NAZI WAR CRIMES in Ukraine; Monoclonal Antibodies Infusion; Murder Under the Guise of “Medical Protocol”; and More

MSM US station OAN drops red pill about NAZI WAR CRIMES in Ukraine


Chimera,  Cancer cells, Mouse DNA, and failed tests. Aggressive cancer and organs melting together. That’s what backs the monoclonal antibodies infusion.


Vivek Ramaswamy & Jordan Peterson Call Out the Hypocrisy of ESG, (Environmental, Social, and Governance) and the True Motives Behind It. “This actually wasn’t about climate change at all…This was about an attack on human flourishing in the West”


Michael Shellenberger on the FBI “Hyping the Russian Misinformation Threat” to Aid the Democrats. “You saw it become a way to condition people for the release of the Biden laptop…It was briefly censored by Twitter but more importantly it was discredited in the minds of many voters including myself.”


British Funeral Director John O’Looney recently dropped some heavy truth bombs about the murders being carried out under the guise of “medical protocol.” God help us as we continue to fight.

As long as we allow Pharma to control medicine, they will protect the cancer industry which generates 1.85 Billion a year and the many efficient cures that exist will not see the light of day.


Boosted Worse Off Than Vaccinated in Many States, Data Show

Dec 30 2022
A nurse administers a COVID-19 vaccine booster to a person at a hospital in Hines, Ill., on April 1, 2022. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

People in the United States who have received COVID-19 boosters in many states are more likely than those who have gotten just a primary series to get infected, receive hospital care, and die, according to an Epoch Times investigation.

Cases, hospitalizations, and deaths among the boosted have been increasing since the booster shots were first introduced in 2021. The boosters were promoted as bolstering protection against adverse outcomes. But, compared to the vaccinated who have not received any boosters, boosted people are testing positive, being hospitalized, and dying at higher levels in many states, according to the review, which went over data in the first two quarters of 2022.

In California, for instance, the boosted population made up 72 percent of the COVID-19 cases among vaccinated people in June. In Vermont that month, the boosted population made up 90 percent of the COVID-19 deaths among the vaccinated.

The number of boosted people has continued to rise since the extra shots were first cleared in 2021. But in some of the states, one or more metrics among the boosted exceed their population.

In Wisconsin, boosted people made up 43 percent of the cases, 43 percent of the hospitalizations, and 46 percent of the deaths in June—well above the boosted population, which was 35 percent of the state as of late August.

“It is unassailable that a very large fraction of highly inoculated [people] are among those being hospitalized or dying,” Dr. Robert Malone, who helped invent the messenger RNA technology that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines utilize, told The Epoch Times. “So, at a minimum, the effectiveness in preventing hospitalization or death does not appear to be aligned with the official policy position.”

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration have continued to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for virtually all Americans, including multiple boosters, stating that the known and potential benefits outweigh the known and potential risks. New, untested boosters replaced the old ones in the fall, but the primary series is still comprised of the old vaccines.

Higher Among Boosted

In 18 of the 19 states that provided or already list sufficient data, the boosted made up a majority of one or more metrics among the vaccinated, The Epoch Times found through reviewing publicly available data and public records requests after reporting how vaccinated people were more likely, when compared to the unvaccinated, to get sick, hospitalized, or die in a number of states.

In seven states, the boosted population even made up a majority of all three metrics—cases, hospitalizations, and deaths—among the vaccinated.

All data are from 2022. Only percentages or numbers were available for some states. Data for June were preferred, followed by data for July. Rates were adjusted for age. Fully vaccinated refers to people who received a primary series and no booster. Boosted refers to people who received one or more boosters, unless noted. Unvaccinated are included as a reference. An explanation of the bolded lines is below the list.

Arizona (week ending June 5)

Rates per 100,000
Cases Unvaccinated: 638.4 Fully vaccinated: 156.6 Boosted: 278.3
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 50.5 Fully vaccinated: 5.3 Boosted: 4.5
Deaths (week ending May 22) Unvaccinated: 6.2 Fully vaccinated: 0.50 Boosted: 0.53
Vaccinated (as of June 5) Fully vaccinated: 62 percent Boosted: 27 percent

 

California (June)

Numbers
Cases Unvaccinated: 215,889 Fully vaccinated: 58,452 Boosted: 149,121
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 5,057 Fully vaccinated: 1,677 Boosted: 2,987
Deaths Unvaccinated: 413 Fully vaccinated: 100 Boosted: 189
Vaccinated (as of Aug. 18) Fully vaccinated: 71.9 percent Boosted: 58.7 percent

 

Colorado

Rates per 100,000 Four-week average as of June 26
Cases Unvaccinated: 406 Fully vaccinated: 162.6 Boosted: 270
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 12.4 Fully vaccinated: 5.9 Boosted: 4.7
Deaths (as of June 1, rates per million) Unvaccinated: 55 Fully vaccinated: 33.1 Boosted: 17
Vaccinated (as of June 27) Fully vaccinated: 71.4 percent Boosted: 37 percent

 

Delaware (May 30-July 3)

Numbers Only boosted and nonboosted were provided
Cases Nonboosted: 6,524 Boosted: 3,154
Hospitalizations Nonboosted: 451 Boosted: 196
Deaths Nonboosted: 6 Boosted: 11
Vaccinated (as of Aug. 29) Boosted: 42.4 percent

 

Georgia (June 4–June 25)

Numbers and rates
Cases Not fully vaccinated: 40,613 Fully vaccinated: 18,169 Boosted: 24,424
Hospitalizations Not fully vaccinated: 1,231 Fully vaccinated: 429 Boosted: 446
Deaths Not fully vaccinated: 59 Fully vaccinated: 26 Boosted: 35
Rates per 100,000 (June 25)
Cases Not fully vaccinated: 243.7 Fully vaccinated: 77.7 Boosted: 243.2
Hospitalizations Not fully vaccinated: 7.4 Fully vaccinated: 1.9 Boosted: 3.7
Deaths Not fully vaccinated: 0.4 Fully vaccinated: 0.1 Boosted: 0.5
Vaccinated (as of June 25) Fully vaccinated: 56.9 percent Boosted: 24.5 percent

Idaho (June 5–July 2)

Numbers
Cases Unvaccinated: 5,766 Fully vaccinated: 2,882 Boosted: 3,892
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 78 Fully vaccinated: 48 Boosted: 42
Deaths Unvaccinated: 28 Fully vaccinated: 22 Boosted: 2
Vaccinated (as of June 29) Fully vaccinated: 52 percent Boosted: 23 percent

Kentucky (June)

Numbers
Cases Unvaccinated: 19,016 Fully vaccinated: 8,291 Boosted: 10,223
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 228 Fully vaccinated: 108 Boosted: 155
Deaths Unvaccinated: 27 Fully vaccinated: 24 Boosted: 29
Vaccinated (as of Aug. 22) Fully vaccinated: 58 percent Boosted: 27 percent

Massachusetts (June 5–July 3)

Numbers and rates
Cases Unvaccinated: 15,029 Fully vaccinated: 6,806 Boosted: 18,756
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: not provided Fully vaccinated: 134 Boosted: 411
Deaths Unvaccinated: 30 Fully vaccinated: 41 Boosted: 125
Rates per 100,000 (June 19–June 25)
Cases Unvaccinated: not provided Fully vaccinated: 74.5 Boosted: 155.32 Second boosted: 165.99
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: not provided Fully vaccinated: 1.31 Boosted: 3.29 Second boosted: 6.25
Deaths Unvaccinated: not provided Fully vaccinated: 0.35 Boosted: 1.17 Second boosted: 1.11
Vaccinated (as of July 28) Fully vaccinated: 77 percent Boosted: 44 percent

Minnesota (June 5–July 3)

Numbers and rates
Cases Not fully vaccinated: 7,983 Fully vaccinated: 6,484 Boosted: 19,437
Hospitalizations Not fully vaccinated: 517 Fully vaccinated: 297 Boosted: 871
Deaths Not fully vaccinated: 20 Fully vaccinated: 16 Boosted: 95
Rates per 100,000 (week of June 5)
Cases Not fully vaccinated: 238.2 Fully vaccinated: 182.2 Boosted: 249.7
Hospitalizations Not fully vaccinated: 20.9 Fully vaccinated: 11.5 Boosted: 7.6
Deaths Not fully vaccinated: 1.3 Fully vaccinated: 0.52 Boosted: 0.59
Vaccinated (as of Aug. 25) Fully vaccinated: 65 percent “Up to date”: 31 percent

 

Mississippi (April 1–Aug. 15).

Percentages Case and hospitalization data not provided
Deaths Not fully vaccinated: 36.6 percent Fully vaccinated: 24.8 percent Boosted: 38.6 percent
Vaccinated (as of Aug. 15) Fully vaccinated: 60 percent Boosted: 29 percent

Nebraska (June 26–July 23)

Numbers Death data not provided
Cases Unvaccinated: not provided Fully vaccinated: 2,928 Boosted: 5,497
Hospitalizations (June 22–July 21) Unvaccinated: not provided Fully vaccinated: 37 Boosted: 76
Vaccinated (as of July 20) Fully vaccinated: 64 percent Boosted: 34 percent

New Jersey (June 4–June 11)

Numbers and rates Hospitalization and death data not provided
Cases Unvaccinated: 8,376 Fully vaccinated: 3,859 Boosted: 7,648
Rates per 100,000
Cases Unvaccinated: 329.6 Fully vaccinated: 116.4 Boosted: 222.8
Vaccinated (as of June 11) Fully vaccinated: 76.3 percent Boosted: 37 percent

New Mexico (July 4–Aug. 1)

Numbers and rates
Cases Unvaccinated: 9,316 Fully vaccinated: 4,584 Boosted: 10,666
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 323 Fully vaccinated: 134 Boosted: 264
Deaths Unvaccinated: 22 Fully vaccinated: 11 Boosted: 34
Rates per 100,000
Cases Unvaccinated: 1,834 Fully vaccinated: 818 Boosted: 1,218
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 91 Fully vaccinated: 31 Boosted: 23
Deaths Unvaccinated: 7 Fully vaccinated: 3 Boosted: 2.6
Vaccinated (as of June 23) Fully vaccinated: 72.1 percent Boosted: 41.8 percent

Oregon (July)

Numbers Hospitalization and death data not provided
Cases Unvaccinated: 18,622 Fully vaccinated: 6,992 Boosted: 14,388
Vaccinated (as of July 20) Fully vaccinated: 69 percent Boosted: 39 percent

Utah (June 5–June 26)

Numbers and rates
Cases Unvaccinated: 8,472 Fully vaccinated: 6,539 Boosted: 11,317
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 297 Fully vaccinated: 208 Boosted: 415
Deaths Unvaccinated: 27 Fully vaccinated: 0 (listed as “under 5” for parts of time period) Boosted: 13
Rates per 100,000
Cases Unvaccinated: 1,267 Fully vaccinated: 707 Boosted: 1,117
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 60 Fully vaccinated: 30 Boosted: 31
Deaths Unvaccinated: 7 Fully vaccinated: 2 Boosted: 1
Vaccinated (as of July 24) Fully vaccinated: 63 percent Boosted: 30 percent

Vermont (June)

Numbers
Cases Not fully vaccinated: 863 Fully vaccinated: 567 Boosted: 1,396
Hospitalizations Not fully vaccinated: 6 Fully vaccinated: 6 Boosted: 26
Deaths Not fully vaccinated: 1 Fully vaccinated: 1 Boosted: 9
Vaccinated (as of June 29) Fully vaccinated: 82 percent Boosted: 51 percent

Wisconsin (June)

Numbers and rates
Cases Unvaccinated: 17,071 Fully vaccinated: 10,295 Boosted: 21,407
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 351 Fully vaccinated: 205 Boosted: 429
Deaths Unvaccinated: 35 Fully vaccinated: 21 Boosted: 48
Rates per 100,000
Cases Unvaccinated: 836.6 Fully vaccinated: 306.6 Boosted: 803.5
Hospitalizations Unvaccinated: 24 Fully vaccinated: 4.8 Boosted: 9.2
Deaths Unvaccinated: 3.2 Fully vaccinated: 0.5 Boosted: 0.9
Vaccinated (as of Aug. 30) Fully vaccinated: 61.6 percent Boosted: 35.4 percent

Wyoming (June)

Numbers Hospitalization data not provided
Cases Unvaccinated: 3,706 Fully vaccinated: 970 Boosted: 1,351
Deaths Unvaccinated: 8 Fully vaccinated: 3 Boosted: 3
Vaccinated (as of July 1) Fully vaccinated: 42.7 percent Boosted: 20.9 percent

Notes: Case, hospitalization, and death data from state health departments. Most vaccination data is from the states, supplemented by other sources, primarily the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The bold lines denote when the proportion of a metric among the boosted exceeds the population of boosted. 

Adjusted Data

Some experts say one can’t derive much from state-level data, particularly if it has not been adjusted.

“The problem with these data is that there are so many missing variables which could confound (bias) the outcomes being followed,” Dr. Andrew Bostom, a former associate professor of medicine at Brown University, told The Epoch Times via email.

For data regarding vaccination, it’s best to utilize randomized or randomized controlled trials, he added, pointing to a paper that found vaccinated people were more likely to suffer a serious adverse event after analyzing data from the original clinical trials.

Some states did adjust data for age, accounting for the fact that older people are more likely to receive not only the original vaccine series, but boosters. All eight states which provided or listed age-adjusted rates showed higher rates for at least one metric among the boosted when compared to the fully vaccinated. In Wisconsin, for example, the rate of hospitalizations among the boosted was 9.2 per 100,000—nearly double the fully vaccinated.

In two of the states—Minnesota and New Mexico—rates for cases among the boosted were even higher than the unvaccinated.

Pfizer and Moderna did not respond to requests for comment.

Epoch Times Photo
Vials of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine on a table in a vaccination clinic in San Rafael, Calif., on April 6, 2022. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Not Higher Among Boosted

To be included in the review, states needed to report figures for at least one metric broken down by vaccination status, and a breakdown by time. States that would only provide data since the beginning of the pandemic, or would not provide data by daily, weekly, or monthly increments, were excluded. So were states that would not separate the boosted from the fully vaccinated.

In the other states with sufficient data, none of the metrics were higher in the boosted compared with the fully vaccinated.

North Carolina (July 31–Aug. 6).
Case data not provided.

Hospitalizations
Unvaccinated: 50.6 percent
Fully vaccinated: 29.4 percent
Boosted: 19.9 percent

Deaths (rate per 100,000 for four weeks through July 30)
Unvaccinated: 2.23
Fully vaccinated: 0.45
Boosted: 0.26

The data covers a period of time before new boosters were available. The old boosters became unavailable in the fall when regulators authorized the new, bivalent boosters. There remains no clinical trial data for the new boosters but real-world studies have estimated they provide suboptimal protection against infection and good protection, at least initially, against hospitalization.

Negative Effectiveness

The data dovetails with a growing body of research that has detected negative vaccine effectiveness after a period of time and a higher likelihood of getting infected among people with more doses.

Researchers with the Cleveland Clinic, for instance, reported this month in a preprint study (pdf) that each successive dose heightened the chance a person tested positive.

The researchers called the finding “unexpected” and cast doubt on the “simplistic explanation” offered by some that people at higher risk from COVID-19 are more likely to receive more doses.

Another study, published in November (pdf), found people who received three doses of a vaccine tested positive more than people who received two doses.

“This finding suggests that the immune response against the primary omicron infection was compromised by differential immune imprinting in those who received a third booster dose, consistent with emerging laboratory science data,” the authors, including Laith Abu-Raddad, an infectious disease expert at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, wrote.

A growing number of researchers fear that people’s immune systems are trained by the shots to react to older virus strains. The shots targeted the original Wuhan strain for years. The updated shots, which are only available as boosters, target the Wuhan strain and a sublineage of the BA.4/BA.5 Omicron subvariants. Those subvariants are already being displaced by newer, more immune-evasive strains (pdf).

“The literature predicted that there was a high risk of exacerbation of immune imprinting using this booster strategy,” Malone said, “and the data are consistent with that.”

Meiling Lee

Meiling Lee is a health reporter for The Epoch Times. Contact her by emailing meiling.lee@epochtimes.nyc

Zachary Stieber

Zachary Stieber  is a senior reporter for The Epoch Times based in Maryland. He covers U.S. and world news.

Humans Have a Mysterious Bioenergy Field; FDA Panel Member Dr. Paul Offit on the new Covid-19 Boosters

Scientist Discovers That Humans Have a Mysterious Bioenergy Field That Mystics Have Always Known About

BY TARA MACISAAC OCTOBER 15, 2022
For thousands of years, mystics have alluded to the presence of a biologically generated energy field, or aura, surrounding humans. Now scientific investigation indicates this may be more than mere mysticism and folklore. Biochemist John Norman Hansen, Ph.D., at the University of Maryland has found evidence that such an energy field could be real, lending credence to what spiritual practitioners have pointed to for eons.

 

May be an image of 2 people, child and text

Dr. Hansen conducted hundreds of experiments with dozens of subjects, and his results are consistently replicable. Other scientists have also reproduced his results, including Willem H. van den Berg of the department of biochemistry and biophysics at the University of Pennsylvania, and physicist William van der Sluys at Gettysburg College, who published their study in the Journal of Scientific Exploration on March 15.

Previous investigation of human bioenergy fields has used photon sensors. Dr. Hansen took a different approach. He wondered whether a bioenergy field, if it exists, would have enough force to push a torsion pendulum—a device sensitive enough to be moved by a subtle force. He hung the pendulum above the subject’s head and saw a clear change in the pendulum’s momentum.

He hung the pendulum above the subject’s head and saw a clear change in the pendulum’s momentum.

“After conducting control experiments to rule out effects of air currents and other artifacts, it is concluded that the effects are exerted by some kind of force field that is generated by the subject seated under the pendulum,” he explained in his 2013 study, titled “Use of a Torsion Pendulum Balance to Detect and Characterize What May Be a Human Bioenergy Field,” also published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration. “We know of no force, such as one within the electromagnetic spectrum that can account for these results. It may be that a conventional explanation for these surprising results will be discovered, but it is possible that we have observed a phenomenon that will require the development of new theoretical concepts.”

One of the outstanding observations was that the effect of the human presence continued for some 30 to 60 minutes after the human subject had already left. With other forces, such as air currents, the pendulum would immediately return to its classic, non-driven motion.

The mental state of a subject can strongly affect the behavior of the pendulum.

Every subject had roughly the same power to influence the pendulum “indicating that the effects on the pendulum require neither unique talent nor practice,” wrote Hansen in a synopsis of a talk he gave at the 34th annual Society for Scientific Exploration conference at the end of May 2015. “However, it has been observed that some subjects, especially ones that have pursued a meditative practice for many years, exert very different effects during a meditative state compared to a non-meditative state … which shows that the mental state of a subject can strongly affect the behavior of the pendulum.”

Is There a Conventional Explanation?

Van den Berg and van der Sluys used the same pendulum device—as Hansen has made the design public, encouraging others to replicate his results—May be an image of 1 person and text that says 'WHAT IF LIFE IS THE DREAM AND WHEN WE DIE, WE WAKE UP'and observed the same change in its movement when in proximity to a human head. They wondered, however, if this change may have been due to a change in air temperature from the heat emanated by a human head. The change in air temperature could cause convection currents, they said.

They wondered, however, if this change may have been due to a change in air temperature from the heat emanated by a human head.

They placed a layer of plastic between the head and the pendulum and found the effect on the pendulum disappeared. They suggested the plastic either cut the pendulum off from the mysterious bioenergy field, or it simply cut off the heat source.

Hansen published a reply to this study, however, noting what he sees as flaws in the theory that body heat caused the pendulum movement.

For starters, Hansen said, “If you were to place a thick plastic shield May be an image of 1 person and text that says '"Some people will never like you because your spirit irritates their demons." -DenzelWashington www. www.facebook.com/poets01 COn poetsol pc -Denzel Washington Tashing' between the subject and the pendulum, the pushing force [of the bioenergy field] would initially be against the shield, and the pendulum would only respond to whatever pushing force remained after pushing against the shield. For the pushing force to survive passage through the shield and then push against the pendulum would violate fundamental principles of physics; i.e. you can only use a force once, and if it is utilized to push against the shield it cannot subsequently push against the pendulum.”

Another factor Hansen said that van den Berg failed to take into account is the persistent aftereffects. Hansen wrote: “A fundamental principle of pendulum physics is that if the pendulum is driven by an outside force and the force is removed, then the pendulum will immediately return to classic non-driven motion.”

May be an image of sky and text that says 'It all begins and ends in your mind. What you give power to, has power over you, if you allow it. Quotes Sayings'Any accumulation of heated convection currents would quickly dissipate after the subject left. So convection currents could not explain these aftereffects. Hansen described the effects of the subject’s bioenergy field as being somehow “imprinted” on the pendulum.

He said the van den Berg study also failed to acknowledge the varied frequencies with which the pendulum oscillates in the presence of a human subject. The pendulum oscillates with a single frequency when the subject is absent. It oscillates with many new frequencies when the subject is present, and for some half an hour or more after the subject has left—something not explained away by convection currents caused by air temperature variations.

Share your stories with us at emg.inspired@epochtimes.com, and continue to get your daily dose of inspiration by signing up for the Inspired newsletter at TheEpochTimes.com/newsletter

 

%d