Houston Medical Staff Fired for not taking the Jab speak.
Geo-Engineering is part of the swamp
Law of One
11.18Questioner: Then we have crusaders from Orion coming to this planet for mind control purposes. How do they do this?
Ra: As all, they follow the Law of One observing free will. Contact is made with those who call. Those then upon the planetary sphere act much as do you to disseminate the attitudes and philosophy of their particular understanding of the Law of One which is service to self. These become the elite. Through these, the attempt begins to create a condition whereby the remainder of the planetary entities are enslaved by their own free will.
16.17Questioner: What was their purpose in doing this?
Ra: I am Ra. The purpose of the Orion group, as mentioned before, is conquest and enslavement. This is done by finding and establishing an elite and causing others to serve the elite through various devices such as the laws you mention and others given by this entity.
18.21Questioner: Why did they want larger and stronger organisms?
TURLEY: The Media is not covering the Twitter Files and the reason why is because they’re heavily invested in this scandal, they’re heavily invested in Hunter Biden — many of these news outlets only recently just acknowledged the laptop is authentic — 2 years later!
“What’s disturbing is what’s on the [Hunter Biden] laptop – hundreds of emails detailing an influence peddling scheme that is breathtaking. Influence peddling is common in D.C. but I’ve been in this town for 3 decades, and I’ve never seen anything come close to what the Biden’s did.”
Interview with Whitney Webb, professional writer, researcher and journalist since 2016 regarding the Clintons and more.
Prepare to have your mind blown
Huge Supreme Court Case
This is how you take down the wall. United we stand Divided we fall
Police in the UK arrest a woman for silently praying:
“Are you praying?” “I might be praying in my head.”
A health care worker prepares Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine doses in Portland, Ore., in a file photograph. (Nathan Howard/Getty Images)
Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine has been linked to blood clotting in older individuals, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
FDA researchers, crunching data from a database of elderly persons in the United States, found that pulmonary embolism—blood clotting in the lungs—met the initial threshold for a statistical signal and continued meeting the criteria after a more in-depth evaluation.
Three other outcomes of interest—a lack of oxygen to the heart, a blood platelet disorder called immune thrombocytopenia, and another type of clotting called intravascular coagulation—initially raised red flags, researchers said. More in-depth evaluations, such as comparisons with populations who received influenza vaccines, showed those three as no longer meeting the statistical threshold for a signal.
Researchers looked at data covering 17.4 million elderly Americans who received a total of 34.6 million vaccine doses between Dec. 10, 2020, and Jan. 16, 2022.
The FDA said it was not taking any action on the results because they do not prove the vaccines cause any of the four outcomes, and because the findings “are still under investigation and require more robust study.”
Dr. Peter McCullough, chief medical adviser for the Truth for Health Foundation, told The Epoch Times via email that the new paper “corroborates the concerns of doctors that the large uptick in blood clots, progression of atherosclerotic heart disease, and blood disorders is independently associated with COVID-19 vaccination.”
Pfizer did not respond to a request for comment.
How the Research Was Done
FDA researchers, with assistance from researchers with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), analyzed data from the CMS database. They included Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries aged 65 or older who received a vaccine within the timeframe, were enrolled when they were vaccinated, and were enrolled for a “clean window” of time prior to vaccination. The window was 183 days or 365 days, depending on the outcome.
About 25 million people receive the Medicare Fee-for-Service, but only about 17 million were vaccinated during the period of time studied.
Researchers used probability testing to detect an increased risk of one or more of 14 outcomes following vaccination. The goal was to see whether vaccination may increase the risk of adverse outcomes, such as pulmonary embolism, or blood clotting in the lungs. If an outcome met a certain statistical threshold, that meant it could increase the risk.
The initial results of the safety monitoring detected an increased risk of four events, the FDA announced on July 12, 2021. They were the same four outlined in the new paper, which is the first update the agency has given on the matter since its announcement.
As of Jan. 15, 2022, 9,065 cases of a lack of oxygen to the heart—known as acute myocardial infarction—were detected, researchers revealed in the new study. As of the same date, 6,346 cases of pulmonary embolism, 1,064 cases of immune thrombocytopenia, and 263 cases of the coagulation were detected.
The primary analysis showed a safety signal for all four outcomes. Researchers tried adjusting the numbers by using different variables. For instance, at one point they adjusted for the variation of background rates, or the rates of each outcome in the general population prior to the pandemic. After certain adjustments—not all—the myocardial infarction, immune thrombocytopenia, and intravascular coagulation ceased being statistically significant.
Pulmonary embolism, though, continued to be statistically significant, the researchers said. Pulmonary embolism is a serious condition that can lead to death.
Limitations of the study included possible false signals and possible missed signals due to factors such as parameters being specified wrongly.
The conditions that didn’t trigger a signal included stroke, heart inflammation, and appendicitis.
The signals were detected only after Pfizer vaccination. Analyses for signals after receipt of the Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines did not show any concerns.
Moderna and Johnson & Johnson did not respond to requests for comment.
All three vaccines have been linked to a number of side effects. Heart inflammation is causally linked to the Moderna and Pfizer shots, experts around the world have confirmed, while Johnson & Johnson’s has been associated with blood clots.
Other conditions, such as pulmonary embolism, have been reported to authorities and described in studies, though some papers have found no increase in risk following vaccination.
Approximately 4,214 reports of post-vaccination pulmonary embolism, including 1,886 reports following receipt of Pfizer’s vaccine, have been reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System as of Dec. 9.
As of the same date, 1,434 reports of post-vaccination myocardial infarction, including 736 following receipt of Pfizer’s vaccine; 469 reports of post-vaccination immune thrombocytopenia, including 234 following receipt of Pfizer’s vaccine; and 78 reports of post-vaccination intravascular coagulation, including 42 after receipt of Pfizer’s vaccine, have been reported.
Cardiologist Dr. Sanjay Verma on the Link Between Myocarditis & Sudden Death
“Myocarditis (inflammation of the heart) does lead to, for the next six months, increased risk of sudden cardiac death after aerobic activity”
Reports to the system can be made by anybody, but most are lodged by health care workers, studies show. The number of reports are an undercount, according to studies.
The new study states that the FDA “strongly believes the potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the potential risks of COVID-19 infection.” No evidence was cited in support of the belief.
The FDA is set to meet with its vaccine advisory panel in January 2023 about the future of COVID-19 vaccines, as the vaccines have been performing much worse against Omicron and its subvariants.
McCullough told The Epoch Times: “A shortcoming of the CMS surveillance system is that it did not capture prior and subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection which accentuate the cumulative risk of COVID-19 vaccination. Given the large number of individuals who have been vaccinated, the population attributable fraction of medical problems ascribed to the vaccines is enormous. I have concerns over the future burden to the healthcare system as a consequence of mass indiscriminate COVID-19 vaccination.”
Zachary Stieber is a senior reporter for The Epoch Times based in Maryland. He covers U.S. and world news
Child sex trafficking expose’ documentary, Contraland, filmed by the Veterans of non-profit organization Veterans For Child Rescue. V4CR exposes the multi-billion dollar industry of child sex trafficking, alerting the populace on the epidemic and how you can empower and safeguard all children.
After the rollout of the COVID jabs in 2021, cancer patients have gotten younger, with the largest increase occurring among 30- to 50-year-olds. (Africa Studio/Shutterstock)
The fact that tumor sizes have become dramatically larger since 2021, patients are younger, and recurrence and metastasis are increasing should be front-page news, but you’re hearing nothing about it. Why is that? This former intelligence officer and strategist believes he knows why.
Analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) data suggests the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been filtering and redesignating cancer deaths as COVID deaths since April 2021 to eliminate the cancer signal
The signal is being hidden by swapping the underlying cause of death with main cause of death
Uncontrollable turbo-charged cancers the medical establishment had never seen before only started to occur after the rollout of the COVID jabs
Before it was manipulated to eliminate the safety signal, data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) showed cancer rates among military personnel and their families tripled after the rollout of the shots
After the rollout of the COVID jabs in 2021, cancer patients have gotten younger, with the largest increase occurring among 30- to 50-year-olds, tumor sizes are dramatically larger, multiple tumors in multiple organs are becoming more common, and recurrence and metastasis are increasing
In a series of Twitter posts, The Ethical Skeptic — self-described as a former intelligence officer and strategist — has laid out a series of charts illustrating how cancer deaths are being mislabeled as COVID deaths.
The suspicion is that this is an effort to hide the fact that the COVID shots have resulted in soaring cancer rates. The Ethical Skeptic also takes a deep dive into the data in “Houston, We Have a Problem, Part 1,” on TheEthicalSkeptic.com.1
As noted in his article, seven out of the 11 International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes tracked by the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics — including cancer — saw sharp upticks starting in the first week of April 2021.
“This date of inception is no coincidence, in that it also happens to coincide with a key inflection point regarding a specific body-system intervention in most of the U.S. population,” The Ethical Skeptic notes.2 In other words, April 2021 was when large swaths of the American population were getting their first COVID jabs.
Cancer Diagnoses on the Rise
The following graph, highlighted on Dr. Jennifer Brown’s Substack,3 illustrates the cyclical wave pattern of cancer diagnoses, from January 2015 and October 1, 2022. As noted in the top-right text box:
“We should be at or near a seasonal nadir. Instead we are at an all-time CA [cancer] excess, and heading up. Keep in mind there is substantial lag to CA reporting, so this likely under-represents true excess.”
At no point during the past seven years have we seen this rate of new cancer diagnoses. Are the COVID shots to blame? Probably, unless we can identify another widespread environmental factor or exposure that was introduced to the population, en masse, in early 2021, that didn’t exist before.
CDC Fudging Death Records to Eliminate Cancer Signal
According to The Ethical Skeptic’s analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) data, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been filtering and redesignating cancer deaths as COVID deaths since Week 14 of 2021 to eliminate the cancer signal.4
The following two charts, posted on Twitter October 1 and 2, 2022, illustrates how cancer mortality is being artificially suppressed. As explained by The Ethical Skeptic:5,6
“The set dynamics are complex, but the principle is straightforward. When a death cert lists Cancer as the UCoD [underlying cause of death] and COVID as MCoD [main cause of death] — the UCoD & MCoD are being swapped, and COVID is being listed as the UCoD 100% (425/wk).
“This results in 20% of all COVID deaths each week, also happening to be persons dying of Cancer — which is egregiously higher than it should be. This is clear over-attribution = equates to exactly the difference between the Cancer and All Other ICD-10 code lag curves.”
The problem facing the CDC, is … What does one do when COVID Mortality is no longer substantial enough to conceal the excess Cancer Mortality?”
So, to rephrase, what The Ethical Skeptic is saying is that 20% of the weekly so-called COVID deaths are actually cancer deaths, which is rather astounding. But swapping the underlying and main causes of death, listing COVID as the main cause, hides (to some degree) the fact that cancer deaths are going through the roof.
According to his analysis, the COVID shot is killing 7,300 Americans per week. COVID, meanwhile, is killing 1,740 people.7 So, what will the CDC blame when COVID disappears and they can no longer swap the underlying and main cause of death designations?
Department of Defense Data Showed Massive Cancer Rise
Uncontrollable turbo-charged cancers the medical establishment had never seen before only started to occur after the rollout of the COVID jabs.8 Data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), exposed by attorney Tom Renz and Sen. Ron Johnson (above), showed cancer rates among military personnel and their families basically tripled after the rollout of the shots.9
As you may recall, within days of the DMED data being revealed, the database was taken offline, allegedly to “identify and correct” a supposed data corruption problem, and when it came back, the data had been altered to hide these glaringly obvious safety signals.10
‘Turbo-Cancers’ Emerged After COVID Jab Rollout
In the video above, Swedish pathologist, researcher and senior physician at Lund’s University, Dr. Ute Kruger, describes the changes she has personally observed in the wake of the COVID shots. For example, she’s noticed:11,12
Cancer patients are getting younger — The largest increase is among 30- to 50-year-olds
Tumor sizes are dramatically larger — Historically, 3-centimeter tumors were commonly found at the time of cancer diagnosis. Now, the tumors they’re finding are regularly 4 to 12 centimeters, which suggests they’re growing at a much faster rate than normal
Multiple tumors in multiple organs are becoming more common
Recurrence and metastasis are increasing — Kruger points out that many of the cancer patients she’s seeing have been in remission for years, only to suddenly be beset with uncontrollable cancer growth and metastasis shortly after their COVID jab
These “turbo-cancers,” as Kruger calls them, cannot be explained by delayed cancer screenings due to lockdowns and other COVID restrictions, as those days are long gone. Patients, despite having access to medical screenings as in years past, are showing up with grossly exacerbated tumor growths, and she believes this is because the cancers are being “turbo-charged” by the mRNA jabs.
Dr. Ryan Cole has also discussed the explosion of cancer (see video below). He believes the shots are primarily accelerating already existing cancers, by way of immune dysregulation.13 He noticed that cancers that could normally be controlled and kept in check, giving the patient several years of quality life, once they got the COVID jab, the cancer would suddenly grow out of control and rapidly lead to death.
Data Are so Corrupted, Will We Ever Get to the Truth?
The sad reality is that most data sources have at this point been so corrupted, it’s unlikely we’ll ever be able to get the whole truth. The CDC started manipulating the data in 2020 and hasn’t stopped. DMED, which has historically been one of the best and most pristine, has now been modified. Other data sources have suffered the same fate.
It’s beyond egregious, and data modelers like The Ethical Skeptic show just how bad the situation is. The idea that the CDC is massaging statistics to hide clear danger signals is appalling and unethical in the extreme, yet that’s what we’re seeing. The question is, why do they go to such lengths to protect such a lethal product? Your guess is as good as mine.
Originally published October 14, 2022 on Mercola.com
Joseph Mercola is the founder of Mercola.com. An osteopathic physician, best-selling author, and recipient of multiple awards in the field of natural health, his primary vision is to change the modern health paradigm by providing people with a valuable resource to help them take control of their health.
Why Did Dr. Malhotra Attack COVID “Vaccine Hesitancy” When There Was No Evidence of Long-Term Safety or Reduced Viral Transmission?
Collapse of Deep State’s COVID Vaccine Propaganda Goes Mainstream
“The collapse of the Covid injection narrative is accelerating and has now burst through the censorship into mainstream consciousness in Europe and the U.S., explains The New American magazine Senior Editor Alex Newman in this episode of Behind The Deep State. The house of cards underpinning the Deep State’s fraudulent campaign is collapsing. One key milestone in that process was Florida State Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo (https://rumble.com/v1niy94-florida-surgeon-general-recommends-adult-men-under-40-stay-away-from-covid-.html) highlighting data showing that young men injected with the experimental mRNA concoction faced an 84% increase in fatal cardiac events. Older people also saw drastic increases in fatal heart issues following the injection. Then, a major scandal broke in Europe as a senior Pfizer executive admitted (https://rumble.com/v1nj2yu-pfizer-exec-concedes-covid-19-vaccine-was-never-tested-on-preventing-transm.html) to the European Parliament that the company had never even tested whether the injection prevented transmission prior to pushing the shot, claiming the Big Pharma behemoth had to move at the ‘speed of science’
‘Vaccine Hesitancy’ Is 1 of WHO’s Top 10 Global Threats—but Flu Shot Data Tells a Different Story (+Graphs)
By Dr. Sean Lin and Health 1+1
October 12, 2022Updated: October 17, 2022
In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) proposed 10 threats to global health, such as air pollution, non-communicable diseases, global influenza pandemic, Ebola and other high-threat pathogens, weak primary health care, and HIV. Among them, vaccine hesitancy was also mentioned, which many people might find surprising.
The elevation of this issue to a global health threat is a rather political approach. From this perspective, it should not be acceptable to the public. Just as consumers evaluate the quality of the products they purchase, people want to know the vaccines they are getting are good in quality and effective. If a vaccine is proven to be effective while there are minimal side effects, most people wouldn’t hesitate to get vaccinated.
Furthermore, vaccination is just one of the preventive measures aimed at protecting the vaccine recipients against certain diseases. And vaccine’s protection effects depend on the functional immune system in the vaccinated people’s bodies. There are many other ways to achieve the same outcomes, such as boosting the individuals’ innate immunity. Also, for some diseases, there are effective medications to cure the patients, alleviate their symptoms, or prevent critical illness.
The term “vaccine hesitancy” is not scientific per se. Rather, it is a political term. In fact, it has become a label that can be used to attack people. In many cases, people who are described as “vaccine hesitant” are also labeled as “anti-science.” This is irrational and shouldn’t be promoted, especially by such an authoritative international health organization as the WHO. This is because the qualities of different vaccines vary greatly. Labeling people “vaccine hesitant” is a practice to violate their right to self-determination. Therefore, people should question whether there are political operations or interest groups behind the campaigns to attack people for “vaccine hesitancy.”
One such example is the WHO’s promotion of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, in the name of eliminating cervical cancer on a global scale. However, prior to the development of cervical cancer, there are already pre-cancerous cells in many females, which can be caused by various internal mechanisms of the human body. Vaccination alone cannot prevent the development of all cervical cancer cases. Therefore, the WHO’s proposal to eliminate cervical cancer through HPV vaccination is unscientific and sounds like a marketing campaign for the vaccine products. The HPV vaccines would reduce the occurrence of cervical cancer, but cannot eliminate it.
Flu Vaccines Have Varying Effects on the Immune Responses of Different Age Groups
Currently, the most commonly used production method of influenza vaccines is the egg-based approach, in which flu viruses grow and replicate themselves. They are then isolated, purified, and inactivated, before being added to the formulation to produce vaccines. Although cost-effective, this method is prone to mutations, which can lower the vaccines’ effectiveness and cause potential problems, such as weakening the vaccine recipients’ immune system.
When implementing flu vaccines, the more responses from T cells and B cells, the better. From the graph below, we can see that among children aged 5 to 9, in terms of T-cell response stimulation, inactivated flu vaccines are less effective than live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIVs) (pdf).
Furthermore, vaccines are not a panacea that works for everyone or every age group. This graph shows the changes in the T cells of children and adults after their immunization with one dose of LAIV. We can see that although the same type of flu vaccines were administered, in terms of T cell response, the vaccines are more effective in children aged 5 to 9 years than in adults. In addition, different vaccine platforms also have different effects on vaccine recipients.
Therefore, we can conclude that these flu vaccines have varying effects on different age groups. The same vaccines may not have the same protection for everyone, as individual factors such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and response to vaccines are also involved, and they may vary greatly among different populations. So, when designing vaccination policies, there should be some adjustment for different age groups. This also further illustrates our points earlier that people should have the self-determination for vaccinations based on their own individual factors, such as the age factor here.
New Generation of Flu Vaccines Will Also Have Mutations and Challenges
Although LAIVs are more effective than inactivated flu vaccines when providing protection, they are not as widely promoted as inactivated vaccines, due to their side effects. Therefore, the next generation vaccines are expected to have better stimulation of T cell responses through new technologies, such as the DNA recombinant technology. One example of a next generation flu vaccine is Wyeth/IL-15/5Flu, which is a T cell-activating vaccine based on the H5N1 flu strain and produced by the pharmaceutical company Wyeth.
However, this T cell-activating vaccine induces a higher incidence and degree of mutation on the influenza A virus genome. That is, even if the virus strains used in the production of the vaccine are not grown from eggs, there will still be mutations at important hemagglutinin-receptor binding sites. For example, in the flu virus strain used in Wyeth/IL-15/5Flu vaccine production, it was found that the mutation at position 34 (involved in receptor binding) in HA protein is 10 times higher than virus strains used for inactivated vaccines.
For instance, when producing these new vaccines, once the mutation-prone virus hemagglutinin’s head domain is removed, its hemagglutinin (HA) stem region, which has a relatively low mutation frequency, will now mutate more. And beneficial adaptation mutations on the polymerase basic 2 (PB2) gene/protein can occur, as the virus adapts to the new production method and environment. As breakthroughs are produced, the stem, which was previously not prone to mutations, would also mutate.
In addition to the mutations brought about by the immune environment, the vaccine companies would also deliberately select the fast-growing strains of influenza virus. This is because for high volume virus production, the choice of virus strains with higher reproduction efficiency is also important. So, it is necessary for vaccine companies to select strains that reproduce fast, in order to grow more viruses with fewer resources.
During this virus strain screening process, mutations concerning gene segments such as the viral enzymes PB1 and PB2 are introduced, and this changes the strains’ replication capability. Also, many of the new generation vaccines are in Vero cells, which are a lineage of monkey kidney epithelial cells and the most popular cell lineage for manufacturing human vaccines. However, Vero cells are not human cells. The virus still needs to adapt to a different host when using Vero cells.
The Impact of Annual Vaccination on the Human Immune System and the Flu Virus
In the 1970s, T.W. Hoskins and colleagues observed a phenomenon in a British boarding school for the first time. That is, flu vaccination in prior influenza seasons can reduce the effectiveness of the vaccine in the current season. This phenomenon, known as the “Hoskins effect,” has also been identified by some other studies.
Although academics have been exploring the “Hoskins effect” for decades and scratching their heads over this phenomenon, the general public is not aware of this issue.
Many people believe that the benefits of flu vaccination outweigh its drawbacks. This is why they are promoting the implementation of flu vaccines. Although there have always been questions about the effectiveness of flu vaccines, there haven’t been any large-scale studies on this issue so far.
Currently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends people over the age of 6 months to receive seasonal flu vaccines. However, what are the impact of annual flu vaccination on our immunity?
According to the journal Frontiers in Immunology, a human cohort vaccine study has been conducted since the 2016-2017 flu season with adult (over the age of 18) and teenage (12 to 18 years old) participants, who are vaccinated annually against the seasonal flu. Every flu season, the subjects’ sera samples and personal information are collected and analyzed at the University of Georgia.
Their immune responses to repeated annual influenza vaccination is tested by hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) composite scores. The participants are enrolled in early September every year, without having received the seasonal flu vaccine. In the teenage participant group, during the 2017-2018 flu season, the hemagglutination inhibition was relatively adequate. However, the inhibition came down in the following flu season. The same phenomenon took place in the adult group, as well.
It can be interpreted that at the beginning of the 2017-2018 flu season, the participants were not vaccinated, and the flu vaccine later provided them with useful protection. However, in the subsequent 2018-2019 flu season, with repeated flu vaccination, the protection offered by the vaccine actually decreased. It has also been observed that the vaccine had become less and less effective among the repeatedly vaccinated participants.
Overall, the HAI composite scores declined significantly from one flu season to the next in teenagers, but somehow remained steady in adult participants. In addition, a comparison of the mean HAI composite scores of prior vaccinated teens and those newly enrolled in the 2018-2019 flu season implies that repeated annual vaccination resulted in reduced immune responses.
Therefore, repeated vaccination strains are associated with reduced boosting of immune responses and thus protection.
The annual flu vaccine contains four different virus strains. It was discovered that if the virus is the same, to very similar year to year, the decline in immune response would be more obvious if the vaccine had been given continuously year to year. In addition, if there is a change in the choice of virus strains between seasons, the vaccine’s protection effect would be better. This may be because the immune system has been fatigued by the repeated vaccination.
The immune system may use the immunological memory based on the previous vaccination when a second slightly different vaccine is administered, leaving the immune system stuck with its first immune responses and unable to generate more effective responses to the second vaccination. However, as flu viral strains change from year to year, the antigens in the vaccine are also adjusted. There has been no tracking of the immune fatigue associated with a particular strain of virus. And the specific mechanism of this phenomenon has not been studied in particular detail.
In addition, repeated vaccination also forces the virus to undergo mutation, as it guides the virus to develop in a certain direction, as it screens the virus strains. This is called immune escape.
During the natural evolution process, pathogens experience random mutations that change their antigens. Therefore, the vaccine loses its effectiveness against the mutated pathogens. Nevertheless, during the vaccine-driven evolution process, after the vaccine is administered, certain pathogens die, and the surviving ones replicate themselves. After several rounds of repeated vaccination, the surviving pathogens would have gone through several rounds of screening, and the vaccine then has less effect on them. And eventually, vaccine-escape mutants will be screened out.
Vaccine escape does not just occur for flu vaccines. There are many examples for other bacteria vaccines. Lessons were not rare.
For example, Bordetella pertussis is the bacterium causing pertussis (whooping cough). As the design of the vaccine against Bordetella pertussis was targeting one of its surface-associated proteins called pertactin, through self-screening, more and more pertactin-negative bacterial isolates were replicating themselves more than the other ones.
Many people get the annual flu jabs, because they believe that they can prevent severe illness. However, the results of a Japanese study may disappoint. This study, published in the journal Vaccine in 2014, shows that flu vaccination doesn’t reduce the risk of subsequent hospitalization or prevent severe illness.
As shown in the table, within 14 days of flu infection, around 40 percent of people who had previously been vaccinated with the flu vaccine were infected with the flu virus. And the percentage of cases in which the individuals got vaccinated and became hospitalized was 9 percent, while this figure was 4 percent for the hospitalized patients who were unvaccinated. Therefore, the flu vaccine doesn’t always reduce disease severity or prevent critical illness as the general public believes, a belief driven by the annual flu vaccination campaigns.
The CDC also conducted a study on flu-caused critical illness among a vaccinated population recently. The patients with life-threatening illness included those who used invasive ventilation, vasopressor, dialysis, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
According to this study, the flu vaccine was effective in 75 percent of the cases with life-threatening illness and in 57 percent of the cases with non-life-threatening illness.
However, this study is not very rigorous, as its sample size is very small. More importantly, the factor of underlying medical conditions was not included in the evaluation of the patients’ disease severity, as many of them already had respiratory, cardiovascular, and/or neurological conditions prior to flu infection. The data of disease severity was not stratified based on different types and degrees of underlying medical conditions. The data shown in this paper only pointed out how many people, whether vaccinated or not, have underlying medical conditions. Therefore, this study is very biased and it draws more conclusions than its data can suggest.
So, in summary, objective evaluation of vaccine efficacy and safety are critical to provide unbiased information to the public. And international organizations or health regulators should avoid politicizing the people who carefully evaluate of their choice of vaccinations. “Vaccine Hesitancy” is a political label that should be abandoned by health agencies and international organizations like WHO.
Dr. Sean Lin is an assistant professor in Biomedical Science Department at Feitian College – Middletown NY. Dr. Lin is also a frequent analyst and commentator for Epoch Media Group, VOA, and RFA. Dr. Lin is a veteran who served as a U.S. Army microbiologist. Dr. Lin is also a member of Committee of Present Danger: China.
Health 1+1 is the most authoritative Chinese medical and health information platform overseas. Every Tuesday to Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. EST on TV and online, the program covers the latest on the coronavirus, prevention, treatment, scientific research and policy, as well as cancer, chronic illness, emotional and spiritual health, immunity, health insurance, and other aspects to provide people with reliable and considerate care and help. Online: EpochTimes.com/Health TV: NTDTV.com/live
New CDC study proves COVID shots cause HORRIFIC adverse effects – Pfizer, FDA knew it
(NaturalHealth365) A new study shared by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) somewhat grandiosely claims that mRNA shots protect children from a rare “hyperinflammatory illness” caused by COVID-19.
In this article, let’s take a closer look at this study and point out some inconsistencies that the CDC seems to ignore as they continue to push for more and more jabs for juveniles.
New CDC study tries to claim that COVID shots prevent Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome due to COVID-19 – instead, provides evidence of adverse effects of COVID jabs
The study in question, entitled “Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome after Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 Infection in 2 Immunized Adolescents, United States,” was conducted by researchers affiliated with the University of Colorado Aurora. The study cites two cases of children who experienced (and recovered from) a suspected “hyperinflammatory illness” called multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). According to the CDC, MIS-C occurs “after SARS-CoV-2 infection.”
Let’s look at some things that both of these children had in common:
Both kids (one boy and one girl) were otherwise healthy 14-year-olds
Both kids had completed their two-dose series of Pfizer COVID shots three months before they were brought to the hospital with concerning symptoms, including fever, fatigue, congestion, cough, myalgias, headache, nausea, vomiting, bloodshot eyes, abdominal pain, and rash (the boy also happened to have developed symptomatic COVID-19 infection just one month after getting vaxxed!)
Upon presenting to the hospital, both kids were diagnosed with a variety of health issues, including hyponatremia (low sodium in the blood), thrombocytopenia (low platelets in the blood), sepsis (severe widespread infection), and impaired cardiac and liver function
Let’s start with the obvious problem:
If COVID shots are supposed to protect against COVID-19 and protect against severe illness, then why on earth would the CDC brandish these two case reports as a sign of COVID shot success? Remember, these are “fully vaxxed” previously healthy children who already had a significantly low risk of severe complications associated with natural SARS-CoV-2 infection because of their young age … yet these children become sick enough following a “breakthrough” infection that they required hospitalization. Trying to claim that their vax status somehow prevented their illnesses from getting worse seems like nothing more than grasping for straws from the CDC.
Next, let’s consider an alternative explanation that the CDC seems to willfully ignore: that their vax status was the explicit reason they experienced severe complications as a result of SARS-CoV-2 infection, a painful medical irony caused by a phenomenon known as Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease (VAED).
Pfizer, FDA has identified vax-associated enhanced disease as “Important Potential Risk” of COVID shots, acknowledges lack of data to understand true risk
VAED has been defined as “a rarely-observed phenomenon whereby vaccination promotes immune responses that exacerbate the disease caused by subsequent infection with the associated pathogen” (see an April 2022 review article from Frontiers in Immunology). In other words, getting vaxxed against a virus drives harmful immune system changes that make a person even sicker once exposed to the virus (instead of more protected). In these hopefully rare cases, the vax would do the exact OPPOSITE of what it is “supposed” to do.
VAED could absolutely explain why these children suffered from MIS-C after getting a “breakthrough” COVID-19 illness. And it’s not as if VAED isn’t on Pfizer’s radar.
In Table 5, page 11 of a confidential report from Pfizer called “5.3.6 CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF POST-AUTHORIZATION ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS OF PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) RECEIVED THROUGH 28-FEB-2021,” Pfizer refers to VAED as an “Important Potential Risk,” but goes on claim that current data shows the phenomenon is only “theoretical” and not yet observed clinically.
Pfizer cites the following data: “VAED may present as severe or unusual clinical manifestations of COVID-19. Overall, there were 37 subjects with suspected COVID-19 and 101 subjects with confirmed COVID-19 following one or both doses of the vaccine; 75 of the 101 cases were severe, resulting in hospitalisation, disability, life-threatening consequences, or death. None of the 75 cases could be definitively considered as [VAED]. In this review of subjects with COVID-19 following vaccination, based on the current evidence, [VAED] remains a theoretical risk for the vaccine. Surveillance will continue.”
We are not claiming that the cases of these two unfortunate 14-year-old kids prove VAED. However, we are concerned that the CDC and other researchers seem so willing to ignore VAED as a possible explanation. Just how many people are harmed by these shots and put at even MORE risk when exposed to circulating coronavirus variants? Is adequate surveillance honestly being conducted, as Pfizer claims?
COVID-19 Vaccine Injury, Syndrome Not a Disease: FLCCC Conference Shares How to Treat It
By Marina Zhang
October 17, 2022Updated: October 18, 2022
The complex myriad of symptoms in people suspecting of COVID-19 vaccine injury has been given a new name and an extensive treatment protocol:
“Post-COVID-19 vaccines syndrome,” said Dr. Paul Marik, co-founder and Chief Science Officer of the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), on Oct. 15 at a conference in Orlando, Florida, aimed at education and sharing information on treating spike protein-induced health issues.
Marik and 15 other experts including pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole, FLCCC co-founder Dr. Pierre Kory, and Steve Kirsch, founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, presented their research and findings.
Intended as an educational conference for health practitioners, the event attracted health providers cross-country, including Florida, New York, Texas, Washington, Virginia, and many more.
Several international doctors were also in attendance, including physicians from Australia and the Philippines.
Endocrinologist Dr. Flavio Cadegiani from Brazil, was both an attendee and a presenter. The conference was preceded by a sold-out networking dinner the night before, and was met with fervent enthusiasm by the attendees.
Post-vaccine injury syndrome is “a multi-system syndrome … it’s not a disease,” Marik said. The condition does not fit a disease model, and therefore rather than targeting the symptoms, the entire body must be treated holistically.
Spike Injury: A Multi-System Disease
Spike protein-induced diseases are diseases driven by a prolonged exposure to spike proteins. Patients can be exposed to these spike proteins through infection (long COVID) or COVID-19 vaccination (post-vaccination injury syndrome).
Since the two conditions are both driven by the same stimulus, there is a high degree of overlap in mechanism and symptoms, often affecting multiple tissues and organs.
Cole presented biopsies that showed spike protein presence and inflammation in small blood vessels, muscles, heart muscles, brain tissue, lungs, spleen, and many more.
Most of the biopsies presented damaged cells that expressed only spike protein, rather than other SARS-CoV-2 proteins. This suggests spike injuries are caused by vaccination and not natural infection, because in infection other SARS-CoV-2 proteins including nucleocapsid proteins are present in addition to the spike protein.
Cole’s findings fed into Marik’s lecture on symptoms and treatment options for long COVID and post-vaccine injury syndrome.
Evaluating React19 survey data from people suspecting vaccine injuries, Marik found the most common symptoms of spike protein-induced diseases.
This included fatigue, exercise intolerance, brain fog, heart palpitations, muscle weakness, tingling, dizziness, muscle aches, sleep disturbances, and joint pain.
“Believe it or not … the average number of symptoms reported is 23,” said Marik.
However, because most patients complain of an extensive list of symptoms not found in any disease, “[patients] will go to the doctor with all these complaints … and the doctor will say it’s all in your head,” said Marik.
Marik said that many patients are thus referred to psychiatric specialties rather than physicians who understand and can treat their disease.
“The vaccine-injured are vast,” said Kory, “the numbers are massive … they are underserved and their needs are not being met.”
Apart from ivermectin and spermidine, Marik recommended low-dose naltrexone, a common drug for overdose in narcotic users.
While some medical practitioners have complained to The Epoch Times about having ivermectin prescriptions monitored, naltrexone is a drug not on the radar.
Research has shown that in low doses naltrexone could reduce inflammation, which is a main driver of spike protein disease, and also reduce common symptoms including brain fog and neuropathic symptoms.
Though these drugs are highly effective, Marik, Kory, and many doctors encouraged personalized and patient-focused medicine where dosage and regimen are adjusted based on the patient’s symptoms and needs.
Kory listed six different treatment strategies for spike protein-induced diseases.
The six strategies are: expelling spike protein, reducing inflammation, reducing micro-clotting, reducing mast cell activation, reducing viral persistence or activation, and recovery of the mitochondria.
Each strategy implemented combinations of different drugs and treatments. Based on the patient’s symptoms, he would prescribe different treatments. For example, a patient complaining of blood clotting would be given anticoagulants, and one complaining of chronic disease may be prescribed drugs to improve mitochondrial action.
Clearing Out Spike Protein
To clear out spike protein, FLCCC doctors recommended drug and lifestyle implementations to improve autophagy.
Autophagy is a natural cellular process where old cell parts are broken down and reused, which could help to clear out spike protein from the body.
Recommended lifestyle changes include intermittent fasting, where a person fasts for at least 16 consecutive hours, and sleep.
Drugs that stimulated or increased autophagy included spermidine, resveratrol, and ivermectin.
Many alternative treatments were also discussed to improve cell repair and reduce inflammation.
Dr. Paul Harch focused on hyperbaric oxygen therapy, a repair treatment where a person is exposed to pressurized air that contains a higher concentration of oxygen.
Harch has been using this therapy to treat chronic wounds, including long-time brain injuries, by reducing inflammation.
In 2017, Harch co-authored a paper on reversing brain injury in a drowned toddler. After 40 sessions of hyperbaric oxygen treatment with Harch, her brain injury made a near-reversal.
Research has shown that increases in oxygen concentration reduces inflammation, and an increase in pressure increases inflammation. A balance between oxygen and pressure can reduce the action of inflammatory cytokines and boost wound repair.
Harch added in Q&A that oxygen therapy can help with brain damage from lack of oxygen at birth.
“It’s still an old wound that’s there, and all of this treatment we’ve done is on chronic wounding,” said Harch.
“I totally do this, but I wrote a book years ago … the conclusion of the book is that you cannot trust the medical profession at the institutional level to do what’s right for you.”
Dr. Asher Milgrom, CEO of AMA Regenerative Medicine & Skincare Inc., through a pre-recorded video offered options of ozone therapy to improve mitochondrial dysfunction—a common driver of fatigue.
Ozone, which is usually not found at normal atmospheric level, improves energy production as it carries three oxygen atoms rather than two, which is what is typically found in oxygen molecules. Since the mitochondria uses oxygen to make energy, having an extra oxygen atom can improve energy production and fatigue.
Rebuilding to Personalized Patient-Focused Medicine
Marik said that the FLCCC’s first conference is a first step in their mission to rebuild the healthcare system back to personalized, patient-focused medicine—which is also the center of their treatment approach when it comes to spike protein-induced diseases.
“What we started is a new approach to medicine that is an alternative healthcare system,” said Marik, “The current one is a complete and utter failure. They’ve been lying to us; they’re corrupted they’re not interested in your health.”
“We’ve now recognized we have to do this ourselves; we can build something better, and I think this is the first step of our mission.”
Marik and Kory expect future conferences will be held, with the earliest expected in 6 months.
Epoch Health will publish a series of articles detailing several of the treatments discussed at the conference.
A recording of the conference will be made available for purchase on the FLCCC website.