths.
Once I viewed God as a verb instead of a noun, my perception of life shifted. Everything around and its manifestation became God. There was only God. When someone spoke to me, it was with God’s voice; when I listened, it was with God’s heart. I invite you to try it.
The small shift from noun to verb may well be the antidote to the forbidden fruit that banished us from Eden. As you begin to view God not as the creator but as the constantly changing dance of creation itself, you’ll discover him in everything you see including yourself.