Current evidence on COVID vaccines does not appear to support a need for booster shots in the general public right now, according to an international team of vaccine scientists, including some from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the World Health Organization (WHO).
“Current evidence does not, therefore, appear to show a need for boosting in the general population, in which efficacy against the severe disease remains high,” Marion Gruber and Phil Krause, two senior FDA vaccine leaders, wrote in an opinion piece published Monday in the Lancet.
The scientists said the benefits of COVID vaccination outweigh the risks, but there could be risks to boosters if they are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, “especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects (such as myocarditis, which is more common after the second dose of some mRNA vaccines, or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which has been associated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines).”
The scientists said COVID vaccines continue to be effective against severe disease, including that caused by the Delta variant — but most of the observational studies on which that conclusion is based are preliminary and difficult to interpret due to potential confounding and selective reporting, they said.
As The Defender reported last month, studies by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed COVID vaccine effectiveness against infection has decreased over time and is less effective in combating the Delta variant.
Gruber and Krause emphasized “careful and public scrutiny of evolving data will be needed to assure boosting is informed by reliable science more than politics.”
The team wrote:
“The message that boosting might soon be needed, if not justified by robust data and analysis, could adversely affect confidence in vaccines and undermine messaging about the value of primary vaccination. Public health authorities should also carefully consider the consequences for primary vaccination campaigns of endorsing boosters only for selected vaccines.
“Booster programs that affect some but not all vaccines may be difficult to implement — so it will be important to base recommendations on complete data about all vaccines available in a country, to consider the logistics of vaccination, and to develop clear public health messaging before boosting is widely recommended.”
The scientists noted boosting may be appropriate for some individuals where a one- or two-dose vaccine did not provide adequate protection — such as immunocompromised people — although they noted people who did not respond robustly to primary vaccination, may also not respond well to a booster.
Both the FDA and CDC have already signed off on allowing third doses for immunocompromised people. But experts are divided on whether boosters are necessary for the general population.
The FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee will meet Friday to discuss Pfizer and BioNTech’s application to administer their COVID vaccine as a third dose, or “booster” shot, to people ages 16 and older.
The scientists also echoed the views of the WHO in arguing current vaccines could “save more lives” if they are used in people who are not yet vaccinated rather than for boosters.
The WHO last week called for a moratorium on boosters in wealthy nations until at least the end of the year.
In a statement to CNN on Monday, an FDA spokesperson said the new opinion paper does not reflect the views of the FDA:
“As noted in the article, the views of the authors do not represent the views of the agency. We are in the middle of a deliberative process of reviewing Pfizer’s booster shot supplemental approval submission, and the FDA as a matter of practice does not comment on pending matters before the agency. We look forward to a robust and transparent discussion on Friday about that application.”
As The Defender reported Sept. 1, Gruber and Krause announced they will leave the FDA this fall, raising questions about the Biden administration and the way it sidelined the agency.
Two of FDA top vaccine regulators will leave the agency this fall, because they don’t believe there is data to support the Biden administration’s push to offer COVID booster shots later this month.https://t.co/eAynNSpeuJ
Gruber and Krause were upset that the Biden administration announced adults should get a booster eight months after they received a second dose — prior to boosters undergoing review or receiving approval by the FDA.
Neither Gruber nor Krause believed there was enough data to justify offering booster shots yet, sources said, and both viewed the announcement, amplified by President Biden, as pressure on the FDA to quickly authorize them.
As The Defender reported earlier this month, the Biden administration announced a plan to begin offering a third booster dose to people who already received two doses of an mRNA vaccine beginning the week of Sept. 20.
Still, the White House has moved forward with its plan to make Americans eligible for a third dose of either Pfizer or Moderna’s vaccines eight months after the date of their second injection, even though that plan requires authorization from the FDA and CDC first.
A group of Japanese researchers released research showing that the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant “is poised to acquire complete resistance” to existing COVID-19 jabs
When four common mutations were introduced to the Delta variant, Pfizer’s mRNA injection enhanced its infectivity, causing it to become resistant
A Delta variant with three mutations has already emerged, which suggests it’s only a matter of time before a fourth mutation develops, at which point complete resistance to Pfizer’s jab may be imminent
A number of experts have raised concerns that COVID-19 jabs and the mass vaccination program could worsen the pandemic by triggering the development of new variants, via a concept known as antigenic, or immune, escape
Another study found that a worst-case scenario can develop when a large percentage of a population is vaccinated but viral transmission remains high, driving the development of resistant strains
COVID-19 jabs continue to be pushed as the only solution to the pandemic, even as “breakthrough” infections increasingly occur. A group of Japanese researchers has also released research showing that the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant “is poised to acquire complete resistance” to existing COVID-19 jabs like Pfizer and BioNTech’s BNT162b2,1 now being sold as Comirnaty.
What’s more, when four common mutations were introduced to the Delta variant, Pfizer’s mRNA injection enhanced its infectivity, causing it to become resistant. A Delta variant with three mutations has already emerged,2 which suggests it’s only a matter of time before a fourth mutation develops, at which point complete resistance to Pfizer’s jab may be imminent.
mRNA COVID-19 Injection Made Delta Variant More Infectious
The spike protein used in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines consists of the original SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, without mutations. Multiple variants of concern (VOC) have emerged, however, which have numerous mutations and are highly infectious. As mutations increase, so do concerns over vaccine resistance and enhanced infectivity. As the researchers explained in bioRxiv, the preprint server for biology:3
“The receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein binds to the host cell receptor ACE2, and the interaction mediates membrane fusion during SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are mainly directed to the RBD and block the interaction between the RBD and ACE2. Most SARS-CoV-2 variants have acquired mutations in the neutralizing antibody epitopes of the RBD, resulting in escape from neutralizing antibodies.”
When a single mutation was added to the Delta spike, most of the anti-RBD antibodies still recognized it. This wasn’t the case with four mutations, however, which the researchers called Delta 4+. Not only was Delta 4+ not recognized, but infectivity was enhanced:4
“… we analyzed the Delta 4+ pseudovirus with four additional RBD mutations. Surprisingly, most BNT162b2-immune sera enhanced infectivity of the Delta 4+ pseudovirus in a dose-dependent manner at relatively low concentrations of BNT162b2-immune sera, but showed weak neutralization only at the highest concentration of the sera.
Especially, PFZ7 greatly enhanced the infectivity at relatively low serum concentration. Some sera, such as PFZ13 and PFZ14, did not show neutralizing activity even at the highest concentration of the sera.”
In short, while Pfizer’s COVID-19 jab still neutralized the Delta variant, when four common mutations were introduced to the RBD, the vaccine lost the ability to neutralize the variant and instead enhanced its infectivity.
Although Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2-immune sera neutralized the Delta variant, when four common mutations were introduced into the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the Delta variant (Delta 4+), some BNT162b2-immune sera lost neutralizing activity and enhanced the infectivity. This has implications for booster shots on the horizon as well, which are unlikely to be effective.
“The third round of booster immunization with the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is currently under consideration,” the researchers explained. “Our data suggest that repeated immunization with the wild-type spike may not be effective in controlling the newly emerging Delta variants.”5
Despite the growing recognition that increasing injections may only make matters worse, President Biden said he has spoken with Dr. Anthony Fauci about giving booster shots at the five-month mark after the initial round of injections rather than waiting eight months, as previously suggested.6
Immune Escape: How the Injections Could Make Variants Worse
A number of experts have raised concerns that COVID-19 jabs and the mass vaccination program could worsen the pandemic by triggering the development of new variants, via a concept known as antigenic, or immune, escape.
A general principle in biology, vaccinology, and microbiology is that if you put living organisms like bacteria or viruses under pressure, via antibiotics, antibodies, or chemotherapeutics, for example, but don’t kill them off completely, you can inadvertently encourage their mutation into more virulent strains. Those that escape your immune system ends up surviving and selecting mutations to ensure their further survival.
Geert Vanden Bossche, Ph.D., a vaccinology expert and former global director of vaccine programs, including work for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, is among those who have warned about immune escape due to the pressure being placed upon the virus during mass vaccination.
“It will have a very tough time … and a lot of these microorganisms will die,” Bossche says. “But if you cannot really kill them all, if you cannot prevent, completely, the infection and if there are still some microorganisms that can replicate despite this huge pressure, they will start to select mutations that enable them to survive.”7
COVID-19 has a high capacity for the mutation but, according to Bossche, if the virus isn’t under pressure, it won’t necessarily see a need to select mutations to, for instance, become more infectious. But if you put it under pressure, as is occurring during the mass vaccination campaign — or as Bossche calls it the “one big experiment” — this may change.
Dr. Peter McCullough — an internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist and a full professor of medicine at Texas A&M College of Medicine in Dallas, who is also the editor of two medical journals and has published hundreds of studies in the literature — is also concerned about immune escape:8
“If we keep this up with the injections, there is going to be one variant after another … We’re playing with fire here with this mass vaccination … My interpretation as an internist and cardiologist — I’m a trained epidemiologist, I’ve literally done a year of intense COVID research and training — I’m going to tell you, I think this Delta outbreak that we have right now is the product of mass vaccination.
If we didn’t have the jab, we would have been better off. We had already treated this down to a very acceptable level.”
Mass Vaccination Driving Vaccine-Resistant Mutants
Another study — this one based on a mathematical model — simulates how vaccination rates and the rate of viral transmission influence SARS-CoV-2 variants.9 They found that a worst-case scenario can develop when a large percentage of a population is vaccinated but viral transmission remains high — much as it is now. This represents the prime scenario for the development of resistant mutant strains. As noted in the study, published in Scientific Reports:10
“… [A] counterintuitive result of our analysis is that the highest risk of resistant strain establishment occurs when a large fraction of the population has already been vaccinated but the transmission is not controlled.
Similar conclusions have been reached in a SIR model of the ongoing pandemic and a model of pathogen escape from host immunity. Furthermore, empirical data consistent with this result has been reported for influenza.”
It’s very similar to the development of antibiotic resistance, during which bacteria mutate and get stronger to survive the assault of antibacterial agents. COVID-19 shots do not block infection completely; they allow infection to occur and may lessen symptoms, but during that time viruses can mutate to evade the immune system.
In an unvaccinated person, the virus does not encounter the same evolutionary pressure to mutate into something stronger but, according to Paul Bieniasz, a Howard Hughes investigator at the Rockefeller University, partially vaccinated individuals “might serve as sort of a breeding ground for the virus to acquire new mutations.”11
Mu, Lambda Variants Showing Resistance
Already, variants have emerged that are showing signs of vaccine resistance. August 30, 2021, the World Health Organization highlighted the mu variant as a variant of interest (VOI), stating it has “a constellation of mutations that indicate potential properties of immune escape.”12
As of August 31, 2021, 39 countries had reported mu cases.13 The lambda variant, which WHO designated as a VOI on June 14, 2021,14 also shows signs of increased infectivity and resistance to vaccines. Writing in medRxiv, researchers from Chile noted:15
“Our results indicate that mutations present in the spike protein of the Lambda variant of interest confer increased infectivity and immune escape from neutralizing antibodies elicited by CoronaVac.
These data reinforce the idea that massive vaccination campaigns in countries with high SARS-CoV-2 circulation must be accompanied by strict genomic surveillance allowing the identification of new isolates carrying spike mutations and immunology studies aimed to determine the impact of these mutations in immune escape and vaccines breakthrough.”
Is Natural Immunity Superior for Variants?
As further evidence of COVID shots’ waning effectiveness and the superiority of natural immunity, data presented July 17, 2021, to the Israeli Health Ministry revealed that, of the more than 7,700 COVID-19 cases reported since May 2021, only 72 occurred in people who had previously had COVID-19 — a rate of less than 1%. In contrast, more than 3,000 cases — or approximately 40% — occurred in people who had received a COVID-19 vaccine.16
In other words, those who were vaccinated were 6.72 times — nearly 700% — more likely to develop COVID-19 than those who had natural immunity from a prior infection. Speaking with journalist Daniel Horowitz, pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole explained that natural immunity produces broad immunity that can’t be matched by vaccination:17
“A natural infection induces hundreds upon hundreds of antibodies against all proteins of the virus, including the envelope, the membrane, the nucleocapsid, and the spike. Dozens upon dozens of these antibodies neutralize the virus when encountered again.
Additionally, because of the immune system exposure to these numerous proteins (epitomes), our T cells mount a robust memory, as well. Our T cells are the ‘marines’ of the immune system and the first line of defense against pathogens. T cell memory to those infected with SARSCOV1 is at 17 years and running still.”
A retrospective observational study published August 25, 2021,18 also found that natural immunity is superior to immunity from COVID-19 jabs, with researchers stating, “This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer-lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease, and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.”
Further, according to a team of researchers from the Washington University School of Medicine, if you’ve had COVID-19 — even a mild case — you’re likely to be immune for life, as is the case with recovery from many infectious agents.19
Unfortunately, health officials aren’t making a distinction for those who have recovered from COVID-19 and continue to recommend injections for all, which may be adding fuel to the fire instead of extinguishing it.
U.S. researchers found boys between the ages of 12 and 15, with no underlying medical conditions, were four to six times more likely to be diagnosed with vaccine-related myocarditis than they were to be hospitalized with COVID.
The researchers identified a total of 257 cardiac adverse events (CAE) using inclusion criteria that met the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) working case definition of myocarditis.
The post-vaccination CAE rate was highest in 12- to 15-year-old boys following their second dose of Pfizer.
Dr. Tracy Høeg, physician, epidemiologist, and associate researcher at UC Davis, found the rate of myocarditis after two doses of Pfizer’s vaccine to be 162.2 cases per million for healthy 12- to 15-year-old boys, and 94 cases per million for healthy 16- to 17-year-old boys. The equivalent rates for girls were 13.4 and 13 cases per million, respectively.
At current U.S. infection rates, the risk of a healthy adolescent being taken to the hospital with COVID in the next 120 days is about 44 per million, they said.
Most children who experienced myocarditis had symptoms within days of the second dose of Pfizer’s vaccine, though a similar side-effect was seen with Moderna’s COVID vaccine. About 86% of the boys affected required hospital care, the authors said.
“Further research into the severity and long-term sequelae of post-vaccination CAE is warranted,” the researchers concluded. “Quantification of the benefits of the second vaccination dose and vaccination in addition to natural immunity in this demographic may be indicated to minimize harm.” The study has yet to be peer-reviewed.
In a Tweet, Høeg said the CDC’s estimates of myocarditis in boys and young men are outliers — Israel and Canada are reporting similar rates of post-vaccine myocarditis at 1 in 6,000.
As The Defender reported Sept. 7, a report released by Public Health Ontario showed the incidence of heart inflammation following mRNA vaccination was significantly more prevalent in young people, and higher after the second dose.
The UK to offer only one jab to 12- to -15-year-olds to reduce school disruptions
The JCVI did not recommend vaccinating healthy 12- to 15-year-olds against COVID but referred the matter to the UK’s chief medical officers who said they would consider other factors in recommending the vaccine.
On Sept. 13, UK’s chief medical officers recommended children 12 to 15 years old be offered one dose of a COVID vaccine to help reduce disruption to education, BBC news reported.
A single dose was recommended due to the potential risks of myocarditis associated with COVID vaccines.
In a letter to ministers, the medical officers warned missing face-to-face school had a “massive impact” on children, both physically and emotionally.
The officials said it was not possible to quantify to what extent vaccination would reduce school disruption. They acknowledged current COVID vaccines are less effective against the Delta variant compared to previous variants.
Estimates also suggest more than half of secondary school-age children may already have been infected and acquired natural immunity.
But they said “on balance,” the benefits in reducing disruption and the harm it caused provided “sufficient extra advantage” to warrant extending vaccination to healthy children in this age group.
The vaccine is likely to be given in schools, and parents will be asked to give consent.
However, if a child and parent are of opposing views and the child is considered competent to decide, the child will get the final say.
It will now be up to ministers whether to accept the recommendation of the UK’s four chief medical officers. Norway also announced it will recommend only one jab due to the risk of myocarditis in teens.
According to the most recent data from VAERS there have been myocarditis and pericarditis in 12- to 17-year-olds, with 462 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
After boasting about their successful vaccine uptake, the country is now facing another surge of cases. Now, countries are banning vaccinated Israeli nationals from entry into their country due to soaring coronavirus infections.
Daisy wrote an article recently on the “othering” of the unvaccinated. She went into detail regarding how individuals are blaming the unvaccinated for absolutely everything going wrong these days. I share her concern. There is a long, detailed history of the “othering” of a population leading to all sorts of horrors. However, it is wrong at a more mundane level, as well. Public discourse surrounding the pandemic seems to focus solely on vaccination as a means of achieving herd immunity. Those who have recovered from the disease and have natural immunity, are being completely ignored.
The most frustrating thing to me, the past year and a half, has been the constantly changing narrative and the dismissal of formerly well-understood scientific truths. Natural immunity is one of those concepts from freshman biology that many seem to completely disregard these days.
I think this is a natural effect of the “cult of expertise” we have in the United States. Seemingly, anyone with specific credentials is automatically deferred to, regardless of how competent they are… or more insidiously, where their financial interests lie.
If more of us were willing to think critically about the “science” in the news these days, we could be more confident in managing our health. A healthy, confident population willing to argue and drag its feet on accepting medical treatments with which they aren’t comfortable is hard to push around.
But we can move forward a little more well-informed.
I’ve gotten into some discussions with medical professionals about whether people who have recovered from the disease need to be vaccinated. These conversations would have been seen as utterly ridiculous three years ago. However, now, it seems, we all need to relearn freshman biology. So I’d like to review the concept of natural immunity to help organize my thoughts and maybe help others that feel like their heads are in a whirl.
I’ve got my old college biology textbook-Life: The Science of Biology, by Purves, Sadava, Orians, and Heller. I’ve got the sixth edition, published in 2001, so it’s about 20 years old. I also have a newer college biology textbook because I’m a big nerd. It’s Campbell Biology, by Reece, Urry, Cain, Wasserman, Minorsky, and Jackson, published in 2014. Both textbooks detail how our immune systems work, and both say pretty much the same thing.
Our bodies have two major ways of defending against disease.
Our innate defenses are things like our skin and mucus. We’re born with these, and they make it difficult for various pathogens such as bacteria, viruses, and multicellular parasites to enter our bodies. Our bodies also have an immune system that recognizes and attacks any infectious agents that make it past our innate defenses.
Our immune system is really sophisticated, and in healthy individuals, it works pretty well. Suppose some kind of pathogen makes it past the body’s innate defenses and begins infecting cells within the host. In that case, the host’s body will, in turn, start producing antibodies that will specifically attack the invading pathogen. The host body will continue producing antibodies until either the host dies or the invading cells die, and the patient’s body can return to normal.
The best part is, even after the active infection is over, the host’s body will retain the memory of the antibodies it produced during the infection. So if the formerly infected person reencounters the pathogen, the body will immediately have the antibodies to kill the pathogen. They rarely get sick again, and if they do, it’s generally very mild.
Even the incredibly pro-vaccine Wall Street Journal had an article on this recently.
Usually, the WSJ leaves their articles on the Opinion Page for about a week. However, within twenty-four hours, WSJ buried this article on natural immunity. Jeff had a great article about alternative media just the other day. This definitely feeds into his narrative about how much good info is getting buried right now.
Anyway, the WSJ article discusses mucosal immunity vs. internal immunity. The author (a neurologist) states that while vaccines stimulate internal immunity, they do nothing to address mucosal immunity. The viruses don’t penetrate the host’s organs, which is why most vaccinated people don’t get really sick. But, the viruses still live and reproduce in mucus-lined mouths and nasal passages. That is why vaccinated people with no symptoms are still spreading Covid like crazy. However, those of us that have recovered have both mucosal and internal immunity.
In case you needed further proof of the efficacy of natural immunity.
An Israeli study showed recently that vaccinated people were 13 times as likely to become infected and 27 times as likely to have symptomatic infections as people with natural immunity.
Alex Berenson posted this information on Twitter on August 25, and the platform permanently banned him on August 28. However, medical professionals are starting to make noise about it, such as Martin Kulldorff, a Harvard epidemiologist. Hopefully, more people begin to listen.
The benefits of natural immunity shouldn’t be as shocking as they seem to be.
After all, we’ve been observing this with other diseases for a long time. A case in point: when I was a kid, everyone still got chickenpox. We all got to miss school and stay home for about a week. I’m the oldest of eight kids, and I think the vaccine came out when my youngest siblings were kids. But I know the oldest four of us caught chickenpox.
One of my brothers caught it twice. The first time around, he caught it when I did. We were pretty sick for a few days and had a rash that covered our bodies for about a week. I never got chickenpox again. However, my brother picked it up a second time at school. He only had a very slight fever for one day and four or five blisters the second time around. That was it.
None of what I’ve said above is even remotely controversial.
In fact, if you look at the history of smallpox, records date back well over 2000 years that smallpox survivors nursed the sick. Even then, it was common knowledge that survivors wouldn’t get sick again.
Now, is smallpox exactly the same as Covid? No, not exactly. The story of smallpox eradication is an amazing one. Since then, we seem to keep hoping we can destroy every disease with vaccines. But that’s not necessarily realistic. For starters, smallpox has no recorded animal hosts. This means, once you wipe it out in humans, it’s gone. Covid, regardless of whether it originated in animals or a laboratory, is known to live in many different animal species. It will never really go away. Humans may gain the upper hand at times. But, it will always be living and evolving within a variety of animal hosts.
Now is not the time to despair.
So, should we all throw up our hands in despair over the fact that there is a new disease, unlikely ever to be eradicated, in our midst? No. We’ve been living with the cold and flu viruses for millennia. They won’t be eradicated either because they mutate rapidly and have a variety of hosts.
I’m not trying to be insensitive to the people that have suffered from Covid. And, as it now seems generally accepted that Covid originated in a laboratory, I’m also not trying to downplay the absolutely evil minds involved in making this disease what it is. But we’ve been living with diseases for millennia. We can learn to live with this one too.
Some people feel totally comfortable with the new mRNA vaccines.
Personally, I’m not comfortable with the mRNA. But, I won’t try to change anyone’s mind. I had Covid, and I’ve got natural immunity. I was extremely low-risk for complications from Covid. (In my late thirties, close to my ideal weight, and no outstanding vitamin deficiencies.) And sure enough, I only felt sick for about a day.
I never had any fever or respiratory symptoms. I was achy for about twenty-four hours and tired the day after. My sense of taste and smell disappeared, which was why I got tested. They have not returned, which is depressing because I love good food, but I can live without it. No child on this planet should miss one race or one get-together with friends because I can’t properly enjoy coffee anymore.
For anyone else who is vaccine-hesitant yet still concerned about the disease itself, there are many other treatment options. Again, humanity treated disease for a long time before vaccines entered the scene. Some of the first doctors to treat Covid patients formed Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance to develop and share low-cost treatment options. This article talks about managing the symptoms of Covid at home for those who are not sick enough to require hospitalization.
This is not an argument for or against vaccines.
If no one were willing to try anything new, we’d never make any progress. But the trials need to be made by fully informed, consenting individuals. That isn’t what we have right now. What we have now is coercion.
I am trying to argue against fear and hysteria. I want to encourage anyone, like myself, who is even moderately scientifically literate, to revisit your old textbooks. Build your confidence to make your own decisions. There’s too much fearmongering out there surrounding this disease. We’re distracted by a disease that 99.5% of infected people under 55 will survive as our rights are taken away, and our international reputation for being even a little bit competent and reliable falls apart.
Don’t allow yourself to get swallowed up by fear. The same things that mostly kept us healthy in the past will mostly keep us healthy now. Eat nutritious food, exercise regularly, and get sunshine.
Does this mean that if you are healthy, nothing terrible will ever happen to you? Of course not, just as obeying all the traffic rules won’t necessarily prevent some drunk from slamming into you. We can’t eliminate risk in our lives. All we can do is try to stack the odds in our favor.
How will you build your resilience and mental strength?
Resilience and mental strength are a huge part of prepping. Going back to the first principles, educating yourself will help you gain confidence in your decisions for yourself and your family. Confidence will help you stand firm against the rising tide of crazy we see in the world. Are you confident in your preparations? Have you been educating yourself along the way? Let’s talk about it in the comments section.
Now is not the time to give in to fear. Now is the time to become strong.
Joanna has been homeschooling three children since 2012. In 2014, she moved to the High Plains of Colorado. She and her children began a little homestead, gardening and raising chickens for eggs and meat. One animal led to another, and these days they have livestock guardian dogs, chickens, geese, ducks, alpacas, goats, pigs, and one very spoiled cat.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee reviewed public and classified intelligence to reach their stunning conclusions that the virus did originate in the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), and it was genetically manipulated
Unfortunately, the mainstream media have ignored the report, providing even more evidence experts are hoping to manipulate what you know and what you do
The evidence clearly points to a viral leak from the Wuhan lab before September 12, 2019, the date a public database of 22,000 viral samples from WIV was inexplicably taken offline
In September and October, daily volume at local hospitals was higher than in the past 2.5 years, and researchers found a much higher than average number of searches for COVID symptoms on the Chinese search engine, Baidu
The Committee also concluded there was enough evidence to show genetic modification was viable, that new processes could produce genetic sequencing “indistinguishable from wild type” and that Peter Daszak likely has information about the specific gain-of-function research and should be brought to testify before Congress
Any question about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 has been dispelled by a new addendum from the House Foreign Affairs Committee of the 117th Congress that reviewed public data and classified intelligence to reveal key new facts.1
In the short video above, Saagar Enjeti talks about a few of the interesting facts revealed in the addendum.2 Unfortunately, as has been the case throughout the last 18 months, the mainstream media completely ignored any report like this one, which suggests health experts have been manipulating what you see.
I believe it’s important to share information from the committee’s report with your friends and family as it sheds light on the lies the media have been perpetuating throughout 2020 and 2021. As you will see and can find in the report, much of the information that led to the conclusions were taken from publicly available data.
If the media’s aim were to ferret out the truth and inform the public, this report may never have been necessary. And, if the media haven’t been telling you the truth about the origins of the virus, what else have they been hiding?
A report by the House Foreign Affairs Committee published in September 2020 highlighted the potential that SARS-CoV-2 was leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). However, after discovering further evidence, the committee finds it is “time to completely dismiss the wet market as the source of the outbreak.”3
In the last 18 months, the virus has wreaked havoc on a health care system unwilling to use cost-effective and successful treatment modalities,4 and we have an economy that is still reeling from months of lockdowns and social distancing.
People are being forced to either accept the consequences and repercussions of hospital treatment for the infection or seek out successful alternatives that are criticized and discouraged by health agencies.5,6 If successful treatment were truly the objective, why would health experts vilify the use of medications that have been on the market for decades7,8 and the media maintain the lie?
Whether you are interested in the origin of a virus technocrats are using to manipulate human behavior or not, as Enjeti succinctly put it, “Getting to the bottom of it [origin of the pandemic] is vitally important for mankind so we can avoid any of this in the future.” And by “any of this” I take it to mean society’s complete trust in a system that has failed the public.
The Most Stunning Headline: Virus Was Leaked From the Lab
Enjeti believes the most stunning headline of the report is that the committee is convinced the virus was leaked from the lab,9 but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. The committee used publicly available data, intelligence reports, and geospatial tracking to make their determination.
It appears the original infections likely occurred well before the December announcement from Wuhan, China. It is important to note that Wuhan is a large metropolitan city, home to some of the tallest skyscrapers, major cultural sites, and multiple universities. As noted in the report, it is five times the size of Houston in landmass with a larger population than Chicago and New York City combined.10
Before the leak in 2019, the committee noted there had been several safety concerns in labs across the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since 2004. It was at this time that SARS leaked for the Beijing lab, and since then other accidental releases have occurred. From what the committee can discern, it is highly probable that SARS-CoV-2 was released from the Wuhan lab before September 12, 2019.
It was on that date, September 12, 2019, that the online public database WIV of viral sequences and samples disappeared. The database had more than 22,000 entries of pathogens collected from mice and bats, with key information including similarities to other known viruses.
Dr. Shi Zheng-li was the senior scientist at WIV who was listed as the data correspondence author, but as the report highlights, to date has not given a consistent answer as to why the online database was removed or when or if it will be put back online.
Coincidentally, researchers from Harvard Medical School and Boston University School of Public Health had been evaluating 2.5 years of satellite imagery of hospitals in Wuhan.11 They were analyzing parking lot traffic volume and discovered that in September and October 2019, five of the six hospitals in the city had a volume that was much higher than in the previous 2.5 years.
The researchers found this peak correspondent with a higher number of searches for two central COVID symptoms — “cough” and “diarrhea” — on the Chinese search engine Baidu.
Was the 2019 Military Games the Ultimate Superspreader?
Each of these factors and more identified in the report point to the likelihood the virus had been released from the lab before September 12, 2019. Data gathered after the 2019 Military World Games held in Wuhan on October 18, 2019, further support the committee’s assertion that the virus may have been contained to a local outbreak had the truth been told.12
The military games are an Olympic-style event that drew 9,308 athletes from 109 countries, including the U.S.13,14 There were 25 countries that sent more than 100 athletes. The government used 236,000 volunteers, 90 hotels, and more than 2,000 drivers. In other words, the games were a hotbed for spreading around the world what could have been contained as a local virus.
One journalist from the Financial Post15 reported some participants at the games described Wuhan as a “ghost town.” One of the athletes told the reporter, “This was a city of 15 million people that was in lockdown. It was strange, but we were told this was to make it easy for the games’ participants to get around.”16
The source shared there were 60 Canadian athletes put in isolation on the flight home who had symptoms of coughing and diarrhea. Once home, he reported that the symptoms became worse and included nosebleeds, fever, and pain with breathing. Family members became ill and doctors were unable to identify a source for the infection. Another military source reported:17
“One-quarter of us got sick, there and when we returned. Some were bedridden for weeks. This made us potential vectors for the virus. The military did nothing. I was sick and others were, too, with Wuhan symptoms … I was eventually given a swab test, which measures only recent exposure, and told to carry on.”
The committee identified four countries that had sent athletes to the games that had people with confirmed COVID-19 in November and December 2019.18 Those countries were Italy, Brazil, Sweden, and France. In both Italy and France, the individuals infected had no known history of traveling outside the country. This suggests the virus was brought into the country from another source. The Committee concluded:19
“While much of the public debate was initially focused on the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan as the origin of the pandemic, the preponderance of evidence now suggests that the virus leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Given the WIV’s demonstrated history of conducting gain-of-function experiments on coronaviruses, including genetically manipulating viruses specifically to make them infectious to humans in BSL-2 labs, as well as their possession of one of the world’s largest collections of coronaviruses, it is completely plausible that one or more researcher(s) was accidentally infected and carried the virus out of the lab.”
Committee Also Believes the Virus Was Genetically Modified
Twenty-nine pages into the report, the committee began addressing the topic of genetic modification. Within the first paragraph, they said there was enough evidence to suggest that genetic modification is a “viable hypothesis.”20 The committee included research from a 16-year collaboration between Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, and Dr. Shi Zheng-li, senior scientist at WIV, which revealed a strong relationship. They wrote:21
“Beginning in 2005, and continuing over the next 16 years, Shi and Daszak have collaborated on coronavirus research. Together, they ‘led dozens of expeditions to caves full of bats, to collect samples and analyze them.’
They have identified more than 500 novel coronaviruses, including roughly 50 related to SARS or MERS, and they have repeatedly engaged in gain-of-function research on coronaviruses designed to make them more infectious in humans.”
Information from the papers they co-wrote also appears in the committee report, three of which were papers on bat SARS-like coronaviruses. The paper in 2013 that was published in the journal Nature was called “Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor.”22
In 2015, Shi gave Ralph Baric and researchers at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill spike protein sequences and plasmids they identified from bat feces samples in 2013. The Committee reported these were used by American researchers to create:23
“’… a chimeric virus expressing the spike of bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone.’ In other words, they removed the spike protein from SHC014 and inserted it into a SARS coronavirus that was genetically manipulated to better infect mice.”
The research was funded by the NIAID and the NIH through the EcoHealth Alliance and the PRC government. In a paper published in 2016, in which Baric was the corresponding author, the writers discussed “moving from disease surveillance to creating chimeric viruses as a means of pandemic preparedness.”24 After reviewing the data, the committee concluded:
“Given the above, it is self-evident that Shi and her colleagues, with funding and support from Daszak, were actively genetically manipulating coronaviruses and testing them against human immune systems in 2018 and 2019, before the beginning of the pandemic.”
The committee’s report delved further into some of the unusual features of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. They point out that critics claim what they say is an apparent “lack of telltale signs of genetic manipulation” is proof that the virus is naturally occurring.
However, Baric had developed and published a novel genetic engineering system to allow for genetic sequencing that would create a new and infectious coronavirus that was “indistinguishable from wild type.”
Daszak’s Dark Relationship With Wuhan
Daszak is the only scientist named in the Executive Summary of the report and whose actions “call into question the way in which U.S. government grants are used in overseas labs and call for more oversight of those grants.”25 To understand the full implications of emails connecting Fauci and Daszak in early 2020, it’s important to understand what happened in the days before.
At the GOP House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, shared email information revealed in a Freedom of Information Act release, which demonstrated Fauci and many other health experts in the world knew the virus was lab-created. 26
Jordan quotes from an email Fauci received from British researcher Christian Anderson that said, “The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features look engineered. Eddie, Bob, Mike, and myself all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”27
In a separate presentation at the House Select Committee on the Coronavirus, Jordan illustrated Fauci’s changing narrative on the issue of gain-of-function research, which is a lab-performed genetic alteration to make a virus more infectious to humans, saying:28
“He initially said the United States taxpayer money did not fund the Wuhan Institute of Virology. He later changed that, saying no, no we did fund it but it was through a sub-grant. He subsequently said no, no we funded it but we did not fund gain-of-function research.
Then just last Sunday he said, well, we funded it, there was gain-of-function research, but it was a sound scientific decision. And then he said this … it would have been negligent to not fund the lab in China.”
In a section of the report from the House Foreign Affairs Committee titled “The Cover-Up, “29 there is evidence that Daszak pushed for a cover-up. His actions included bullying scientists who asked questions and directly lying about the nature of the research and about the low-level safety protocols being used in the research. They conclude his actions cost time and “provide further proof the virus likely leaked from the WIV.”30
Daszak Grateful Fauci on Board With Cover Up
In April 2020, Fauci was at the White House, where he rejected the idea that the coronavirus was created in the lab in Wuhan.31 In July 2020, Daszak headed up a second commission to investigate the origin of the virus, The Lancet COVID-19 commission,32 despite his many conflicts of interest and of having openly and repeatedly dismissed the possibility of the pandemic being the result of a lab leak.33
However, once Fauci’s emails were released under a Freedom of Information Act request, it was discovered that Daszak wrote: “I just wanted to say a personal thank you on behalf of our staff and collaborators, for publicly standing up and stating that the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for COVID-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”34
Jordan quotes testimony from “Dr. Jarrar,” whom he identifies as a former assistant secretary for health, that supports the mounting evidence being revealed. Jordan said:35
“Here’s what Dr. Jarrar said. ‘I believe it’s just too much of a coincidence that the worldwide pandemic caused by a novel bat coronavirus that cannot be found in nature started just a few miles away from a secretive laboratory doing potentially dangerous research on bat coronaviruses.'”
In the House Committee’s report, Daszak’s name is mentioned 125 times. The importance of Daszak’s position in gain-of-function research done at WIV and the ensuing coverup is brought home by the committee’s recommendation for the next steps that Congress should take, namely “After this extensive investigation, we believe it is time to call Peter Daszak to testify before Congress.”36
Paul Thacker, a former investigator with the U.S. Senate, says Dr. Anthony Fauci lied to Congress when he claimed he’s never funded gain-of-function research. This is a federal offense punishable by up to five years in prison, provided the false statements are materially relevant and knowingly false
July 20, 2021, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul — who has grilled Fauci about his research funding in two separate hearings in 2021 — announced he would ask the DOJ for a criminal referral, as he’s convinced Fauci made false statements to Congress
One “smoking gun” is a research article written by Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) scientists. The paper acknowledges funding from the NIAID/NIH, and the research meets the Department of Health and Human Services’ definition of gain-of-function research
According to the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, “The term ‘gain-of-function is generally used to refer to changes resulting in the acquisition of new, or an enhancement of existing, biological phenotypes”
In a June 2021 essay, professor Jeffrey Sachs, head of The Lancet’s commission tasked with investigating COVID’s origin, described how the NIAID has funded gain-of-function research at the WIV, stating it’s “common knowledge in the U.S. scientific community that NIH has … supported genetic recombinant research on SARS-like viruses that many scientists describe as GOFROC [gain-of-function research of concern]”
In an August 31, 2021, substack article,1 Paul Thacker, an investigative reporter and former investigator with the U.S. Senate, reviews evidence he claims shows Dr. Anthony Fauci lied to Congress, an offense punishable by up to five years in prison, provided the false statements are materially relevant and knowingly false.
“A new investigative documentary by the U.K.’s Channel 42 detailed some of the strongest evidence to date that the COVID19 pandemic may have started from a lab leak in Wuhan, China,” Thacker writes.3
“At the very least, the documentary’s interviews with experts and review of documents made explicit how China has misled the world about its research with dangerous pathogens …
The documentary clarified one other point: Anthony Fauci lied before Congress and the American public when he claimed during a congressional hearing that he has not funded gain-of-function research conducted by the Wuhan Institute of Virology …
President Biden has campaigned on honesty and decency. The question now for President Biden is, ‘What will you do with Fauci now that he has broken the law and violated the public trust by lying before Congress?’”
Fauci Redefines Scientific Terms on the Fly
In what appears to be an attempt to extricate himself from blame for the COVID pandemic, Fauci — director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), an arm of the National Institutes for Health (NIH), since 1986 — denied ever having funded gain-of-function research at the WIV or elsewhere when questioned by members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee in May 2021.4
According to Thacker, the evidence clearly refutes this. One “smoking gun” is a research article written by WIV scientists titled “Discovery of a Rich Gene Pool of Bat SARS-Related Coronaviruses Provides New Insights Into the Origin of SARS Coronavirus.”5 This research was funded by the NIH and meets the Department of Health and Human Services’ definition of gain-of-function research.6,7
The Channel 4 documentary addressed this paper. When asked whether the NIH ever funded gain-of-function research at the WIV, David Relman, a research physician at Stanford University, replies, “Yes. Indirectly, but yes. How do we know? The paper says, right on the front page, ‘Supported by NIAID, NIH.’” The clip featuring Relman is included below.
As previously reported by the National Review,8 we know the WIV received NIAID/NIH funding to create novel chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses capable of infecting both human cells and lab animals. “Chimeric viruses” refers to artificial man-made viruses, hybrid organisms created through the joining of two or more different organisms.
This is precisely what gain-of-function research is all about. According to a 2016 report9 from the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, “The term ‘gain-of-function is generally used to refer to changes resulting in the acquisition of new, or an enhancement of existing, biological phenotypes.”
Fauci now wants to adopt a far narrower definition of gain-of-function research that takes into account the supposed intent behind the research, but that really doesn’t make sense. Just because you don’t set out with the intent to harm doesn’t mean your creation can’t cause harm or might inadvertently cause harm.
US Funding of Gain-of-Function Research Was Well-Established
According to Thacker, “Fauci certainly knew that the WIV he was helping to fund conducted gain-of-function studies because it has been common knowledge.”10 For example, a year before Fauci was queried by Congress, Newsweek reported that:11
“In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million …
The NIH research consisted of two parts. The first part12 began in 2014 and involved surveillance of bat coronaviruses … The program funded Shi Zheng-Li, a virologist at the Wuhan lab … to investigate and catalogue bat coronaviruses in the wild. This part of the project was completed in 2019.
A second phase13 of the project, beginning that year, included … gain-of-function research for the purpose of understanding how bat coronaviruses could mutate to attack humans. The project was run by EcoHealth Alliance … under the direction of President Peter Daszak … NIH canceled the project … April 24  …
Many scientists have criticized gain of function research, which involves manipulating viruses in the lab to explore their potential for infecting humans, because it creates a risk of starting a pandemic from accidental release.”
Around that same time, former Acting Director of the CIA Michael Morell told Politico14 that “if the virus leaked from a Wuhan lab, the U.S. would shoulder some of the blame since it funded research at that lab through government grants from 2014 to 2019.”
Mid-January 2021, the U.S. State Department published a fact sheet accusing the Chinese government of being obsessively secretive about gain-of-function research at the WIV, and that it was collaborating with the Chinese military on secret projects.
The fact sheet has since been removed from the State Department’s website but was reported by a number of outlets at the time. Among them, Life Site News, which wrote:15
“In a ‘Fact Sheet’ posted online … the Department of State (DOS) presented three distinct elements about the origin of the virus, which ‘deserve greater scrutiny’ … The first of the three issues needing further investigation, was the outbreak of illness inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
The DOS revealed it had ‘reason to believe’ that ‘several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses’ …
Additionally, the DOS noted that researchers in the WIV had been performing experiments on ‘RaTG13, the bat coronavirus identified by the WIV in January 2020 as its closest sample to SARS-CoV-2 (96.2% similar)’ since at least ‘2016.’
The laboratory also ‘has a published record of conducting ‘gain-of-function’ research to engineer chimeric viruses.’ Such research, gain-of-function research, is a kind which ‘improves the ability of a pathogen to cause disease.’”
Additional Reports Citing Gain-of-Function Research
March 6, 2021, the editorial board of The Washington Post published an article16 calling for an independent investigation into the origin of SARS-CoV-2. In that article, the board pointed out that:
“… a senior researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Shi Zhengli, was working on ‘gain-of-function’ experiments, which involve modifying viral genomes to give them new properties, including the ability to infect lung cells of laboratory mice that had been genetically modified to respond as human respiratory cells would.”
The board also noted that Shi was “working with bat coronaviruses that were genetically very similar to the one that caused the pandemic.” A few months later, in a June 22, 2021, essay,17 professor Jeffrey Sachs, head of The Lancet’s commission tasked with investigating COVID’s origin, also described how the NIAID has funded gain-of-function research at the WIV:
“It is in fact common knowledge in the U.S. scientific community that NIH has indeed supported genetic recombinant research on SARS-like viruses that many scientists describe as GOFROC [gain-of-function research of concern].
The peer-reviewed scientific literature reports the results of such NIH-supported recombinant genetic research on SARS-like viruses. More specifically, it is clear that the NIH co-funded research at the WIV that deserves scrutiny under the hypothesis of a laboratory-related release of the virus.”
‘Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery’
Someone who has taken a particular interest in Fauci’s potential role in this pandemic is Dr. Peter Breggin, a Harvard-trained psychiatrist and former consultant for the National Institute of Mental Health. In October 2020, he published the report18 “Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery,” detailing Fauci’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its military.
Breggin is convinced Fauci “has been the major force” behind research activities that enabled the CCP to manufacture lethal SARS coronaviruses, which in turn led to the release — whether accidental or not — of SARS-CoV-2 from the WIV.
He claims Fauci has helped the CCP obtain “valuable U.S. patents,” and that he, in collaboration with the CCP and the WHO, initially suppressed the truth about the origins and dangers of the pandemic, thereby enabling the spread of the virus from China to the rest of the world.
Fauci has, and continues to, shield the CCP and himself, Breggin says, by “denying the origin of SARS-CoV-2” and “delaying and thwarting worldwide attempts to deal rationally with the pandemic.”
In the executive summary of the report, Breggin documents 15 questionable activities that Fauci has been engaged in, starting with the fact that he funded dangerous gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses, both by individual Chinese researchers and the WIV in collaboration with American researchers. This research, Breggin says, allowed the CCP and its military to create their own bioweapons, including SARS-CoV-2.
Will Fauci Be Held Accountable?
According to Thacker, “it’s obvious” Fauci “broke the law and misled Congress.” He adds:19
“This is not my personal opinion; I was required to know and enforce the relevant provisions of the law during the three years I ran investigations in the Senate. On two occasions I had to consult with Senate Legal Counsel and then warn people about lying to Congress …
Fauci lied while testifying before Congress. Fauci lied to the American people. Several lines of evidence make this clear. But catching Fauci lying and breaking the law does little good, because the Department of Justice prosecutes people for lying to Congress, and the Department of Justice is run … by the Biden administration. So what is President Biden going to do about this?”
During an appearance on the Hannity Show, July 20, 2021, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul — who has grilled Fauci about his research funding in two separate hearings this year — announced he would indeed ask the DOJ for a criminal referral.20
Paul specifically asked the DOJ to investigate whether Fauci violated 18 U.S. Code § 100121 — which makes it a federal crime to make “any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation” as part of “any investigation or review” conducted by Congress — or any other statute. Time will tell if it amounts to anything.
Gain-of-Function Research Is the Real Threat
Regardless of what happens to Fauci, at the end of the day, the key issue that needs to be addressed is whether we should allow research that involves making pathogens more dangerous to humans at all, regardless of what the intent behind it might be, or the specific technology used.
Lab leaks have occurred on multiple occasions, so it’s really only a matter of time before something far more devastating than SARS-CoV-2 gets out. World leaders need to realize that funding gain-of-function research is the real threat here and take action accordingly to forestall another pandemic. As long as researchers are allowed to mutate and create synthetic pathogens, they’re creating the very risk they claim they’re trying to prevent.
The Great Reset has been called a conspiracy theory by many, despite specific plans published on the World Economic Forum (WEF) website and partnerships between the WEF and global organizations like the United Nations and World Health Organization
An investigative report asserts that the ongoing restructuring of processes that control food and data are upending traditional practices so private corporations have more control and influence than the democratically elected government
A part of the Great Reset is a reset of the economy, including jobs. Many across the U.S. are facing unemployment if they do not choose to take a genetic therapy experiment in the form of a COVID-19 vaccine
Employees of six major hospitals in Cincinnati, Ohio, have filed a lawsuit, hoping to stop the mandated vaccine, which health experts are promoting with inconsistent messages, first claiming it does not stop community transmission; yet, requiring it for employment under the guise of preventing the spread of infection
Over the past year and a half, I’ve written many articles detailing the evidence supporting the claim that the COVID pandemic is a ruse to usher in a new system of global centralized governance by unelected leaders, the so-called Great Reset.
The recent release of the House Foreign Affairs Committee report1 entitled, “The Origins of COVID-19: An Investigation of the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” presented solid evidence that many of the “conspiracy theories” about the virus were in fact true. For example, using some intelligence reports and other public documents, the committee found that:2
“… we now believe it’s time to completely dismiss the wet market as the source of the outbreak. We also believe the preponderance of the evidence proves the virus did leak from the WIV and that it did so sometime before September 12, 2019.”
They presented evidence of genetic modification and wrote this:3
“This report also lays out ample evidence that researchers at the WIV, in conjunction with U.S. scientists and funded by both the PRC [People’s Republic of China] government and the U.S. government, were conducting gain of-function research on coronaviruses at the WIV …
In many instances, the scientists were successful in creating ‘chimeric viruses’ — or viruses created from the pieces of other viruses — that could infect human immune systems.
With dangerous research like this conducted at safety levels similar to a dentist’s office, a natural or genetically modified virus could have easily escaped the lab and infected the community.”
The idea of the Great Reset may feel like a conspiracy theory, especially if life, as you know it where you live, has not dramatically changed. You still go to work, buy food, go to the gym, go out to eat, and attend events. There may be people wearing masks, and you may see or hear news reports about vaccine mandates and vaccine passports, but it hasn’t reached your employer and you may not be personally affected … yet.
But, make no mistake, unless we all do our part to peacefully protest the changes being planned, write to our legislatures, and talk to our neighbors and friends, what is happening in New York,4 France,5 Germany6 and Israel,7 will soon be knocking on your front door.
Does ‘Great Reset’ Sound Like a Conspiracy? It May Be Worse
An article titled, “Welcome To 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy and Life Has Never Been Better” appeared in Forbes Magazine8 in November 2016. It was written by Ida Auken, a member of the Denmark Parliament9 and agenda contributor at the World Economic Forum (WEF).10
The article was frightening in the simplistic way it describes the dissolution of society as we know it. And, as time marches forward, we see more evidence of what the WEF has proposed as “perfect sense”11 coming true.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau suggested in September 2020 what other world leaders have also promoted12 — that the COVID-19 virus, that has killed and devastated the health of many people, provided the world is an:13
“… opportunity for a reset … our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to re-imagine economic systems that actually address global challenges like extreme poverty, inequality and climate change.”
More than 20 world leaders came together to suggest, “At a time when COVID-19 has exploited our weaknesses and divisions, we must seize this opportunity and come together as a global community for peaceful cooperation that extends beyond this crisis.”14 And while that sounds noble, altruistic and humanitarian, it is the plan for the future that is in stark contrast to the statement.
Ivan Wecke, a journalist from Open Democracy, did a deep dive into some of what lies behind the WEF’s Great Reset plan and found what he called something “almost as sinister hiding in plain sight. In fact, more sinister because it’s real and it’s happening now. And it involves things as fundamental as our food, our data, and our vaccines.”15
Although Wecke discounts the plans of the Great Reset to abolish private property, use the virus to solve overpopulation, and enslave the remainder of humanity as “nebulous and hard to pin down,” he goes on to illustrate in detail how the fundamental structure of the world that controls food and data, and ultimately humanity, is being upended and restructured so that private corporations have more control and influence than governments.
WEF Calls It ‘Stakeholder Capitalism’
It comes down to “stakeholder capitalism,” which are the magic words that Klaus Schwab, WEF chairman, has been promoting for decades, and is a central theme in the organization’s Great Reset plan.16 The concept as Wecke describes it is to transform global capitalism, so corporations create value for stakeholders.17
These stakeholders can be consumers, employees, communities, and others. This will be carried out through multi-stakeholder partnerships of governments and private-sector businesses across the globe. As he dug deeper into the concept, it became more apparent that this means giving corporations more power and taking that influence away from democratically elected institutions.
The initial plan was drafted after the 2008 economic crisis and included the vision that governments around the world would be only one influencer in a multi-stakeholder model. When he asked himself who would be the other nongovernmental stakeholders, Wecke only had to look at the WEF partners that meet each year in Davos, Switzerland.
These partners are some of the biggest companies in the oil, food, technology, and pharmaceutical. In other words, the companies that could ultimately restructure society and control the supply chain are those that provide everyday necessities. These proposed concepts appear to have started taking shape in a strategic partnership agreement that the WEF signed with the United Nations in 2019.
Harris Gleckman, a senior fellow at the Center for Governance and Sustainability from the University of Massachusetts18 calls this move an inroad to create a place for corporations inside the United Nations.19
The WEF is using the concept of multi-stakeholders to change the current system that countries use today to work together. This multilateral system may not always be effective and may have too many layers of bureaucracy, but Wecke says it is “theoretically democratic because it brings together democratically elected leaders of countries to make decisions in the global arena.”20
Big Tech May Run the Roadmap for Digital Cooperation
What’s really happening here, though, is the move toward placing unelected stakeholders in positions of power does not deepen democracy but, rather, puts decision-making in the hands of financially focused corporations. As Wecke points out, this will have real-world implications for how medications are distributed, food systems are organized, and how Big Tech is governed.
Under a democratic rule of law, six corporations already control 90% of the news media consumed by Americans. Tech Startups calls this an “illusion of choice and objectivity.”21 How much more propaganda will be thrown in the face of consumers when Big Tech is monitoring and controlling Big Tech?
The year 2030 holds significance for the WEF’s vision22 which is to scale technology and facilitate “inclusive growth.” In the fall of 2021, the UN will bring together the Food Systems Summit to achieve sustainable development goals by 2030.23 Yet, Sofia Monsalve of FIAN International, a human rights organization focused on food and nutrition, told Wecke:24
“’Abandoning pesticides is not on the table. How come?’ asks Sofia Monsalve of FIAN International, a human rights organisation focused on food and nutrition.
‘There is no discussion on land concentration or holding companies accountable for their environmental and labour abuses.’ This fits into a bigger picture Monsalve sees of large corporations, which dominate the food sector, being reluctant to fix the production system. ‘They just want to come up with new investment opportunities.’”
Wecke also dug into a long list of participants in the 2020 Roadmap For Digital Cooperation25 and found influencers included Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and the WEF.26 The functions for the group appear to be vague, but if the group comes to fruition, it will be a decisive victory for those Big Tech companies that have been pushing to expand their power,27 are fighting antitrust rules28 and are facing accusations of tax evasion.29
The move by the UN and WEF has not gone unnoticed. A group of more than 170 civil organizations has signed an open letter30 detailing why they oppose the plan. At a time when stronger regulations are needed to protect consumers, it appears that the new UN digital roadmap may be seeking less.
Firing the Unvaccinated Is the Start of the Great Job Reset
Finally, Wecke addresses the issue of global vaccine distribution.31 Instead of the World Health Organization, which is “the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system,”32 being responsible for vaccine access, another initiative was created called COVAX. According to the WHO, COVAX is co-led by the WHO, UNICEF, CEPI, and GAVI.33
As a quick reminder, GAVI (the Vaccine Alliance) and CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations) have strong ties with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the WEF and are connected with large pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and more.34
The influence these groups have on the global distribution of the COVID vaccine may have been best illustrated when South Africa and India requested a temporary lift on the rules governing intellectual property to increase manufacturing and distribution to developing countries. Wecke reports35 that although the WHO director-general publicly said that he backed a proposal, others in the COVAX initiative strongly opposed it, and it didn’t happen.
There appear to be enough vaccines available in industrialized nations for the WEF to support any and all employees being fired if they choose not to take the vaccine. The National File36 published a tweet the WEF made in May 2021 which said, “Get your COVID-19 jab — or you could face consequences from your employer #COVID19 #JobsReset21.”
Additionally, the WEF had posted an article37 on their website that made a variety of claims about the percentage of companies that would require employees to be vaccinated and juxtaposed mental health concerns and burnout through the pandemic with being unvaccinated in the article.
After intense backlash, the tweet was deleted and replaced with a question, “Will employees be required to get the COVID-19 vaccination?”38 The new post quickly filled with screenshots of the original post.
Two Cities Promising to Fire Employees
Even before the FDA announced their approval of the Pfizer vaccine,39 Cincinnati, Ohio, area hospital systems had announced that starting October 1, 2021, all health care workers and volunteers are required to be vaccinated. Among those participating in the vaccine mandate are the University of Cincinnati Health, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, and the Christ Hospital Health Network.40
Health care workers in Cincinnati have now filed a lawsuit against six of the hospital systems saying requiring vaccines for employment is unlawful and violates workers’ Constitutional rights. The lawsuit says, “When there was no vaccine, the workers had to go to work. They were heroes. Now that there is a vaccine, they have to get the vaccine or be fired. Now they are ‘zeros.’”41
April Hoskins is a lab assistant at St. Elizabeth Edgewood who has worked for 20 years in family practice and hospital oncology. She told a reporter from WLWT5,42 “You’ve trusted us this whole time to take care of these patients, unvaccinated, without the proper PPE. And now out of nowhere, you have to get it or you’re going to be terminated? Like, something is wrong with that picture.”
August 23, 2021, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced that all public school teachers and staff would be required to have at least one dose of the vaccine by September 27, 2021, or they would no longer have a job. Not soon afterward, the United Federation of Teachers union issued a statement from union president Michael Mulgrew reiterating their desire and priority to keep the students and teachers safe. He went on to say:43
“While the city is asserting its legal authority to establish this mandate, there are many implementation details, including provisions for medical exceptions, that by law must be negotiated with the UFT and other unions, and if necessary, resolved by arbitration.”
It Is Important to Point Out the Inconsistencies
This was the second announcement from de Blasio, who first mandated vaccinations for approximately 400,000 employees in the Department of Education, New York Police Department, and the Fire Department of New York.44 In tandem with New York, California Long Beach Unified School District also announced mandatory vaccinations, as has Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot for all Chicago Public School employees by October 15, 2021.
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy also announced mandatory vaccinations or twice-weekly testing requirements for all state employees, effective October 18. It is clear that as different states and municipalities add their own mandates, it’s essential to be aware of what is happening in your local and regional areas, as well as to speak up at public meetings and demand public hearings on the matter.
The mayor of Orland Park, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago, describes an example of how decisions behind closed doors can have a different outcome than those in public.45 He also says what is happening now is about “our processes, Constitutionality and the rule of law.”
The inconsistencies from health experts are deafening. Even the World Health Organization advises people who are vaccinated to continue wearing masks due to the Delta variant because “vaccine alone won’t stop community transmission.”46 Simultaneously, the public is told that everyone needs the vaccine to prevent the spread of the infection47 and if you have the vaccine, you can still spread the virus and put others at risk.48
Each person has a responsibility to speak up, share information and ensure that as people make up their minds about vaccination, vaccine passports, civil liberties, and the right to free speech, they have all the information they need and not just what’s shared in mainstream media.
To that end, I encourage you to share my articles with your friends and family. As you know, they are removed from the website 48 hours after publication. Please copy and paste the information, with the sources, and share it!
Reports over the last few months about the proposed multi-billion-dollar settlements to end huge opioid-related lawsuits clearly reflect the attitude of drug manufacturers and distributors.
Even as they agree to pay record amounts, industry leaders and their public relations representatives maintain there is no connection between Big Pharma and narcotic addiction in the U.S.
Purdue Pharmaceuticals, which marketed the opiate derivative OxyContin as non-addictive, is demanding broad legal immunity in exchange for its $4.5 billion settlement.
With the announcement of the $26 billion offer, Michael Ullmann, executive vice president and general counsel of Johnson & Johnson, gave a carefully worded statement:
“We recognize the opioid crisis is a tremendously complex public health issue, and we have deep sympathy for everyone affected. This settlement will directly support state and local efforts to make meaningful progress in addressing the opioid crisis in the United States.”
With a consistent strategy, and in the wake of Big Pharma’s benevolent status for rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, the defendants are not taking any responsibility for contributing to the opioid epidemic.
Rather, for their billions, they are demanding all states and municipalities involved in all lawsuits agree to never again associate their products with drug addiction.
Corporations have offered to buy silence about their complicity in the death of half a million people over the last 20 years. This attempted bribe mirrors the morality of a continuing supply of addictive drugs to the uncounted millions who today suffer from prescribed opioid abuse.
Addicts who avoid or survive an overdose must navigate through a society that allows access to narcotics while designating the addicted as outcasts and criminals. Whether the source of their drugs is imported opiates or prescribed pain killers, their suffering is substantially enhanced by a hostile culture and negligent government oversight.
We have turned a blind eye to what is effectively a licensed drug cartel that exploits the vulnerable.
The attorney general of Pennsylvania, Josh Shapiro, directly involved in both the Purdue and Johnson & Johnson lawsuits, gave a succinct analysis of his perspective:
“These deaths did not have to happen. This epidemic was manufactured by an army of pharmaceutical executives and drug distributors.”
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), empowered to protect the public, has not been able to resist the commanding influence of the pharmaceutical industry.
The FDA continues to fail in minimizing the pain and suffering of addicts and their families, ravaged by a preventable epidemic of drug dependence.
Dr. Raeford Brown, a former head of the FDA advisory committee for approval of new opioid painkillers, in 2019 said:
“The modus operandi of the agency is that they talk a good game and then nothing happens. Working directly with the agency for the last five years, as I sit and listen to them in meetings, all I can think about is the clock ticking and how many people are dying every moment that they’re not doing anything. The lack of insight that continues to be exhibited by the agency is in many ways willful blindness that borders on the criminal.”
But clearly, there hasn’t been an inclination to change anything, primarily because the FDA and Big Pharma have always had a mutually beneficial relationship.
Could it be because the opioid oversight division of the FDA relies on pharmaceutical giants for 75% of its budget? Or perhaps it is due to the revolving door between regulators at the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and drug industry professionals.
Both of these ongoing structural allowances are overt symptoms of the lack of will to end the flow of huge earnings.
Prescription drugs like Fentanyl and OxyContin, and similar opioids, have been abused because of profit-driven policies that result in ineffective efforts to regulate and restrict their use.
Even as acceptance of a settlement offer is considered, opioid addiction and its ensuing tragic consequences are on the increase.
Beyond huge civil suits, it seems there is no effort to reveal the details of the insidious relationship between profiteers and regulators — and not because the public isn’t aware of the destructive alliance.
By extension, expectation of honest government oversight has been minimal, although the underlying amoral relationship between the FDA and Big Pharma is a topic rarely analyzed in detail.
As the drug giants offer billions in settlement funds to state government programs for what are social and criminal abuses, regulation and oversight by the FDA for protecting public health is minimal.
There is no secret as to who holds the authority in their alliance with the pharmaceutical giants.
And now, as the world faces the challenges of an ongoing pandemic, there is unwarranted blind faith in this same consortium.
The development of vaccines was fast and furious in the name of an explosive health crisis. Yet when scrutiny of every detail is most needed, the pharmaceutical industry has been given extensive room for error and foul play.
The FDA continues to dance to the tune of the pharmaceutical industry as the vaccine makes staggering profits — this should cause immense concern.
The prescription drug business has earned its reputation for being ruthless in seeking maximum proceeds from medications that are often abused or have numerous associated risks. Nothing has changed.
With a history of malfeasance, there is no room for good faith in a trade whose central interest is protecting profits — yet the public is asked to believe that compassionate concerns are driving the relentless push for vaccination policy.
With a tremendous financial incentive to grow the market, there is very little discussion about how profits might be influencing the promotion of the COVID-19 vaccine.
While ostensibly, all forces have been gathering in the name of ending a worldwide pandemic, there are undoubtedly other motives in vaccine distribution.
From when it was first declared, it was clear that a country could not reach herd immunity independently. Effectiveness and pronouncements aside, six months after the first doses were given, 80% of the COVID-19 vaccines produced have gone to the world’s wealthiest countries.
Perhaps the universal vaccination campaign is not as equitable as portrayed. Once again, it appears that dependence on a costly drug for countries that can pay is a key component of pharmaceutical marketing. Recipients are told it is free, although nothing is without cost — whether through taxes or side effects.
Somehow blind trust continues, giving one of the most powerful and wealthiest industries on the planet free rein to push a questionable product. Their huge PR and lobbying forces are hard at work enforcing a subjective view. The new vaccines continue to be presented as a brilliant, humanitarian cure for the pandemic.
As justification for vaccine mandates grows, the drug industry, through its advocates at the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), is at the center of minimizing dissent.
The industry has created the impression that the COVID-19 vaccine development and rollout could not possibly be flawed or duplicitous.
This manufactured consensus relies on seemingly reasonable logic: It would be impossible for all the well-meaning laboratories, researchers, and doctors across many countries to naively minimize risks or collude in any false narrative about the pandemic or vaccines.
This simplistic myth of their public relations campaign accounts for the general atmosphere — journalists and the public can’t imagine they are not fully informed.
However, it is important to understand this contrived rationale from the broadest perspective. The universal vaccine rollout is unfolding on a planet burning at its edges, with poles melting and oceans rising.
The same governments and corporate forces that have failed in slowing a planetary catastrophe are now asking for absolute confidence regarding our future health.
The impression that corporate, government, and scientific forces are collaborating in our best interests is based on a pretense worth examining. Blind acceptance of any industry’s solutions for a global crisis has no foundation.
Trusting Big Pharma with our well-being is equivalent to expecting that the oil, military, and chemical industries will save the Earth from environmental disaster.
The root problem is no secret: Profit-making eclipses sane decision-making.
The pharmaceutical industry has continuously duped the public. It has collaborated with the medical establishment in the distribution of addictive narcotics. This same commercial enterprise has promoted other questionable vaccines and drugs that are more dangerous than the diseases they prevent or symptoms they treat.
The huge number of people harmed or killed by adverse reactions to vaccines or prescribed drugs has somehow become a reality we accept. Over decades, an atmosphere has been created where poisonous side-effects are tolerated.
Meanwhile, the industry hires experts in generating group-think. Those who don’t agree to participate in their ruse are marginalized.
Challenging the official line of Big Pharma holds great risks. Countering policies that might diminish profits is often guaranteed to end research funding, and very likely, a lucrative career.
As crisis builds, there is even less tolerance for dissenters.
A pandemic of deceit
The greatest symptom of the pandemic is a loss of common sense.
The emotional pleadings and attempts to ostracize anyone who questions whether they should have a COVID-19 vaccination have the telltale signs of a deceitful public relations campaign.
It has been very successful.
Big Pharma also received a PR gift from politicians and pundits who repeat any conjecture, from the unlikely to the outrageous, about the pandemic.
Most legitimate questions about the vaccine program from doctors and scientists are now lumped together with challenges mounted by politically motivated, conspiratorial sensationalists.
There is always misinformation spread by a range of uninformed sources on any topic. Currently, because of a void of understanding and critical, detailed analysis, speculation about the pandemic is rampant.
If more information and detail were available, there would be less conjecture. Instead, anyone who doubts the prescribed reality must be part of a hoax.
There is a cult-like, unconscionable attitude toward those who dispute any aspect of the vaccination plan. As some of the first serious questions about effectiveness appear, with uncertainty about vaccine suppression on future variants of the disease, a softening of the dogmatic atmosphere might be expected.
Reporting about those at higher risk for serious illness has decreased since the start of the pandemic. Instead, there is a parade of dramatic stories about perfectly healthy, unvaccinated individuals who suddenly succumb to the virus.
For example, the British press widely reported the death of a so-called, fit and healthy 42-year-old man who regretted not being vaccinated, but failed to mention that he was an asthmatic and was likely using steroids to control his condition. A few articles mention his underlying condition, late in the text, seemingly without realizing the revelation countered the principal assertion of the piece.
This account is one of many that demonstrates how the emotional campaign for everyone to get vaccinated even overshadows efforts to inform those with underlying conditions. Perhaps their health is not the priority in the campaign.
Why isn’t COVID-19 news coverage replete with guidance for those at risk, with convincing articles concerning lifestyle and dietary choices?
It is because nothing but messages that support vaccination production and sales are acceptable. Deviation from this doctrine is taboo.
Despite contradiction in terms, inconsistencies ignored and conflicts with previous optimistic data, the PR campaign continues. Indeed, as flaws in the vaccines and deceptive logic become apparent, the greater the intensity to support a distorted reality.
The pharmaceutical industry, the government, and the devoted news media continue to repeat the holy mantra no matter what unfolds: The vaccine is safe, effective, and free.
The self-labeled, fact-checking websites, rather than daring to critique the PR talking points, limit themselves to beating the drum of the CDC, FDA, and Big Pharma. Press research is dominated by those who look for sources of false data from those who question the science behind testing or vaccination.
Most of the news media staunchly hold its position. Critics remain 100% focused on debunking those who question vaccination statistics. Ignoring their greater responsibility for challenging the industry, they repeatedly arrive at an amazingly consistent conclusion about any statistics that imply doubts about the vaccine: All data, when properly analyzed, shows the importance of vaccination, with minimal risks, and in every case, the disparagers are falsifying or exaggerating.
Deviation from this prescriptive interpretation is deemed sacrosanct.
Doctors and analysts who break the prohibition against raising the possibility of other forms of prevention or treatment are marginalized or excommunicated. Knowledgeable physicians with patients who have had serious reactions to the vaccine, and virologists who have dissenting opinions, are shunned as dangerous deviants.
As of May 1, the CDC stopped gathering data on breakthrough cases that were no hospitalizations or deaths. This quiet decision came concurrently with the revelation that newer highly contagious variants could infect the vaccinated. With minimal or no symptoms, these people could continue to infect others unknowingly. It is also possible this could drive new variants.
Perhaps there are some people who still believe Big Pharma’s prime directive in facing the pandemic is altruistic benevolence. But if indeed their mission has turned to ending suffering and healing the masses, there should be no problem in agreeing that there is nothing to hide.
For those who understand the foundational morality of the drug industry has not changed, it is a time for more scrutiny than ever before.
We must be vigilant in looking at facts. Blind trust in news media or any single source is dangerous.
The CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System is long overdue for vast improvement. Data on the dangers and complications of the vaccines should be scrupulously gathered and made public.
There is a desperate need for openness and transparency so that every detail can be evaluated with objectivity — the pandemic must be faced with eyes wide open. Our medical decisions must be based on extensively supported, verifiable information.
mRNA-based COVID shots have used codon optimization to improve protein production. A codon consists of three nucleotides, and nucleotides are the building blocks of DNA. The use of codon optimization virtually guarantees unexpected results
Replacing rare codons must be done judiciously, as rarer codons can have slower translation rates and a slowed-down rate is actually necessary to prevent protein misfolding
Stop codons, when present at the end of an mRNA coding sequence, signals the termination of protein synthesis. According to a recent paper, both Pfizer and Moderna selected suboptimal stop codons
The COVID shots induce spike protein at levels unheard of in nature, and the spike protein is the toxic part of the virus responsible for the most unique effects of the virus, such as blood clotting disorders, neurological problems, and heart damage. To expect the COVID shot to not produce these kinds of effects would be rather naïve
Other significant threats include immune dysfunction and the flare-up of latent viral infections such as herpes and shingles. Coinfections, in turn, could accelerate other diseases. Herpesviruses, for example, have been implicated as a cause of both AIDS and chronic fatigue syndrome
“Let’s start with a thought experiment: If an engineering design flaw exists and no one measures it, can it really injure people or kill them?” a Twitter user named Ehden writes.1 He goes on to discuss an overlooked aspect of the COVID mRNA shots, something called “codon optimization,” which virtually guarantees unexpected results. Ehden explains:2
“Trying to tell your body to generate proteins is hard for many reasons. One of them is the fact that when you try to run the protein information via ribosomes which process that code and generate the protein, it can be very slow or can get stuck during the process.
Luckily, scientists found a way to overcome this problem, by doing code substitution: instead of using the original genetic code to generate the protein, they changed the letters in the code so the code would be optimized. This is known as Codon Optimization.”
COVID Shots Use Codon Optimization
A codon consists of three nucleotides, and nucleotides are the building blocks of DNA. An August 2021 article in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, addressed the use of codon optimization as follows:3
“The open reading frame of the mRNA vaccine is the most crucial component because it contains the coding sequence that is translated into protein.
Although the open reading frame is not as malleable as the non-coding regions, it can be optimized to increase translation without altering the protein sequence by replacing rarely used codons with more frequently occurring codons that encode the same amino acid residue.
For instance, the biopharmaceutical company CureVac AG discovered that human mRNA codons rarely have A or U at the third position and patented a strategy that replaces A or U at the third position in the open reading frame with G or C. CureVac used this optimization strategy for its SARS-CoV-2 candidate CVnCoV …
Although replacement of rare codons is an attractive optimization strategy, it must be used judiciously. This is because, in the case of some proteins, the slower translation rate of rare codons is necessary for proper protein folding.
To maximize translation, the mRNA sequence typically incorporates modified nucleosides, such as pseudouridine, N1-methylpseudouridine or other nucleoside analogues. Because all native mRNAs include modified nucleosides, the immune system has evolved to recognize unmodified single-stranded RNA, which is a hallmark of viral infection.
Specifically, unmodified mRNA is recognized by pattern recognition receptors, such as Toll-like receptor 3 (TLR3), TLR7 and TLR8, and the retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIGI) receptor. TLR7 and TLR8 receptors bind to guanosine- or uridine-rich regions in mRNA and trigger the production of type I interferons, such as IFNα, that can block mRNA translation.
The use of modified nucleosides, particularly modified uridine, prevents recognition by pattern recognition receptors, enabling sufficient levels of translation to produce prophylactic amounts of protein.
Both the Moderna and Pfizer–BioNTech SARS-CoV-2 vaccines … contain nucleoside-modified mRNAs. Another strategy to avoid detection by pattern recognition receptors, pioneered by CureVac, uses sequence engineering and codon optimization to deplete uridines by boosting the GC content of the vaccine mRNA.”
Much of this information was previously reviewed in my interview with Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., and Judy Mikovits, Ph.D. You can’t see the article but the video is embedded above. This study was published well after our interview and merely confirms what Seneff and Mikovits have unraveled in their research.
According to Ehden, 60.9% of the codons in COVID shots have been optimized, equivalent to 22.5% of the nucleotides, but he doesn’t specify which shot he’s talking about, or exactly where the data came from.
That all mRNA COVID shots are using codon optimization to one degree or another is clear, however. A July 2021 article4 in the journal Vaccines specifically evaluates and comments on the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA shots, noting:
“The design of Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines involves many different types of optimizations … The mRNA components of the vaccine need to have a 5′-UTR to load ribosomes efficiently onto the mRNA for translation initiation, optimized codon usage for efficient translation elongation, and optimal stop codon for efficient translation termination.
Both 5′-UTR and the downstream 3′-UTR should be optimized for mRNA stability. The replacement of uridine by N1-methylpseudourinine (Ψ) complicates some of these optimization processes because Ψ is more versatile in wobbling than U. Different optimizations can conflict with each other, and compromises would need to be made.
I highlight the similarities and differences between Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines and discuss the advantage and disadvantage of each to facilitate future vaccine improvement. In particular, I point out a few optimizations in the design of the two mRNA vaccines that have not been performed properly.”
What Can Go Wrong?
One key take-home from the Nature Reviews Drug Discovery article5 cited above is that replacing rare codons “must be used judiciously,” as rarer codons can have slower translation rates and a slowed-down rate is actually necessary to prevent protein misfolding.
An (adenine) and U (uracil) in the third position is rare, and the COVID shots replace these A’s and U’s with G’s (guanine) or C’s (cytosine). According to Seneff, this switch results in a 1,000-fold greater amount of spike protein compared to being infected with the actual virus.
What could go wrong? Well, just about anything. Again, the shot induces spike protein at levels unheard of in nature (even if SARS-CoV-2 is a “souped-up” manmade concoction), and the spike protein is the toxic part of the virus responsible for the most unique effects of the virus, such as the blood clotting disorders, neurological problems, and heart damage.
So, to expect the COVID shot to not produce these kinds of effects would be rather naïve. The codon switches might also result in protein misfolding, which is equally bad news. As explained by Seneff in our previous interview:
“The spike proteins that these mRNA vaccines are producing … aren’t able to go into the membrane, which I think is going to encourage it to become a problematic prion protein. Then, when you have inflammation, it upregulates alpha-synuclein [a neuronal protein that regulates synaptic traffic and neurotransmitter release].
So, you’re going to get alpha-synuclein drawn into misfolded spike proteins, turning into a mess inside the dendritic cells in the germinal centers in the spleen. And they’re going to package up all this crud into exosomes and release them. They’re then going to travel along the vagus nerve to the brainstem and cause things like Parkinson’s disease.
So, I think this is a complete setup for Parkinson’s disease … It’s going to push forward the date at which someone who has a propensity towards Parkinson’s is going to get it.
And it’s probably going to cause people to get Parkinson’s who never would have gotten it in the first place — especially if they keep getting the vaccine every year. Every year you do a booster, you bring the date that you’re going to get Parkinson’s ever closer.”
Immune Dysfunction and Viral Flare-Ups
Other significant threats include immune dysfunction and the flare-up of latent viral infections, which is something Mikovits has been warning about. In our previous interview, she noted:
“We use poly(I:C) [a toll-like receptor 3 agonist] to signal the cell to turn on the type I interferon pathway, and because [the spike protein your body produces in response to the COVID shot] is an unnatural synthetic envelope, you’re not seeing poly(I:C), and you’re not [activating] the Type I interferon pathway.
You’ve bypassed the plasmacytoid dendritic cell, which combined with IL-10, by talking to the regulatory B cells, decides what subclasses of antibodies to put out. So, you’ve bypassed the communication between the innate and adaptive immune response. You now miss the signaling of the endocannabinoid receptors …
A large part of Dr. [Francis] Ruscetti’s and my work over the last 30 years has been to show you don’t need an infectious transmissible virus — just pieces and parts of these viruses are worse, because they also turn on danger signals. They act like danger signals and pathogen-associated molecular patterns.
So, it synergistically leaves that inflammatory cytokine signature on that spins your innate immune response out of control. It just cannot keep up with the myelopoiesis [the production of cells in your bone marrow]. Hence you see a skew-away from the mesenchymal stem cell towards TGF-beta regulated hematopoietic stem cells.
This means you could see bleeding disorders on both ends. You can’t make enough firetrucks to send to the fire. Your innate immune response can’t get there, and then you’ve just got a total train wreck of your immune system.”
We’re now seeing reports of herpes and shingles infection following COVID-19 injection, and this is precisely what you can expect if your Type I interferon pathway is disabled. That’s not the end of your potential troubles, however, as these coinfections could accelerate other diseases as well.
For example, herpes viruses have been implicated as a trigger of both AIDS6 and myalgic encephalomyelitis7 (chronic fatigue syndrome or ME-CFS). According to Mikovits, these diseases don’t appear until viruses from different families partner up and retroviruses take out the Type 1 interferon pathway. Long term, the COVID mass injection campaign may be laying the foundation for a rapidly approaching avalanche of a wide range of debilitating chronic illnesses.
Are COVID Shots Appropriately Optimized?
As noted in the Vaccines article cited earlier, the codon optimization in the Pfizer and Moderna shots could be problematic:8
“As mammalian host cells attack unmodified exogeneous RNA, all U nucleotides were replaced by N1-methylpseudouridine (Ψ). However, Ψ wobbles more in base-pairing than U and can pair not only with A and G, but also, to a lesser extent, with C and U.
This is likely to increase misreading of a codon by a near-cognate tRNA. When nucleotide U in stop codons was replaced by Ψ, the rate of misreading of a stop codon by a near-cognate tRNAs increased.
Such readthrough events would not only decrease the number of immunogenic proteins, but also produce a longer protein of unknown fate with potentially deleterious effects …
The designers of both vaccines considered CGG as the optimal codon in the CGN codon family and recoded almost all CGN codons to CGG … [M]ultiple lines of evidence suggest that CGC is a better codon than CGG. The designers of the mRNA vaccines (especially mRNA-1273) chose a wrong codon as the optimal codon.”
The paper also points out the importance of vaccine mRNA to be translated accurately and not merely effectively, because if the wrong amino acids are incorporated, it can confuse your immune system and prevent it from identifying the correct targets.
Accuracy is also important in translation termination, and here it comes down to selecting the correct stop codons. Stop codons (UAA, UAG, or UGA), when present at the end of an mRNA coding sequence signals the termination of protein synthesis.
According to the author, both Pfizer and Moderna selected less than optimal stop codons. “UGA is a poor choice of a stop codon, and UGAU in Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines could be even worse,” she says.
What Health Problems Can We Expect to See More Of?
While the variety of diseases we may see a rise in as a result of this vaccination campaign is myriad, some general predictions can be made. We’ve already seen a massive uptick in blood clotting disorders, heart attacks, and stroke, as well as heart inflammation.
More long term, Seneff believes we’ll see a significant rise in cancer, accelerated Parkinson’s-like diseases, Huntington’s disease, and all types of autoimmune diseases and neurodegenerative disorders.
Mikovits also suspects many will develop chronic and debilitating diseases and will die prematurely. At the highest risk, she places those who are asymptomatically infected with XMRV and gammaretroviruses from contaminated conventional vaccines. The COVID shot will effectively accelerate their death by crippling their immune function. “The kids that are highly vaccinated, they’re ticking time bombs,” Mikovits said in my May 2021 interview.
What Are the Options?
While all of this is highly problematic, there is hope. From my perspective, I believe the best thing you can do is to build your innate immune system. To do that, you need to become metabolically flexible and optimize your diet. You’ll also want to make sure your vitamin D level is optimized to between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL (100 nmol/L to 150 nmol/L).
I also recommend time-restricted eating, where you eat all your meals for the day within a six- to an eight-hour window. Time-restricted eating will also upregulate autophagy, which may help digest and remove spike protein. Avoid all vegetable oils and processed foods. Focus on certified organic foods to minimize your glyphosate exposure.
Sauna therapy may also be helpful. It upregulates heat shock proteins, which can help refold misfolded proteins. They also tag damaged proteins and target them for removal.
The FDA can only grant emergency use authorization for a pandemic drug or vaccine if there’s no safe and effective preexisting treatment or alternative. Since there are several such alternatives, the FDA is legally required to revoke the emergency authorization for these shots
While the COVID injections have been characterized as being somewhere around 95% effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection, this is the relative risk reduction, which tells you very little about its usefulness. The absolute risk reduction is only around 1% for all currently available COVID shots
Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) refers to a condition where the vaccination augments your risk of serious infection. We are now starting to see evidence that ADE is occurring in the vaccinated population
One of the most common side effects of the COVID shots is abnormal blood clotting, which can result in strokes and heart attacks
Even micro clots that don’t completely block the blood vessel can have serious ramifications. You can check for the presence of micro clots by performing a D-dimer blood test. If your D-dimer is elevated, you have clotting somewhere in your body
In this interview, German microbiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi sifts through the facts and fictions of the coronavirus pandemic. Together with Karina Reiss, Ph.D., he’s written two books on this subject, starting with “Corona False Alarm? Facts and Figures,” published in October 2020, followed by “Corona Unmasked: New Facts and Figures.”
Bhakdi graduated from medical school in Germany in 1970. After a year of clinical work, he joined the Max Planck Institute of Immunobiology, where he remained for four years as a post-doc.
There, he also began researching immunology. Eventually, he ended up chairing the department of medicine, microbiology, and hygiene at the University of Mainz, where he worked for 22 years until his retirement nine years ago. During that time, Bhakdi also worked on vaccine development, and says he’s “certainly pro-vax with regards to the vaccinations that work and that are meaningful.”
Much of his research focused on what’s called the complement system. When activated, the complement system ends up working in such a way that it destroys rather than aids your cells. Interestingly enough, SARS-CoV-2 uses this very system to its advantage, turning your immune system toward a path of self-destruction.
The same self-destructive path also appears to be activated by the COVID shots, which is part of why Bhakdi believes they are the greatest threat humanity has ever faced. “It is our duty to aggressively inform people about the dangers that they are subjecting themselves and their loved ones to by this ‘vaccination,’” he says.
How Effective Are the COVID Shots?
While the COVID injections have been characterized as being somewhere around 95% effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection, this claim is the product of statistical obfuscation. In short, they’ve conflated relative risk reduction and absolute risk reduction. The absolute risk reduction is actually right around 1% for all currently available COVID shots.1
In “Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trials”2 Ron Brown, Ph.D. calculates the absolute risk reduction for Pfizer’s and Moderna’s injections, based on their own clinical trial data, so that they can be compared to the relative risk reduction reported by these companies. Here’s a summary of his findings:
In a July 1, 2021, commentary in The Lancet Microbe,3 Piero Olliaro, Els Torreele, and Michel Vaillant also argue for the use of absolute risk reduction when discussing vaccine efficacy with the public. They too went through the calculations, coming up with the following:
What Kind of Protection Do the COVID Shots Provide?
Aside from providing insignificant protection in terms of your absolute risk reduction, it’s important to realize that they do not provide immunity. All they can do is reduce the severity of the symptoms of infection. According to Bhakdi, they fail even at this.
“They showed absolutely zero [benefit in the clinical trials],” he says. “This is the ridiculousness. People don’t understand that they’re being fooled and have been fooled all along. Let’s take the one of these Pfizer trials: 20,000 healthy people were vaccinated and another 20,000 people were not vaccinated.
And then they observed, over a period of 12 weeks or so, how many cases they found in the vaccinated group and how many cases they found the non-vaccinated. What they found was that less than 1% of the vaccinated group got COVID-19 and less than 1% in the non-vaccinated group also got COVID-19.
The difference was 0.8 to 0.1%, which is nothing, considering the fact that they were not even looking at severe cases. They were looking at people with a positive PCR test — which as we all now know is worthless — plus one symptom, which could be cough or fever.
That is not a severe case of COVID-19. Any vaccination that is going to get authorized must be shown to protect against severe illness and death, and this has definitely not been shown. So, forget authorization. It can’t be authorized, not by any normal means.
Now [the COVID injections do not have] full authorization, it’s an emergency authorization, which again is absolute bullshit, since we know the infection fatality rate of this disease or virus is not greater than that of seasonal flu. John Ioannidis has published these numbers, which have never been contested by anyone in the world and cannot be contested.
If you are under 70 years of age and have no severe preexisting illness, you can hardly die [from SARS-CoV-2 infection]. So, there is no fatality rate that can be reduced.
And for people who are elderly and have preexisting illness, as we know from Dr. Peter McCullough and his colleagues’ work, there are very good means and medicines to treat this virus so that the fatality rates go down another 70 to 80%, which means there is no ground for emergency use whatsoever.
This means the FDA should be able to be forced to retract this emergency use authorization — unless they are in league with whoever wants to do this.”
I neglected to follow up on his comment about 40,000 people being equally divided between the injection and no injection groups in the COVID injection trials. A few months ago, they actually abandoned the non-injection arm of the trial, so no there is no control group anymore.
The justification was that the injection was too important to deny it to the control group. It’s just another sneaky way to skirt around reporting all the adverse effects occurring in the injection group.
That said, it’s worth repeating that the FDA can only grant emergency use authorization for a pandemic drug or vaccine if there’s no safe and effective preexisting treatment or alternative. Since there are several such alternatives, the FDA is legally required to revoke the emergency authorization for these shots.
Evidence of Increased Infection Risk After Injection
Presently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claims some 95% of SARS-CoV-2 infections resulting in hospitalization are occurring among the unvaccinated. This too is statistical fiction, as they’re using data from January through June 2021, when most of the American public were unvaccinated.
Looking at more recent data, we’re finding that the majority of severe cases and hospitalizations are actually occurring among those that received the COVID jab. Unfortunately, as noted by Bhakdi:
“It’s all manipulated. And, if someone wants to manipulate something and are in a position to then propagate it, you have no chance of analyzing it and telling people because we have no voice in this affair. When we stand up and tell people this, they just turn around and say that’s not the truth.”
Disturbingly, we’re now starting to see the first indications of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), which many scientists were concerned about from the very beginning. India, for example, where 10% of the population has been “vaccinated,” is now seeing very severe cases of COVID-19. Bhakdi says:
“What we’re witnessing in India and probably also in Israel is the immune dependent enhancement of disease … It’s bound to happen. So, the people who are getting vaccinated now have to be fearful of the next wave of genuine infections, whether it’s [SARS-CoV-2 variants] or any other coronaviruses, because they’re all related and they will all be subject to immune dependent enhancement, obviously.”
Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), or paradoxical immune enhancement (PIE) refers to a condition where the vaccination results in the complete opposite of what you’re looking for. Rather than protect against the infection, the vaccine augments and worsens the infection.
ADE can occur through more than one mechanism, and Bhakdi is of the opinion that the enhancement is primarily due to over-reactive killer lymphocytes and secondary complement activation, both of which cause severe damage.
Antibodies Versus Lymphocytes
“There are two major arms of defense against viral infection. One is the antibodies that, if they are present, may prevent the virus from entering your cells. These are so-called neutralizing antibodies, which the vaccination is supposed to [produce].
But the antibodies are not at the place that they are needed, which is on the surface of the airway epithelium. They are in the blood, but not at the surface of the epithelium where the virus arrives. The second arm of immune defense then comes into play, and these are the lymphocytes.
There are different types of lymphocytes and I will simplify matters by saying the important lymphocytes are the so-called killer lymphocytes that sense whenever a virus product is being produced in the cell. They will then destroy the cells that harbor the virus and thus the factory is closed and you get well again.
That is the mechanism for how we can survive viral infections of the lung, and this happens all the time. So, the lymphocytes, in contrast to the antibodies, recognize many, many, many parts of the proteins. So, if a virus changes a little bit, it doesn’t matter, because the waste products that are recognized by the killer lymphocytes remain very similar.
That is why all of us, and this is now known, all of us have memory lymphocytes in our lymph nodes and lymphoid organs that are trained to recognize these coronaviruses. And whether or not a mutant is there, it doesn’t really matter, because they will recognize a mutant or variant.”
According to Bhakdi, coronaviruses can only undergo point mutations, meaning only one nucleotide at a time can be changed. The influenza virus, meanwhile, can undergo more radical mutations. For example, a flu virus can completely change its spike protein by swapping spike proteins with another virus that is simultaneously present.
This sort of shift is not possible with coronaviruses. Therefore, you will never have leaps in antigenic changes either for antibodies or for T-cell killer lymphocytes. That’s why the background immunity that evolves during the lifetime of a human being is very broad and solid.
Natural Immunity Is Far Superior to Vaccine-Induced Immunity
One of the most egregious nullifications of medical scientific truth is the claim that COVID “vaccination” confers superior protection compared to the natural immunity you get after you’ve been exposed to the virus and recover. The reality is that natural immunity is infinitely more superior to the vaccine-induced protection you get from these shots, which is both narrow and temporary.
The COVID shot produces antibodies against just one of the viral proteins, the spike protein, whereas natural immunity produces antibodies against all parts of the virus, plus memory T cells. As noted by Bhakdi:
“The very fact that the World Health Organization has changed the definition of herd immunity … is such a scandal. I’m at a loss of words to describe how ridiculous I find this all, that this is being accepted by our colleagues. How can the physicians and scientists of the world bear to listen to all this nonsense?”
How the COVID Shot Causes Damage
As explained by Bhakdi, when you get a COVID shot, genetic instructions are being injected into your deltoid muscle. Muscle drains into your lymph nodes, which in turn can enter your bloodstream. There may also be direct translocation from the muscle into smaller blood vessels.
Animal data submitted by Pfizer to Japanese authorities show the mRNA appeared within the blood within one or two hours of injection. The rapidity of it suggests the nanoparticles are translocated from the muscle directly into the blood, bypassing the lymph nodes.
Once inside your bloodstream, the genetic instructions are delivered to the cells available, namely your endothelial cells. These are the cells that line your blood vessels. These cells then start producing spike protein, as per the mRNA instructions. As the name implies, the spike protein looks like a sharp spike protruding from the cell wall, into the bloodstream.
Since they are not supposed to be there, your killer lymphocytes rush to the area, thinking the cells are infected. The killer lymphocytes attack the cells, which causes damage to the cell wall. This damage, in turn, provokes clot formation. We’re now seeing evidence that COVID shots are causing all manner of clotting issues, from microsized clots to massive clots stretching a foot or more in length.
Of course, when a large enough clot occurs in the heart, you end up with a heart attack. In the brain, you end up with a stroke. But even micro clots that don’t completely block the blood vessel can have serious ramifications. You can check for the presence of micro clots by performing a D-dimer blood test. If your D-dimer is elevated, you have clotting somewhere in your body.
How Vaccine-Induced Antibodies Can Cause Harm
But that’s not all. The anti-spike protein antibodies can also be harmful. Bhakdi explains:
“The other thing that has now emerged is just as frightening [as the clotting problem]. One to two weeks after the first jab, you start making antibodies in large amounts.
Now, when the second jab is done, and the spike proteins starts to project from the walls of your vessels into your bloodstream, it is not only met by the killer lymphocytes, but now the antibodies are also there and the antibodies activate [the] complement [system].
That was my first field of research. The first cascade system is the clotting system. Turn it on and the blood will clot. If you turn on the complement system with the antibodies that bind to your vessel wall, then this complement system will start creating holes in the vessel wall.
And you see these patients who have bleeding in the skin. Ask, where does that come from? Well, if you go around riddling your vessels with holes, you [get bleeding]. If the holes riddle vessels of the liver, or the pancreas or the brain, then the blood will seep through the vessels into the tissues …
[The COVID injections] are in your bloodstream for at least a week, and they will seep into any organ. And when those [organ] cells then start to make the spike protein themselves, then the killer lymphocytes will also seek and destroy them [in that organ, creating more damage and subsequent clotting].
What we are witnessing is one of the most fascinating experiments that could lead to massive autoimmune disease. When this will happen, God knows. And what this will lead to, God knows.”
COVID Jab May Trigger Latent Viruses and Cancer
The COVID jabs can also decimate your lymph nodes, as your lymph nodes are full of lymphocytes and other immune cells. Some of the lymphocytes will die immediately upon contact, causing inflammation.
Cells that don’t die and take up the mRNA and start producing spike protein will be recognized as virus producers and get attacked by the complement system. It essentially creates a war between some immune cells against other immune cells. As a result of this attack, your lymph nodes swell and become painful.
This is a serious problem, as the lymphocytes in your lymph nodes are lifelong sentinels that keep latent infection such as shingles under control. When they malfunction or are destroyed, these latent viruses can activate. This is why we’re seeing reports of shingles, lupus, herpes, Epstein-Barr, tuberculosis, and other infections emerge as a side effect of the shots. Of course, certain cancers can also be affected.
“As we all know, tumors are forming every day in our bodies, but those tumor cells are recognized by our lymphocytes and then they’re snuffed out,” Bhakdi says. “So, I am worried sick that the world is being goaded into taking something into the body that is going to change the whole face of medicine.”
Informed Consent Is Virtually Impossible
After giving this issue a great deal of thought, Bhakdi is convinced that the COVID injection campaign must be stopped.
“Gene-based vaccines are an absolute danger to mankind and their use at present violates the Nuremberg codex, such that everyone who is propagating their use should be put before tribunal,” Bhakdi says.
“Especially the vaccination of children is something that is so criminal that I have no words to express my horror … We are horribly worried that there’s going to be an impact on fertility. And this will be seen in years or decades from now. And this is potentially one of the greatest crimes, simply one of the greatest crimes imaginable …
As we all know, it is laid down by the Nuremberg codex that in case experiments are to be conducted in humans, this can only be performed with informed consent.
Informed consent means that the person to be vaccinated has to be informed about all the risks, the risk benefit ratios, the potential dangers and what is known about side effects. This cannot be done with children, because children are not in the position to understand it.
Therefore, they cannot give informed consent. Therefore, they cannot be vaccinated. If anyone does that, he should be set before a tribunal. If grownups have been informed and want to get the shot, that’s all right. But don’t force anyone to get the shot. It has to be by informed consent only.”
Of course, informed consent is also virtually impossible to even for adults, as they’re only given one side of the story. All side effects and risks are censored virtually everywhere and discussions about them are banned. The U.S. government is even pushing to criminalize discussion about COVID injection risks.
Where Do We Go From Here?
If you’ve already gotten one or two shots, there’s nothing you can do about that. Certainly, do not get a booster, as each booster is undoubtedly going to magnify the damage.
“In the end, I predict that we’re going to see mass illnesses and deaths among people who normally would have wonderful lives ahead of them,” Bhakdi says. The question on people’s minds is, can anything be done to reverse the damage from these shots? As yet, we do not know.
However, if you have received one or more shots and develop symptoms of an infection, Bhakdi recommends treatment with hydroxychloroquine and/or ivermectin, such as the Zelenko protocol,4 and the MATH+ protocols,5 which have proven their effectiveness. It’s important to realize you may actually be more prone to serious infection, not less.
Nebulized hydrogen peroxide can also be used for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, as detailed in Dr. David Brownstein’s case paper6 and Dr. Thomas Levy’s free e-book, “Rapid Virus Recovery.” Whichever treatment protocol you use, make sure you begin treatment as soon as possible, ideally at the first onset of symptoms.
A newly published medical study found that infection from COVID-19 confers considerably longer-lasting and stronger protection against the Delta variant of the virus than vaccines.
“The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, according to a large Israeli study that some scientists wish came with a ‘Don’t try this at home’ label,” the Scientific Americanreported Thursday. “The newly released data show people who once had a SARS-CoV-2 infection were much less likely than vaccinated people to get Delta, develop symptoms from it, or become hospitalized with serious COVID-19.”
Put another way, vaccinated individuals were 27 times more likely to get a symptomatic COVID infection than those with natural immunity from COVID.
In Israel, vaccinated individuals had 27 times higher risk of symptomatic COVID infection compared to those with natural immunity from prior COVID disease [95%CI:13-57, adjusted for time of vaccine/disease]. No COVID deaths in either group.https://t.co/hopImCD1D0
The findings come as many governments around the world are demanding citizens acquire “vaccine passports” to travel. New York City, France, and the Canadian provinces of Quebec and British Columbia are among those who have recently embraced vaccine passports.
Vaccine passports are morally dubious for many reasons, not the least of which is that freedom of movement is a basic human right. However, vaccine passports become even more senseless in light of the new findings out of Israel and revelations from the CDC, some say.
Harvard Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff said research showing that natural immunity offers exponentially more protection than vaccines means vaccine passports are both unscientific and discriminatory since they disproportionately affect working-class individuals.
“Prior COVID disease (many working-class) provides better immunity than vaccines (many professionals), so vaccine mandates are not only scientific nonsense, they are also discriminatory and unethical,” Kulldorff, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist, observed on Twitter.
Prior COVID disease (many working class) provides better immunity than vaccines (many professionals), so vaccine mandates are not only scientific nonsense, they are also discriminatory and unethical. https://t.co/d14kTPnCWk
Nor is the study out of Israel a one-off. Media reports show that no fewer than 15 academic studies have found that natural immunity offers immense protection from COVID-19.
“Among the most fraudulent messages of the CDC's campaign of deceit is to force the vaccine on those with prior infection, who have a greater degree of protection against all versions of the virus than those with any of the vaccines.”
These data suggest that vaccinated individuals are still spreading the virus much like unvaccinated individuals.
The Bottom Line
Vaccine passports would be immoral and a massive government overreach even in the absence of these findings. There is simply no historical parallel for governments attempting to restrict the movements of healthy people over a respiratory virus in this manner.
Yet the justification for vaccine passports becomes not just wrong but absurd in light of these new revelations.
People who have had COVID already have significantly more protection from the virus than people who’ve been vaccinated. Meanwhile, people who’ve not had COVID and choose to not get vaccinated may or may not be making an unwise decision. But if they are, they are principally putting only themselves at risk.
THE STORY:Want to know what’s really in the 4 main COVID fake vaccines? This scientist investigated them and published his results.
THE IMPLICATIONS:This scientific and precise analysis demonstrates the complete and utter toxicity of the experimental COVID non-vaccine drug. People need to know this before putting this stuff into their bloodstream.
COVID vax ingredients have been revealed
by a science team led by Dr. Robert O. Young. Young has done great work since the start of the scamdemic by pointing out that COVID is a collection of symptoms caused by pathological blood coagulation or blood clotting, and not caused by a virus, since SARS-CoV-2 (like HIV) is a virus that has never been purified, isolated and proven to exist. Now, in a bombshell revelation, Young and his team have used advanced microscopy and other analytical techniques to inspect the contents of the 4 major COVID non-vaccines going around – Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Johnson & Johnson – and documented truly shocking discoveries. They found graphene oxide, nanometals, PEG (polyethylene glycol), and even (in the case of the Pfizer fake-vaccine) parasites! Young writes that he utilized “instrumentation includ[ing] Optical Microscopy, Bright–Field Microscopy, pHase Contrast Microscopy, Dark–Field Microscopy, UV absorbance, and Fluorescence Spectroscopy, Scanning Electron Microscopy, Transmission Electron Microscopy, Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy, X-rayDiffractometer, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance instruments” to verify the contents of the fake-vaccines. Young is very open about his work and methods so the scientific world can easily set up experiments to test reproducibility.
COVID Vax Ingredients Exposed: Graphene Oxide
In confirmation of the wonderful research done by La Quinta Columna (The 5th Column) who broke the news that the non-vaccines contained graphene oxide, Young verified that is indeed the case. As a reminder, graphene oxide is highly toxic to the human body. Graphene oxide nanoparticles have many applications such as being used as batteries, supercapacitors, and for drug delivery – and as biosensors, which is the whole reason that is being placed into the vial to be injected in the first place. Numerous studies have affirmed that graphene is toxic to the immune system and the bodyin general. Young writes the following (rGO stands for reduced graphene oxide):
“The observations under optical microscopy revealed and abundance of transparent 2D laminar objects that show great similarity with images from literature (Xu et al, 2019), and with images obtained from rGO standard (SIGMA)(Figures 1, 2 and 3). Images of big transparent sheets of variable size and shapes were obtained, showing corrugated and flat, irregular. Smaller sheets of polygonal shapes, also similar to flakes described in literature (Xu et al, 2019) can be revealed with pHase Contrast and Dark-Field microscopy.”
Below are 2 images from his work, with the first showing the similarity between the graphene oxide found in the Pfizer non-vaccine (left) compared to a standard (right). The second image shows the effect of graphene oxide on human blood cells, causing the Rouleau effect of clotted cells that look like stacked coins.
Graphene oxide in Pfizer COVID vaccine (left) and standard (right). Image credit: Dr. Robert Young
The effect of graphene oxide on blood cells: the Rouleau effect. Image credit: Dr. Robert O. Young
Young also used Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) and observed “an intricate matrix or mesh of folded translucent flexible rGO sheets with a mixture of darker multilayer agglomerations.” See his work for all the evidence.
COVID Vax Ingredients Exposed: Nanometals
Throughout Young’s report, he repeatedly shows images of aggregates that he discovered in the non-vaccines. These aggregates are often a combination of both light and heavy metals, including such things as aluminum, titanium, vanadium, chromium, iron, nickel, and copper, or even a combination of other elements entirely, such as bismuth, carbon, sodium, and nitrogen. Why are these nanometals and nanoparticulates part of the fake-vaccine formulation? Is it to induce vaccine recipients to become more magnetic, to work with Smart Grid/5G systems, to become more machine-like, or all of the above?
COVID Vax Ingredients Exposed: PEG
Young writes that he used XRF (X-ray fluorescence) to detect polyethylene glycol and ethylene alcohol in the Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZeneca “vaccines”. PEG and ethylene alcohol are both known as carcinogenic and genotoxic.
COVID Vax Ingredients Exposed: Parasites
Young’s analysis also exposed an inconvenient fact: the Pfizer fake vaccine contained a parasite (see image below). What possible reason could there be for Big Pharma companies to manufacture parasite-containing vaccines? Why on Earth are so many people so quick to inject this toxic stuff straight into their bloodstream without investigation and research?
On a similar note, interestingly enough, Japan just halted 2 separate shipments of the Moderna fake vaccine in Okinawa, after black substances were found in the vials (those wanting to go deep down the rabbit hole may want to investigate the black goo-connection here). This RT article states that “black substances were discovered in syringes and a vial, while unidentified pink substances were spotted in a different syringe with a Moderna vaccine dose, according to Japan’s public broadcaster, NHK.” In another RT article it states that “the decision to suspend a total of 2.6 million doses of the Moderna vaccines comes after 1.63 million shots were halted last week following the discovery of contaminants in some vials in a batch that was shipped to more than 860 vaccination centers across the country.”
A parasite found in the Pfizer vaccine. Image credit: Dr. Robert Young
The COVID Fake-Vaccines is Nanotech Drugs Functioning as Gene Therapy
Young spells out clearly what we must always remember about the COVID fake vaccines:
“[The 4 COVID vaccines] … are NOTvaccines but nanotechnological drugs working as a genetic therapy.The name “vaccine” is likely to be an escamotage (trickery) used forbureaucratic and technocratic reasons in order to receive an urgent approval, ignoring all the normal rules necessary for new drugs, especially for those involving novel nanotechnological mechanisms which have never been developed nor experienced by humans any where, at any time in the history of World.
All these so–called vaccines” are patented and therefore their actual content is kept secret even to the buyers, who, of course, are using taxpayers’ money. So, consumers (taxpayers) have no information about what they are receiving in their bodies by inoculation. Humanity is kept in the dark as far as the nanoparticulate technological processes involved are concerning, on the negative effects on the cells of the body, but mostly on the possible magneticotoxic, cytotoxic and genotoxic nano–bio-interaction effect on the blood and body cells.”
One of the key propaganda pieces and buzzphrases through this plandemic has been to trust science. Of course, when NWO (New World Order) mouthpieces say that, they mean they want you to trust their science, not objective science. Dr. Young’s science is first class, and the results are devastating for Big Pharma, governments, and all those pushing the agenda. This shines more light on the darkness of Operation Coronavirus. Informed consent is the basis of medical freedom. Please share this information far and wide so people can actually know what they may be putting in their bodies if they so choose.
Judy K. Brown’s book, “Perversion of Justice: The Jeffrey Epstein Story,” details the conspiracy of silence surrounding the biggest alleged pedophile and sex trafficking mogul of our time, Jeffrey Epstein, and his network of rich and powerful people, which includes Bill Gates
Corruption is rampant throughout our public health agencies and medical organizations. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funds the Food and Drug Administration in the U.S. and the Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency in the U.K.
The Gates Foundation also owns shares in Pfizer and BioNTech, raising questions about corruption in the FDA and IHMA, both of which appear to have given Pfizer’s COVID shot preferential treatment despite overwhelming safety concerns and questionable effectiveness
The Gates Foundation is also a primary funder of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, which was responsible for the grossly inaccurate modeling that led to several governors ordering COVID patients to be sent into nursing homes
Gates is now calling on the western world to sacrifice itself in order to stave off climate change. But the climate change crisis, like the COVID pandemic, is a red herring, used to justify the implementation of the Great Reset
In the video above, Russell Brand discusses Judy K. Brown’s book, “Perversion of Justice: The Jeffrey Epstein Story,” which details the conspiracy of silence surrounding the biggest alleged pedophile and sex trafficking mogul of our time, Jeffrey Epstein.
The media’s refusal to dig into the Epstein story, Brand says, suggests the media are part of a corrupted establishment that protects the rich and powerful, no matter what. One rich and powerful person who enjoys the legacy media’s protection is Bill Gates.
Gates and Epstein
Brand cites an article in The Daily Beast,1 claiming Gates had dozens of meetings with Epstein between 2011 and 2014 alone, typically at Epstein’s Manhattan home. When news of Gates’ relationship with Epstein emerged in 2019, Melinda Gates reportedly contacted a divorce attorney.
According to The Daily Beast, Gates “encouraged Epstein to rehabilitate his image in the media.” If true, this suggests Gates may indeed have been closer to Epstein than he’s been letting on. An anonymous source who claims to have been present at several of the meetings has said the two were “very close.”
The Daily Beast also claims that “people familiar with the matter said Gates found freedom in Epstein’s lair, where he met a rotating cast of bold-faced names and discussed worldly issues between rounds of jokes and gossip — a ‘men’s club’ atmosphere that irritated Melinda.”
Speaking with CNN anchor Anderson Cooper, Gates dismisses his relationship with the notorious sex trafficker of minors as nothing more than a naïve attempt to secure funding for his public health efforts.
Seeing how the extent of Epstein’s interest in public health seems to have been an obsession with the idea of creating his own race of superhumans by having sex slaves give birth to his babies,2 this excuse seems flimsy at best. Epstein also donated money to the Worldwide Transhumanist Association.3
Gates is now trying to wiggle out from beneath Epstein’s dark shadow, calling their meetings “a mistake.” Brand may be right, however, when he says that the story of Gates’ relationship with Epstein really highlights the importance of retaining our autonomy, and not blindly follow people who claim superiority over us.
Gates is as flawed as anyone else, and perhaps more so, as wealth and power breed corruption, and allow people to pursue interests that would not or could not be pursued unless you have the money and influence to ensure secrecy.
Gates Funds UK and US Public Health Organizations
If we’ve learned anything over the past year and a half, it’s that corruption is rampant throughout our public health agencies and medical organizations. As reported by Armstrong Economics, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funds — and therefore has significant influence over — public health agencies in both the United States and the U.K.:4
“The [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] has given full approval to Gates’s vaccines because it has been under tremendous political pressure to do so. Even CNBC reported that ‘Federal health officials had been under mounting pressure from the scientific community and advocacy groups to fully approve Pfizer and BioNTech’s vaccine …’
Meanwhile, in London, an investigation has revealed that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are the primary funders of the UK’s Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency just as they are [of] the FDA in the United States.
The SEC has done absolutely NOTHING about insider information since Gates is also a MAJOR shareholder in Pfizer / BioNTech mRNA. There are reliable medical organizations opposing these vaccines despite the approval by two regulatory agencies that are taking money from Gates which only introduces conflicts of interest and potential corruption …
The FDA has NEVER approved a completely new type of medicine in less than one year, which raises serious questions about corruption. The average time it takes to get approval from the FDA is 12 years!”
The London investigation they’re referring to was published in The Daily Expose August 20, 2021.5 The MHRA, the British version of the U.S. FDA, actually receives most of its funding from the Gates Foundation, the investigation found.
June 4, 2021, the MHRA extended its emergency use authorization of the Pfizer jab to children between the ages of 12 and 15, despite known risks of heart inflammation. The Daily Expose writes:6
“At the time, the Chief Executive of the MHRA, Dr. June Raine said the MHRA had ‘carefully reviewed clinical trial data in children aged 12 to 15 years and have concluded that the Pfizer vaccine is safe and effective in this age group and that the benefits outweigh any risk.’
We are left wondering if Dr. June Raine and the MHRA have even read the results of the extremely short and small study.7 If they have then they would have seen that 86% of children in the study suffered an adverse reaction ranging from mild to extremely serious.8
Just 1,127 children took part of the trial, however only 1,097 children completed the trial, with 30 of them not participating after being given the first dose of the Pfizer jab. The results do not state why the 30 children did not go on to complete the trial … Can we really trust the MHRA to remain impartial when its primary funder is the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, who also own shares in Pfizer and BioNTech? We don’t think so.”
Gates Is Heavily Invested in Drug Companies
The Gates Foundation also owns “major shares” in both Pfizer and BioNTech, which jointly developed a COVID shot that August 23, 2021, was granted full approval9 for use in people 16 years of age and older by the FDA.
The Gates Foundation started shifting its investments into pharmaceuticals in 2002. That year, Gates invested $205 million into nine large drug companies, including Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. “The decision to take stakes in individual firms appears to be a shift in strategy, and for the first time aligns the charity’s interests with those of the drugs firms,” The Guardian reported at the time.10
According to The Motley Fool,11 Gates initially invested in Pfizer “with the stated intention of ‘expand[ing] access to the pharmaceutical company’s all-in-one injectable contraceptive.” Once the COVID-19 pandemic broke out, Gates predicted early on that Pfizer would be the first to get emergency use approval.
The Gates Foundation didn’t pick up BioNTech shares until September 2019, just three months before the COVID pandemic emerged, when it bought $55 million worth of shares.
Gates-Funded Forecasting Led to Nursing Home ‘Death Warrants’
The Gates Foundation has also shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars to the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), which was responsible for the ill-fatedly inaccurate modeling that led to several governors issuing “nursing home death warrants.” The Strategic Culture Foundation writes:12
“New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is finally facing the heat for his botched and criminally negligent coronavirus response policies, yet no one seems to be asking why Cuomo and select governors made the fateful decisions that led to the excess deaths …
In March and early April, politicians were informed by the modeling ‘experts’ at Gates-funded IHME that their hospitals were about to be completely overrun by coronavirus patients.
Modelers from IHME claimed this massive surge would cause hospitals to run out of lifesaving equipment in a matter of days, not weeks or months. Time was of the essence, and now was the time for rapid decision making, the modelers claimed. On two separate April 1 and April 2 press conferences, Cuomo made clear that his policy decisions were based off of the IHME model.”
In one of those press conferences, Cuomo thanked the Gates Foundation “for the national service that they’ve done.” The Pennsylvania Health Department also used IHME models to navigate its response. Even federal bureaucrats like Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx, both of whom have personal ties to Gates as well, leaning on the IHME forecasts to justify lockdowns, business closures, and curfews.
In the end, the IHME models didn’t pan out. They weren’t even close. “For example, IHME used a 3+% death rate when the real number ‘from’ COVID-19 is only around 0.1%,” Strategic Culture Foundation writes, adding:13
“The buck does indeed stop with the elected leaders who made the fateful decisions to send sick COVID patients into nursing homes, lock down their states, and mask up their citizens in perpetuity, but that’s only half of the story.
The bad data they used almost exclusively came from the Gates network, which has trafficked in pseudoscience and has demonstrated complete incompetence and reckless forecasting since the beginning of last year.”
Not surprisingly, Gates has stayed mum on the gross failures of the IHME. As noted by the Strategic Culture Foundation,14 he has “seamlessly washed his hands of COVID mania and has moved on to demanding that the western world sacrifice itself in the name of the latest ‘crisis’ that is climate change.”
COVID-19 — A Launch Pad for the Great Reset
Of course, Gates’ “green” plans will also grow his own wealth, just like the COVID pandemic has done. Indeed, the so-called “climate change crisis” is nothing but another tool to implement the Great Reset, which will forever alter the face of society and commerce, shifting virtually all wealth and ownership to a few technocrats at the top, leaving regular people with no wealth or freedom to speak of.
Considering Gates’ position within the technocratic elite, it’s no surprise his fingerprints can be found on all the necessary chess pieces of this global chess game. As you may recall, the Gates Foundation co-sponsored the pandemic preparedness simulation for a “novel coronavirus,” known as Event 201, in October 2019 along with the World Economic Forum and Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.
The event eerily predicted what would happen just 10 weeks later, when COVID-19 appeared. Both the Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum are also partnered15 with the United Nations which, while keeping a relatively low profile, appears to be at the heart of the globalist takeover agenda.
The World Economic Forum, while a private organization, works as the social and economic branch of the U.N. and is a key driving force behind modern technocracy and the Great Reset agenda. Its founder and chairman, Klaus Schwab, publicly declared the need for a global “reset” to restore order in June 2020.16
Technocratic rule, which is what the Great Reset will bring about, hinges on the use of technology — in particular, artificial intelligence, digital surveillance, and Big Data collection (which is what 5G is for) — and the digitization of industry, banking and government, which in turn allows for the automation of social engineering and social rule (although that part is never expressly stated).
Beyond pandemic preparedness and response, the justification for the implementation of the Great Reset agenda in its totality will be climate change. The Great Reset, sometimes referred to as the “build back better” plan, specifically calls for all nations to implement “green” regulations and “sustainable development goals”17,18 as part of the post-COVID recovery effort.
But the end goal is far from what the typical person envisions when they hear these plans. The end goal is to turn us into serfs without rights to privacy, private ownership, or anything else. In short, the pandemic is being used to destroy the local economies around the world, which will then allow the World Economic Forum to come in and “rescue” debt-ridden countries. The price for this salvation is your liberty.
The Great Reset
The Great Reset is not some wild conspiracy theory but a publicly released agenda that is moving forward, whether we like it or not.
Many world leaders have spoken about it in an official capacity, and in June 2020, Zia Khan, senior vice president of innovation at the Rockefeller Foundation penned the article19 “Rebuilding Toward the Great Reset: Crisis, COVID-19, and the Sustainable Development Goals,” reviewing the “social crisis” necessitating the world’s acceptance of new world order.
The article was co-written with John McArthur, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, which is one of several technocratic think-tanks. Keeping in mind what I’ve just said about what the Great Reset is really all about, and the justifications used to implement the theft of wealth and freedom, read how they posit these changes as being in your best interest:
“Upheaval can yield new understanding and opportunity. Outdated or unjust norms can succumb to society’s pressing need for better approaches. For example, the need for massive and urgent government intervention has drawn fresh attention to social safety nets and the possibility of dramatic policy enhancements.
Tragic consequences of racial discrimination have catapulted awareness of systemic problems and triggered prospects for much-needed social reforms. Rapid environmental improvements linked to economic shutdown have rekindled consciousness of the profound interconnections between ecosystems, economies, and societies …
Rather than passively allowing norms to evolve through inertia or randomness, we can all pursue actions for Response and, soon enough, Recovery in a manner that improve the odds of a Reset toward better long-term outcomes.
Fortunately, we already have a strong starting point for what the world’s economic, social, and environmental outcomes should be. Five years ago, in 2015, all 193 UN member states agreed on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a common set of priorities to be achieved in all countries by 2030.”
I believe the only way to stop it is through our collective responses to the various pieces and parts of the plan that are being rolled out. They want you to believe that none of the things being introduced have anything to do with each other but, in fact, they are all pieces of the same puzzle.
It would be a tragic mistake to trust Gates or any of the other players that are being brought before us as saviors of the day. They’re all wolves in sheep’s clothing. The Great Reset is at our doorstep, and your freedom, and that of future generations, hinges on you fighting to keep it.20
Our best bet right now is to involve ourselves in local governance, be it your child’s school board or local government, and engaging in peaceful civil disobedience.
Gates may be presented as an all-knowing genius whose mission is to keep us healthy and safe, but his activities are inconsistent with and fail to match his carefully manufactured persona. Again and again, Gates has wielded influence in matters where lies have been told and public health and human rights have been decimated for profit.