Originally published: September 1, 2020

At 79 years old, Dr. Anthony Fauci — who has served as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984 — has yet to come out with the “Big One” — a vaccine or infectious disease treatment that will allow him to retire with a victory under his belt.

He failed to create a successful vaccine for AIDS, SARS, MERS and Ebola. A COVID-19 vaccine is essentially his last chance to go out in a blaze of glory. As evidenced by his history, he will stop at nothing to protect Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine and Gilead’s antiviral Remdesivir.

He even threw tried and true pandemic protocols out the window when COVID-19 hit, turning into an unquestioning spokesman for draconian liberty-stripping measures instead. To echo a question asked by Dr. Sal Martingano in his article,¹ “Dr. Fauci: ‘Expert’ or Co-Conspirator,” why are we not questioning this so-called expert?

Fauci ‘Has Been Wrong About Everything’

The risk we take when listening to Fauci is that, so far, he’s been wrong about most things. In a July 14, 2020, “Opposing View” editorial in USA Today, White House adviser Peter Navarro, director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, stated that Fauci “has been wrong about everything that I have interacted with him on.”² According to Navarro, Fauci’s errors in judgment include:³

Navarro continues:⁹

“Now Fauci says a falling mortality rate doesn’t matter when it is the single most important statistic to help guide the pace of our economic reopening. The lower the mortality rate, the faster and more we can open. So when you ask me whether I listen to Dr. Fauci’s advice, my answer is: only with skepticism and caution.”

Fauci Has Done Nothing to Help Unite the Country

While Fauci claims to be exasperated by how political the pandemic has become,¹⁰ before Instagram banned him from the platform and took the post down,¹¹ Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pointed out in an August 2, 2020, Instagram post¹² that Fauci himself is, at least in part, part of the problem, as his double standards on hydroxychloroquine have done much to polarize and divide the nation:

“Fauci insists he will not approve HCQ for COVID until its efficacy is proven in ‘randomized, double blind placebo studies.’ To date, Dr. Fauci has never advocated such studies for any of the 72 vaccine doses added to the mandatory childhood schedule since he took over NIAID in 1984. Nor is he requiring them for the COVID vaccines currently racing for approval.

Why should chloroquine be the only remedy required to cross this high hurdle? HCQ is less in need of randomized placebo studies than any of these vaccines since its safety is well established after 60 years of use and decades on WHO’s listed of ‘essential medicines.’

Fauci’s peculiar hostility towards HCQ is consistent with his half century bias favoring vaccines and patent medicines. Dr. Fauci’s double standards create confusion, mistrust and polarization.”

In a June 10, 2020, article,¹³ Global Research also questioned Fauci’s many attempts to disparage the drug for no apparently valid reason; even promoting the fake (and ultimately retracted) Lancet study that claimed to show hydroxychloroquine was dangerous. At the end of the day, who benefits? Well, certainly it benefits the drug and vaccine industries, which seems to be where Fauci’s loyalties lie.

Fauci’s Bias Is Hard to Miss

While Fauci is not named on the patents of either Moderna’s vaccine or Remdesivir, the NIH does have a 50% stake in Moderna’s vaccine,¹⁴ and the recognition that would come with a successful vaccine launch would certainly include Fauci.

He also has lots to lose — if nothing else, his pride — if Remdesivir doesn’t become a blockbuster, as his NIAID is sponsoring the clinical trials.¹⁵ The NIAID also supported the original research into Remdesivir, when it was aimed at treating Ebola.¹⁶

His bias here is clear for anyone to see. April 29, 2020, he stated¹⁷ Remdesivir “has a clear-cut and significant positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery.” How good is that? Patients on the drug recovered in 11 days, on average, compared to 15 days among those receiving a placebo. Overall, the improvement rate for the drug was 31%.

Meanwhile, research¹⁸ now shows hydroxychloroquine reduced mortality by 50% when given early, and many doctors anecdotally claim survival rates close to 100%. This still isn’t good enough for Fauci, who continues insisting hydroxychloroquine is a bust.¹⁹

His stance on these two drugs certainly doesn’t make sense based on the data alone. But it does make sense if he wants (or has been instructed) to protect the profits of Remdesivir.

As director of NIAID, which has been part of Remdesivir’s development from the start, why wouldn’t he want to see it become a moneymaker for the agency he dedicated his career to? It also makes sense when you consider his primary job is to raise funds for biodefense research, primarily vaccines but also diagnostics and drug therapies.^20,21

Fauci Doubts Safety of Russian Vaccine

Early in August 2020, Russia announced they would begin vaccinating citizens with its own COVID-19 vaccine, despite not finishing large-scale human trials.²² The announcement drew skepticism from American infectious disease specialists, including Fauci, who said he has “serious doubts” that Russia’s COVID-19 vaccine is actually safe and effective.²³

He’s probably right on that point. It’s hard to imagine you can prove safety and effectiveness in a mere two months of trials. But the fast-tracked vaccine efforts of the U.S. and EU are hardly bound to be significantly better, considering the many shortcuts that are being taken.

Fauci Ignores Two Decades of Failed Coronavirus Vaccines

Despite being in a position to know better, Fauci conveniently ignores the many failed attempts to create other coronavirus vaccines over the past two decades, including vaccines against SARS and MERS. A paper²⁴ by Eriko Padron-Regalado, “Vaccines for SARS-CoV-2: Lessons From Other Coronavirus Strains” reviews some of these past experiences. As noted in the Conservative Review:²⁵

“Since their emergence in 2003 and 2012 respectively, no safe and efficacious human vaccines for either SARS-Cov1 or MERS have been developed.

Moreover, experimental non-human (animal model) evaluations of four SARS-Cov1 candidate vaccine types, revealed that despite conferring some protection against infection with SARS-Cov1, each also caused serious lung injury, caused by an overreaction of the immune system, upon viral challenge.²⁶

Identical ‘hypersensitive-type’ lung injury occurred²⁷ when mice were administered a candidate MERS-Cov vaccine, then challenged with infectious virus, negating the ostensible benefit achieved by their development of promising … ‘antibodies’ … which might have provided immunity to MERS-Cov.

These disappointing experimental observations must serve as a cautionary tale for SARS-Cov2 vaccination programs to control epidemic COVID-19 disease.”

NIAID Safety Controversies and Ethics Violations

When recently asked for a rebuttal to criticism of his leadership during the pandemic, Fauci replied, “I think you can trust me,” citing his long record of service in government medicine. However, that long service record is fraught with ethics and safety lapses.

For example, in 2005, NPR reported²⁸ the NIH tested novel AIDS drugs on hundreds of HIV-positive children in state foster care during the late 1980s and90s without assigning patient advocates to monitor the children’s health, as is required by law in most states.

Fauci was appointed director of the NIAID in 1984. The AIDS research was part of his research portfolio, and the AIDS research division reported directly to him, so these violations occurred on his watch.²⁹ In 2008, two NIH biomedical ethicists published a paper on the controversial practice of using wards of the state as guinea pigs, noting:³⁰

“Enrolling wards of the state in research raises two major concerns: the possibility that an unfair share of the burdens of research might fall on wards, and the need to ensure interests of individual wards are accounted for … Having special protections only for some categories is misguided. Furthermore, some of the existing protections ought to be strengthened.”

Under Fauci, the NIAID became the largest funder of HIV/AIDS in the world.³¹ Despite that, numerous articles over the years have discussed how AIDS activists have been less than satisfied with Fauci and the NIAID.^32,33,34 A 1986 article stated:³⁵

“If Fauci were less intent on amassing power within the federal health bureaucracy … he would have left AIDS treatment research with the NCI, where it began, relying on that institute’s proven expertise in organizing large, multisite clinical trials for cancer therapies.”

A July 23, 2020, article in Just the News lists several other safety and ethics problems that Fauci has been involved in through the years, including conflict of interest violations in vaccine research.³⁶

Just the News also interviewed NIAID chief of ethics and regulatory compliance Dr. Jonathan Fishbein, whom the NIAID was forced to reinstate in 2005 after it was determined that Fishbein had been wrongly fired in retaliation for raising concerns about lack of safety in some of the agency’s research:³⁷

“Fishbein said … Fauci failed to take responsibility for the managers and researchers working below him when signs of trouble emerged, allowing problems to persist until others intervened. ‘Fauci is all about Fauci,’ Fishbein said. ‘He loves being the headline. It’s his ego.’”

Fauci’s Connections to Wuhan Lab

By now, you probably also know that the NIAID funded gain-of-function research on coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. As reported by Newsweek:³⁸

“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.”

This money was not given directly, but rather funneled to the Wuhan lab via the EcoHealth Alliance. According to a recent report by The Wall Street Journal,³⁹ the NIH is now insisting EcoHealth Alliance submit all information and materials from the Wuhan lab before it’s allowed to resume funding.

Fauci is a longtime proponent of dangerous gain-of-function research. In 2003, he wrote an article⁴⁰ published in the journal Nature on how “the world needs new and creative ways to counter bioterrorism.”

“We will pursue innovative approaches for modulating innate immunity to induce and enhance protection against many biological pathogens, as well as simple and rapid molecularly based diagnostics to detect, characterize and quantify infectious threats,” Fauci wrote.

“These are lofty goals that may take many years to accomplish — but we must aspire to them. Third, we must enormously strengthen our interactions with the private sector, including biotechnology companies and large pharmaceutical corporations.

Many biodefence-related products that we are pursuing do not provide sufficient incentives for industry — the potential profit margin for companies is tenuous, and there is no guarantee that products would be used.

Therefore, we will seek non-traditional collaborations with industry, for example guaranteeing that products will be purchased if companies sign up … so that we can quickly make available effective vaccines and treatments …”

With that, there can be little question about which team Fauci is on. He’s on the side of drug and vaccine makers, and has been for decades. There’s no money to be made by either the agency or its private collaborators from natural products such as vitamin D, vitamin C, quercetin or its drug equivalent, hydroxychloroquine. All of these are dirt-cheap and off patent.

Prediction Track Record = Null

Fauci’s predictions for COVID-19 mortality have also turned out to be as inaccurate as all of his previous predictions. In 1987, he predicted heterosexual infection of HIV/AIDS would rise to 10% by 1991. It never rose above 4%.

He predicted the bird flu would result in 2 million to 7 million deaths. In the end, the avian H5N1 flu killed 440 worldwide. He sought billions of dollars to combat the threat of Zika, a virus that fizzled without making much of an impact anywhere.⁴¹

When you look at his track record, you realize he’s predicted “nightmare” scenarios for decades, none of which have materialized. Last but not least, Dr. Fauci serves on Bill Gates leadership council.

While it’s clear that the experimental COVID shots have killed a considerable number of people, the total death toll remains elusive, thanks to U.S. health agencies obfuscating, hiding and manipulating data.

That said, the most recent survey^1,2 — published in the peer-reviewed journal BMC Infectious Diseases — puts the death toll from the COVID jabs somewhere between 217,330 and 332,608 in 2021 alone. As noted by Steve Kirsch:³

“[We’ve] killed at least 217,000 Americans and seriously injured 33 million … in just the first year, and the CDC and FDA want to give you more shots … Since deaths from the vaccine were higher in 2022, most experts would estimate the all-cause mortality death toll from the COVID vaccines to be in the range of 500K to 600K.

So the global cost of life from these vaccines is on the order of 10 to 12 million people … These [data] are consistent with the numbers I’ve been saying for a long time. It’s not a coincidence.”

Survey: Why People Did or Did Not Get the Jab

Now, the slant of this paper is kind of interesting. The primary aim of it was to “identify the factors associated by American citizens with the decision to be vaccinated against COVID-19.”

The author was curious about why 31% of the U.S. population had declined the jab or not completed the primary series by November 2022, nearly two years into a massively advertised “vaccination” campaign.

Calculating the proportion of fatal events from the jab was secondary. As explained by the author, Mark Skidmore,⁴ Ph.D., an economics professor at Michigan State University:⁵

“A largely unexplored factor is the degree to which serious health problems arising from the COVID-19 illness or the COVID-19 vaccines among family and friends influences the decision to be vaccinated.

Serious illness due to COVID-19 would make vaccination more likely; the perceived benefits of avoiding COVID-19 through inoculation would be higher.

On the other hand, observing major health issues following COVID-19 inoculation within one’s social network would heighten the perceived risks of vaccination. Previous studies have not evaluated the degree to which experiences with the disease and vaccine injury influence vaccine status.

The main aim of this online survey of COVID-19 health experiences is to investigate the degree to which the COVID-19 disease and COVID-19 vaccine adverse events among friends and family, whether perceived or real, influenced inoculation decisions. The second aim of this work is to estimate the total number of COVID-19 vaccine induced fatalities nationwide from the survey.”

Here’s an excerpt describing the methodology:⁶

“An online survey of COVID-19 health experiences was conducted. Information was collected regarding reasons for and against COVID-19 inoculations, experiences with COVID-19 illness and COVID-19 inoculations by survey respondents and their social circles. Logit regression analyses were carried out to identify factors influencing the likelihood of being vaccinated.”

Survey Findings

A total of 2,840 people completed the survey between December 18 and 23, 2021. The mean age was 47, and the gender ratio was 51% women, 49% men. Just over half, 51%, had received one or more COVID jabs.

As Skidmore suspected, results showed that people who got the jab were more likely to know someone who experienced a health problem from COVID-19 infection, whereas those who knew someone who experienced a health problem after getting the jab were less likely to be jabbed.

Of the respondents, 34% knew one or more people who had experienced a significant health problem due to the COVID-19 illness, and 22% knew one or more people who had been injured by the shot. So, as noted by to the author:⁷

“Knowing someone who reported serious health issues either from COVID-19 or from COVID-19 vaccination are important factors for the decision to get vaccinated.”

As for the types of side effects experienced by people within the respondents’ social circles, they included (but were not limited to) the “usual suspects,” such as:

• Heart and cardiovascular problems
• Severe COVID infection or other respiratory illness
• Feeling generally unwell, weak, fatigued and out of breath for weeks
• Blood clots and stroke
• Death

Hundreds of Thousands Killed for No Reason

Based on these survey data, Skidmore estimates:

“… the total number of fatalities due to COVID-19 inoculation may be as high as 278,000 (95% CI 217,330-332,608) when fatalities that may have occurred regardless of inoculation are removed.”

Were COVID-19 an infection with an extremely high mortality rate, perhaps high rates of death from a vaccine would be acceptable. But COVID-19 has an exceptionally low mortality rate, on par with or lower than influenza, hence the risk associated with the COVID jabs ought to be equally low.

As it stands, the risks of the shots are very high, while Pfizer’s own trial data, with more than 40,000 participants, show they offer no benefit in terms of your risk of hospitalization and/or death. The absolute risk reduction is so minute as to be inconsequential.⁸

High Rates of Side Effects

The death toll from the jabs isn’t the only disturbing part of this paper, though. Skidmore’s findings also suggest side effects from the jab may be more common than previously suspected.

As mentioned, 51% of the respondents had been jabbed. Of those, 15% reported experiencing a new health problem post-jab and 13% deemed it “serious.” Compare that to Pfizer’s six-month safety analysis,⁹ which claimed only 1.2% of trial participants reported a serious adverse event.

Now, as suggested by Kirsch,¹⁰ “we need to discount that by a factor of two because people report less severe adverse events as adverse events.” Still, that means serious adverse events from the jab are five times higher than what Pfizer reported.

“This is why the FDA never does after-market surveys in the drugs it approves. Because reality hurts,” Kirsch writes.¹¹ “It is the FDA that should have discovered this before Mark Skidmore. The FDA is asleep at the wheel and they just believe everything the drug companies tell them, hook, line, and sinker. This is a major miss. Why aren’t they doing surveys like this to see if the reality matches the study?”

More Side Effect Rate Comparisons

For additional comparison, here are the findings of several other investigations:

• Rasmussen Reports¹² — In December 2022, Rasmussen Reports polled 1,000 Americans. In this poll — taken one year after Skidmore’s survey — 34% reported experiencing minor side effects from the jab and 7% reported major side effects.
• CDC’s V-Safe data¹³ — In October 2022, ICAN obtained the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s V-Safe data. This is a voluntary program to monitor adverse vaccine reactions. Of the 10.1 million COVID jab recipients who used the app, 7.7% had to seek medical care post-jab.
• Kirsch-funded survey¹⁴ — A June 2022 U.S. survey by the market research company Pollfish found that 16.3% of COVID jabbed respondents experienced an injury, and 9.7% required medical care.

The graphic below, which visually compares Skidmore’s findings to the findings of the Rasmussen, V-Safe and Pollfish surveys, was created by InfoGame on Substack.¹⁵ As noted by InfoGame:

“Skidmore’s article serves as another sign that the rate of COVID-19 side effects is extremely high and that the COVID-19 vaccines are an unprecedently risky medical product.”

Menstrual Irregularities Are Common Post-Jab

While we’re on the topic of reported side effects, several surveys have also focused on the frequency of abnormal menses in women who got the jab, which could be indicative of reproductive harm. For example:

• A British survey published in early December 2021 found 20% of women experienced menstrual disturbances following their jab.¹⁶
• A study published in Science Advances in mid-July 2022 found 66% of “fully vaccinated” postmenopausal women experienced abnormal breakthrough bleeding. In total, 42.1% reported heavier menstrual flow post-jab (this included women of all ages, as well as transgenders on hormone treatments).¹⁷
• An Italian peer-reviewed study published in March 2022 found that “50-60% of reproductive-age women who received the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine reported menstrual cycle irregularities, regardless of the type of administered vaccine.” After the second dose, abnormal menses were reported by 60% to 70%.¹⁸

People in High Places Seek Retraction

Not surprisingly, people in high places are already trying to force a retraction of the paper. A special notice from the editor, dated just two days post-publication, states, “Readers are alerted that the conclusions of this paper are subject to criticisms that are being considered by editors. Specifically, that the claims are unsubstantiated and that there are questions about the quality of the peer review.” As noted by Kirsch:¹⁹

“They are actively trying to get the paper retracted because it destroys the narrative. I’m certain they will succeed because journals are under intense pressure to censor any anti-narrative paper. The problem is that Mark’s survey was entirely consistent with my surveys.

If they want to have the paper retracted they need to show us THEIR surveys. But of course, they don’t have any surveys because they are too afraid of the results.

So they will use hand-waving arguments like “I don’t like the methodology” or some nonsense like that instead of gathering their own data. They will NEVER show us survey data that supports their narrative because it isn’t there.

That’s why there are no success anecdotes. NOBODY can give me the name of a US geriatric practice where all-cause deaths plummeted after the vaccines rolled out. In every case, they went the wrong way. The narrative is unraveling at an accelerated pace but the medical community is still fighting the truth.”

In the U.S., 1 in 5 prescriptions is written for an off-label use.¹ While sometimes this allows medications to be overused or misused, it also protects doctors’ ability to freely treat patients, and patients’ ability to use all available treatments after making an informed decision.

That 20% of medications are used off-label also indicates “a degree of freedom physicians currently have that will be foreclosed,” notes English comedian and actor Russell Brand,² if a little-noticed provision in the omnibus spending bill is passed. “Literally, this will mean that your doctor will not be able to do what’s best for you because they’ll work for Big Pharma now,” Brand says.³

19 Lines in 4,155-Page Bill Could Change Practice of Medicine

The 2023 omnibus appropriations bill — a 4,155-page tome involving $1.7 trillion in spending — includes 19 lines that could give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration the power to ban off-label use of approved medications. In a commentary for The Wall Street Journal, Dr. Joel Zinberg wrote:⁴

“Physicians routinely prescribe drugs and employ medical devices that are approved and labeled by the Food and Drug Administration for a particular use. Yet sometimes physicians discern other beneficial uses for these technologies, which they prescribe for their patients without specific official sanction.

The new legislation amends the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, to give the FDA the authority to ban some of these off-label uses of otherwise approved products. This unwarranted intrusion into the physician-patient relationship threatens to undermine medical innovation and patient care.”

FDA Wants Power to Regulate Practice of Medicine

“The new provision was enacted at the FDA’s urging,” Zinberg says,⁵ in response to a 2021 legal ruling that limited the FDA’s power to meddle with the practice of medicine. In March 2020, the FDA banned the use of electric shock devices for particular uses, namely to treat patients engaging in self-harm or aggressive behaviors that could harm others.

The devices are FDA approved, and while the FDA banned their use for certain contexts, it still allowed them to be used for smoking addiction and other purposes.⁶ This led to a lawsuit — Judge Rotenberg Education Center v. FDA — in which the Judge Rotenberg Education Center, a school for people with severe behavioral and intellectual conditions, sued the FDA over the ban.

The court ruled in the school’s favor, stating that the FDA’s ban violated federal law because it interfered with health care practitioners’ authority to practice medicine. As it stands, the FDA does not have the power to ban medical devices for a particular use.

The school’s attorney, Mike Flammia, who also represented students’ parents in favor of the device’s use, told CNN the decision “protects what all of us cherish, and that is the ability to go to our doctor and have our doctor decide what is the best treatment.”⁷

As it stands, Section 360f of the FDCA⁸ only gives the FDA authority to ban a medical device if it poses “an unreasonable and substantial risk of illness or injury.” It can ban the device outright, but it can’t pick and choose when it can and can’t be used.

“Barring a practitioner from prescribing or using an otherwise approved device for a specific off-label indication would violate another FDCA section, which bars the FDA from regulating the ‘practice of medicine,'” Zinberg says.⁹ The FDA is trying to change that.

Download this Article Before it Disappears

Download PDF

Pharma — Not Your Doctor — Would Dictate Medical Decisions

The omnibus amendment would change Section 360f so that the FDA could ban a medical device if it poses an unreasonable risk for “one or more intended uses” while leaving it approved for others. “Since the new provision lets the FDA skirt the ban on interfering with the practice of medicine by banning devices for particular uses, the agency will likely claim this as a precedent allowing it to ban off-label uses of drugs as well,” according to Zinberg.¹⁰

This puts the FDA, and by proxy Big Pharma, at the helm of powerful health care decisions that should be made on an individual, personalized level between a patient and their health care provider.

Remember that in 1992, the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) was created, which allows the FDA to collect fees from the drug industry. “With the act, the FDA moved from a fully taxpayer funded entity to one supplemented by industry money,” a BMJ article written by investigative journalist Maryanne Demasi explains.¹¹

Now, significant portions of regulatory agencies’ budgets come from the pharmaceutical industry that these agencies are supposed to regulate. In 1993, after PDUFA was passed, the FDA collected about $29 million in net PDUFA fees. This increased 30-fold — to $884 million — by 2016.¹²

It’s also revealing that at the FDA, 9 out of 10 of its former commissioners between 2006 and 2019 went on to work for pharmaceutical companies.¹³ As Brand noted:¹⁴

“What they’re looking for is a crafty, sly, insidious way to be able to intercede in your relationship with your physician. And as usual, it’s for your ‘safety’ and for your ‘benefit’ … Why would you want Big Pharma and a regulatory body that they fund interfering in your relationship with your doctor about your health?

Have they not found enough ways to extract revenue from you, to put your health second, to put your well-being way, way behind their profits and their list of priorities? Why is the bias moving even further in that direction? … This is not about medicine. This is about licensing. This is about profits, patents, the ability to extract revenue.”

Patients Suffer When Pharma’s in Control

During the pandemic, it became clear how patients suffer when health agencies are allowed to dictate what medications doctors are allowed to prescribe to their patients. Ivermectin — a generic medication that doctors had success treating COVID-19 with early on — was quickly vilified, as were the doctors who attempted to prescribe it for COVID-19 patients.

In his book, “The War on Ivermectin: The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the COVID Pandemic,” Dr. Pierre Kory details Big Pharma’s suppression of this drug when it was found to work against COVID-19. When he and colleagues first spoke out about the drug’s potential, however, he was naïve. He said during our 2022 interview:¹⁵

“I worked a lot and I got deeply expert on ivermectin. But what happened in the next few months is that everything started going sideways, and I could not figure it out. I saw hit pieces … The thing is, I didn’t know. I didn’t know that what I was really doing — bringing forth data supporting the efficacy of a generic drug — that is poking the bear.

And when I say poking the bear, what is anathema to the pharmaceutical industry and their whole business model is they cannot have generic off-patent drugs become standard of care. It obliterates the market for their pricing new pills.

I didn’t know I was stepping into a war. In the history of pharma, I don’t think any single medicine threatened as many [drug] markets and campaigns. The only other medicine that did that was hydroxychloroquine, but they already killed hydroxychloroquine in 2020.

I was coming out now with ivermectin, and it threatened hundreds of billions of dollars in perpetuity for these insanely lethal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, remdesivir, paxlovid, molnupiravir — all of the markets for their novel new pills to enter. I mean, I don’t think any medicine has ever threatened that much of a market.”

‘A Problem for Many Reasons’

If the FDA is allowed to ban medications for certain uses, we’ll see more of what happened with ivermectin. It’s a “problem for many reasons,” Zinberg explains:¹⁶

“The statute gives the FDA the power, without any public input, to prevent patients’ access to off-label therapies even though their physicians and their patients have found the treatments to be beneficial or even essential.

… Allowing the FDA to ban certain off-label uses will impair clinical progress. Off-label use enables physicians to assess their patients’ unique circumstances and use their own evolving scientific knowledge in deciding to try approved products for new indications.

If the treatment proves useful, formal studies are performed and published. If enough evidence accumulates, the treatment becomes the standard of care, even if the manufacturer didn’t submit the product for a separate, lengthy and costly FDA review.

… Substituting regulators’ wisdom for the cost-benefit judgment of physicians and their patients will discourage attempts to use approved products in new and beneficial ways and deprive patients of valuable treatments. Congress should reconsider this ill-advised legislation.”

California Law Also Shackles Doctors’ Freedoms

In California, regulators are also interfering with the practice of medicine. Law AB 2098, which was signed into law September 30, 2022¹⁷ and went into effect January 1, 2023,¹⁸ gives the state power to take away doctors’ medical licenses if they spread “misinformation” that goes against the standard COVID-19 rhetoric.

Specifically, those who “disseminate or promote misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines” could be “disciplined,” which includes loss of their medical license.¹⁹

It’s akin to putting shackles on their wrists, forcing them to conform to a narrative intent on pushing dangerous gene therapies and ineffective medications. It’s also a potential warning of darker things to come.

What constitutes “misinformation” or “disinformation” worthy of taking away a person’s medical license? It’s anyone’s guess, really, but doctors afraid of being punished are likely to steer clear of anything that could possibly fit under this definition — to the detriment of their patients.

Bill 2098 itself is packed with misinformation and ignores the scientific truths about COVID-19,²⁰such as the fact that prior infection with COVID-19 results in natural immunity — immunity that’s superior to that achieved via a COVID-19 shot.²¹

The bill, if it passes, will stop doctors from practicing medicine the way they deem best for the individual patient. It will also stop dissent — even when dissent is necessary and beneficial, and coming from people with expertise. And that’s precisely the point.²² In December 2022, Physicians for Informed Consent sued the state of California, arguing that AB 2098 violates the U.S. Constitution.

According to a news release, “The lawsuit argues that the State has weaponized the vague phrase ‘misinformation,’ thereby unconstitutionally targeting physicians who publicly disagree with the government’s public health edicts on COVID-19.”²³

This Shift Isn’t Just for the US

It’s important to note that the trend to let a Pharma-controlled government silence your doctor and dictate basic components of your medical care is not confined to the U.S. — it’s happening globally.

Proposed amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR), for instance, aim to erase the concepts of human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms from the equation.²⁴The first principle in Article 3 of the 2005 IHR states that health regulations shall be implemented “with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons.” The amendment strikes that sentence.

Instead, international health regulations will be based on “principles of equity, inclusivity and coherence” only. This means they can force you to undergo whatever medical intervention they deem to be in the best interest of the collective.

Individuals won’t matter. Human dignity will not be taken into consideration. Human rights will not be taken into consideration, and neither will the concept that human beings have fundamental freedoms that cannot be infringed. Autonomy over your body will be eliminated. You’ll have no right to make personal health decisions.

While it may start slowly, such as with Pharma’s quiet move to ban off-label usage of medications for certain uses, it will soon expand, chipping away at your sovereignty until it’s gone. This is why it’s imperative to share this knowledge and support measures that protect our human rights and individual freedoms.

In January 2022, House Oversight Committee Republicans released a batch of emails sent to and from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).^1,2,3 A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit brought by Jimmy Tobias at The Intercept⁴ also forced the release of unredacted NIH correspondence in late November 2022, just as Dr. Anthony Fauci prepared to retire from his position as director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

The emails reveal what many had suspected all along, namely that SARS-CoV-2 appeared to be a genetically engineered virus that somehow escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China. (In a January 17, 2023, Twitter thread,⁵ molecular biologist Richard Ebright, Ph.D., summarized the lab-origin hypothesis.)

The correspondence also reveal that a) NIH leaders were nervous about the possibility that they’d funded the creation of this virus, and b) they were determined to suppress questions about its origin.

Summary of Key Findings

As reported by the House Oversight Committee:⁶

“Excerpts of emails released today reveal the following:

Fauci Tipped Off About Lab Leak Possibility

January 31, 2020, Fauci received an email from Dr. Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust, asking him to call Kristian Andersen, Ph.D., an evolutionary biologist and professor in the department of immunology and microbiology at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, California. As reported by The Intercept January 19, 2023:⁸

“Fauci had his phone call with Andersen that night, and what he heard clearly disturbed him. In an email to Farrar after the call, he wrote the following:

‘I told [Andersen] that as soon as possible he and Eddie Holmes should get a group of evolutionary biologists together to examine carefully the data to determine if his concerns are validated. He should do this very quickly and if everyone agrees with this concern, they should report it to the appropriate authorities.

I would imagine that in the USA this would be the FBI and in the UK it would be MI5′ … What were Andersen’s concerns? And why were they so dire they might merit a call to the FBI?

Andersen laid them out plainly in an email to Fauci that same evening. ‘The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (<0.1%) so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered,’ Andersen wrote in the email.

‘I should mention,’ he added, ‘that after discussions earlier today, Eddie, Bob, Mike and myself all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory. But we have to look at this much more closely and there are still further analyses to be done, so those opinions could still change.'”

Download this Article Before it Disappears

Download PDF

NIH Funded Risky Research at the WIV

The following day, February 1, 2020, at 2 p.m., Fauci, Farrar, Collins, Andersen and several other virologists had their conference call, and Andersen clearly wasn’t the only one who had noticed tell-tale signs of genetic engineering. Farrar himself wrote “On a spectrum if 0 is nature and 100 is release — I am honestly at 50!” ⁹

According to The Intercept,¹⁰ Fauci spent that morning “brushing up on what sorts of grants and collaborations his agency was involved in with research institutions in China.”

In all likelihood, he discovered (if he was somehow previously unaware, which seems doubtful) that the NIH had provided research grants to the EcoHealth Alliance, which in turn subcontracted coronavirus experiments to the WIV — including an experiment involving humanized mice that were infected with chimeric hybrids of SARS-related bat coronaviruses.¹¹

According to The Intercept, it’s highly unlikely that these experiments resulted in SARS-CoV-2, as the viruses are too dissimilar, “but it does raise questions about what other kinds of experiments were going on in Wuhan and haven’t been disclosed.”

NIH-Linked Scientists Suspected Lab Leak From the Start

February 2, 2020, Farrar circulated a set of notes summarizing the discussion, which he said was to be treated “in total confidence.”¹² Michael (Mike) Farzan, Ph.D., an expert on the entry processes of enveloped viruses, was bothered by the presence of a furin cleavage site — a novel feature that allows SARS-CoV-2 the ability to infect cells in the human airways.

According to Farrar’s note, Farzan “has a hard time explain[ing] that as an event outside the lab.” Farrar’s summary goes on to state that:¹³

“… the likely explanation could be something as simple as passage SARS-live CoVs in tissue culture on human cell lines (under BSL-2) for an extended period of time, accidentally creating a virus that would be primed for rapid transmission between humans via gain of furin site (from tissue culture) and adoption to human ACE2 receptor via repeated passage …

So, I think it becomes a question of how do you put all this together, whether you believe in this series of coincidences, what you know of the lab in Wuhan, how much could be in nature — accidental release or natural event? I am 70:30 or 60:40.”

A note from professor and microbiologist Robert (Bob) Garry, Ph.D.,¹⁴ reveals he had similar concerns:

“… I aligned the nCoV with the 96% bat CoV sequenced at WIV. Except for the RBD [receptor binding domain] the S proteins are essential [sic] identical at the amino acid level — well all but the perfect insertion of 12 nucleotides that adds [sic] the furin site.

S2 is over its whole length essentially identical. I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario where you get from the bat virus or one very similar to it to nCoV where you insert exactly 4 amino acids 12 nucleotide [sic] that all have to be added at the exact same time to gain this function — that and you don’t change any other amino acids in S2?

I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature. Do the alignment of the spikes at the amino acid level — its [sic] stunning. Of course, in the lab it would be easy to generate the perfect 12 base insert that you wanted.

Another scenario is that the progenitor of nCoV was a bat virus with the perfect furin cleavage site generated over evolutionary times. In this scenario RaTG13 the WIV virus was generated by a perfect deletion of 12 nucleotides while essentially not changing any other S2 amino acid [sic]. Even more implausible IMO [in my opinion]. That is the big if.”

In other words, in the earliest days of the pandemic, the general consensus among virologists in communication with the NIH was that a WIV lab leak was not only plausible, but perhaps the most likely. The correspondence also leaves no doubt about the fact that Fauci and Collins wanted to silence this theory.

The Cover-Up Begins

In a February 2, 2020, email, Collins stated that he was “coming around to the view that a natural origin is more likely,” and warned that “voices of conspiracy will quickly dominate” lest they convene a panel of experts to address the matter, and that such conspiracies could do “great potential harm to science and international harmony.”

Dutch virologist Ron Fouchier, who participated in the call, also warned his colleagues that continuing the discussion about a lab leak “would unnecessarily distract top researchers from their active duties and do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular.”¹⁵

Fauci, for his part, appears to have made the decision to suppress the lab leak theory that same day (February 2). In an email, he wrote:¹⁶

“Like all of us, I do not know how this evolved, but given the concerns of so many people and the threat of further distortions on social media, it is essential that we move quickly.”

According to The Intercept, Fauci, Farrar and Collins alerted officials at the World Health Organization in the hopes they’d convene an expert panel to investigate, but “WHO apparently declined to do so at the time.” The group was well aware of the risks involved, though, were the lab leak theory to gain legs, so a plan to discourage further “accusations” was apparently hatched.

Hastily Written Paper Sought to Discourage Bioweapon Idea

Just two days later, on February 4, 2020, Fauci and Collins received the first draft of the article, “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” later published in Nature Medicine.¹⁷

Three of the authors, Andersen, Robert Garry of Tulane University and Edward Holmes of the University of Sydney, were on the February 1, 2020, conference call. Andersen, Garry, and another “Proximal Origin” author, W. Ian Lipkin of Columbia University, have also received large NIH grants in recent years,¹⁸ so this paper was not written by uninterested and independent parties.

The original draft is still secret. All we have is an email reply from Fauci, in which he appears to flag the inclusion of serial passage through humanized mice. This suggests the issue of animal passage was raised, but then immediately scrapped.

The Nature Medicine article roundly dismissed the idea that the virus was the result of deliberate engineering, proposing instead that, despite a dearth of evidence, it most likely evolved naturally. (Two potential natural-evolution theories were described.) They didn’t conclusively dismiss the possibility of a lab leak, though — only the idea that it was “deliberately” engineered. As noted in the paper:¹⁹

“Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here.

However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.”

Lab Origin Was Never Ruled Out

The “other theories of its origin” described in the “Proximal Origin” paper was the possibility that it might have been the result of “selection during passage,” which is a routine laboratory practice. In other words, it seems they were most concerned with dispelling any rumors about it being intentionally created, which would place it in the category of a bioweapon.

As reported by The Intercept, Farrar, Fauci and Collins certainly had not ruled out the possibility of a lab origin altogether:²⁰

“The scientists seem by this point to have made a sharp distinction between a scenario in which the virus was deliberately engineered in a lab and a scenario in which the virus was generated during serial passage experiments in a lab.

‘Eddie would be 60:40 lab side,’ Farrar added. ‘I remain 50:50.’

‘Yes, I’d be interested in the proposal of accidental lab passage in animals (which ones?),’ Collins wrote.

‘?? Serial passage in ACE2-transgenic mice,’ Fauci responded.

‘Exactly!’ Farrar replied.

‘Surely that wouldn’t be done in a BSL-2 lab?’ wrote Collins, referring to biosafety level 2 labs, which do not have the most stringent safety protocols.

‘Wild West…’ was Farrar’s response, an apparent reference to lab practices in China or possibly to the Wuhan Institute of Virology itself.

In the above exchange, the health officials seem to be contemplating the possibility that the repeated passage of a coronavirus through genetically modified mice in an insufficiently secure lab could have resulted in the accidental emergence and release of SARS-CoV-2.

In a later email exchange, Farrar, quoting Garry, noted that serial passage in animals had been proved to result in the appearance of furin cleavage sites in other viruses, specifically the H5N1 flu virus. ‘There are a couple passage of H5N1 in chicken papers — the furin site appears in steps.'”

Similarly, there’s this exchange between Christian Drosten, Ph.D., and Andersen on February 8.²¹ Drosten wrote:

“Can someone help me with one question: didn’t we congregate to challenge a certain theory, and if we could, drop it? Who came up with this story in the beginning? Are we working on debunking our own conspiracy theory?”

Andersen’s reply read:

“Our main work over the last couple of weeks has been focused on trying to disprove any type of lab theory, but we are at a crossroad where the scientific evidence isn’t conclusive enough to say that we have high confidence in any of the three main theories considered.

As to publishing this document in a journal, I am currently not in favor of doing so. I believe that publishing something that is open-ended could backfire at this stage.”

Andersen’s reluctance notwithstanding, the paper was accepted for publication a month later, March 17, 2020 — and the possibility of the virus being the result of serial passage remained.

Most-Read Propaganda Paper Ever

The influence of the “Proximal Origin” paper cannot be overstated. As reported by The Intercept,²² it’s been accessed more than 5.7 million times and cited by more than 2,000 media outlets, making it one of the most-read papers ever published. It’s fair to say this propaganda piece was “milked for all its worth” to uphold the illusion of a natural evolution consensus.

Most media outlets also overstated the paper’s conclusion. While it did not present any actual evidence to support the natural evolution theory, and admitted it might have been created through serial passaging in a lab, outlets like ABC News boldly declared, “Sorry, Conspiracy Theorists. Study Concludes COVID-19 ‘Is Not a Laboratory Construct,'”²³ as if the issue had been conclusively settled based on the scientific evidence at hand.

Questions Could Not Be Quelled

The Nature Medicine article didn’t stem the flow of questions, though, a fact decried by Collins in a mid-April 2020 email to Fauci:

“Wondering if there is something NIH can do to help put down this very destructive conspiracy, with what seems to be growing momentum … I hoped the Nature Medicine article on the genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 would settle this. But probably didn’t get much visibility. Anything more we can do? Ask the National Academy to weigh in?”

Fauci replied, “I would not do anything about this right now. It is a shiny object that will go away in times [sic].” He was wrong, of course, and the reason questions didn’t go away was because emerging evidence kept strengthening the lab leak theory, while there is nothing with which to support natural evolution.

As Sergei Pond, a computational virologist at Temple University, told The Intercept,²⁴ “there was no data then, and there is no data now, that would definitively indicate that a lab origin like the one contemplated in ‘Proximal Origin’ is not at least plausible.”

Having read the unredacted emails, David Relman, a professor of microbiology, immunology and medicine at Stanford University, added:²⁵

“When I first saw it [the Proximal Origin paper] in March 2020, the paper read to me as a conclusion in search of an argument. Among its many problems, it failed to consider in a serious fashion the possibility of an unwitting and unrecognized accidental leak during aggressive efforts to grow coronaviruses from bat and other field samples.

It also assumed that researchers in Wuhan have told the world about every virus and every sequence that was in their laboratories in 2019. But these [unredacted emails] actually provide evidence that the authors considered a few additional lab-associated scenarios, early in their discussions.

But then they rushed to judgment, and the lab scenarios fell out of favor. It appears as if a combination of a scant amount of data and an unspoken bias against the [lab origin] scenario diminished the idea in their minds.”

Virologists Under the Microscope

As reported by The Washington Post,²⁶ virologists are now under the microscope like never before, and the NIH is said to be “preparing an overhaul of the policies on government-funded research.” Draft recommendations²⁷ from the biosecurity advisory board were released January 20, 2023.

Clearly, paranoia is high, and there’s good reason for that. Not only do we have the unredacted NIH emails showing there were grave concerns about COVID-19 being the result of a lab leak, and that those concerns were “allayed” by passing propaganda for “science,” but researchers have also published research showing they’re now conducting gain-of-function research on SARS-CoV-2.²⁸

Who in their right mind would think that was a good idea? The fact that reckless dual-use research into dangerous pathogens is taking place on the daily is precisely why getting to the bottom of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is so important. If this kind of research contributed to COVID-19, then clearly we need to make sure it cannot happen again.

I believe one of the primary reasons why the lab leak theory is being so heavily disputed is because acknowledging it as true would force Congress to rein in the research industry. But we cannot afford to ignore it, because gain-of-function research capabilities pose a truly existential threat to mankind as a whole.²⁹

Inspector General Report Blasts NIH for String of Errors

Interestingly, January 25, 2023, the U.S. Office of Inspector General released a report³⁰ detailing the NIH’s failure to properly monitor and review potentially hazardous coronavirus research. As reported by the Daily Mail:³¹

“EcoHealth Alliance was awarded $8 million in Government research grants between 2014 and 2021, which it subcontracted to research facilities. The WIV was one of eight teams awarded grants at that time.

Today’s audit said there was a lack of oversight by the NIH and EcoHealth at the Chinese facility and other labs that benefitted from Government grants.

The report said: ‘Despite identifying potential risks associated with research being performed under the EcoHealth awards, we found that NIH did not effectively monitor or take timely action to address EcoHealth’s compliance with some requirements.

‘Although NIH and EcoHealth had established monitoring procedures, we found deficiencies in complying with those procedures limited NIH and EcoHealth’s ability to effectively monitor federal grant awards and subawards to understand the nature of the research conducted, identify potential problem areas, and take corrective action’ …

Investigators say EcoHealth also did not submit proper progress reports on the use of its fund in a timely manner, with information coming in two years late. It also says the NIH failed to terminate its grant with EcoHealth after the non-profit broke protocols.”

Justin Goodman, senior vice president of Advocacy and Public Policy at the White Coat Waste Project commented on the report:³²

“This audit confirms what we have been documenting since early 2020 when we first exposed NIH’s funding of the Wuhan lab: EcoHealth Alliance shipped tax dollars to Wuhan for dangerous animal experiments that probably caused the pandemic, violated federal laws and policies and wasted tax dollars.

Yet, the Wuhan lab remains eligible for even more taxpayer money for animal tests and just since the pandemic began, EcoHealth has raked in at least $46million in new federal funds from the DOD, USAID, NIH, and NSF.

As the group that first exposed and ended EcoHealth’s calamitous collaboration with the Wuhan animal lab, we’re calling on Congress to defund these rogue organizations once and for all. Taxpayers should not be forced to bankroll reckless white coats who waste money, break the law and place public health in peril. Stop the money, stop the madness.”

US Government Stonewalls FOIA Requests

As investigators try to get to the truth, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is doing everything it can to prevent it from coming out. As reported by Gary Ruskin,³³ executive director and co-founder of U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), in 2022, as the HHS was slammed with FOIA requests relating to COVID-19, they added four extra layers of legal review within the HHS legal department.

These attorneys scoured each and every document to make sure anything potentially incriminating was properly redacted before release. “This plainly appears to be an effort to delay or block release of documents about the origin of COVID-19,” Ruskin wrote. “What is HHS hiding? We hope Congress will investigate.”

The good news is, the Republican House now has the ability to launch such investigations, and I hope they will. The problem is that it would be dangerous to prove a cover-up, as it would turn everything upside-down. Health agencies, universities and any number of other agencies would have to be retooled. So, getting to the bottom of this affair will require people who believe the truth is worth the pain.

Originally published: December 29, 2020

Ivor Cummins is a biochemical engineer with a background in medical device engineering and leading teams in complex problem-solving. On his website, TheFatEmperor.com,¹ he offers guidance on how to decode science to transform your health. In a podcast from December 11, 2020, he interviewed Dr. Reid Sheftall about SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.

Sheftall is an intelligent surgeon, having scored in the 99.95 percentile on the SATs and off the scale on his medical board and surgical board exams. He begins by explaining that the SARS-CoV-2 is only 100 nanometers in diameter, which is smaller by one-fourth than SARS-2 virus, which is only 100 nanometers in diameter, which is smaller, by one-fourth, than the shortest wavelength that we can see in the visible spectrum.

He’s been using social media to write essays about different aspects of the virus and the policies that were enacted because of what he calls “mistakes that were made early on” in the pandemic. Here are seven of Sheftall’s predictions and corrections, along with the date in which he made them, which are covered in more detail during the interview:

1. SARS-CoV-2 has an infection mortality rate that is equal to or less than the flu (March 15).
2. Masks won’t reduce the transmissibility (March 15), but experts still say they do.
3. Lockdowns not only will not work, but will cause much death and destruction, including loss of jobs and insurance, life savings and other resources, up to and including loss of life (March 17). Experts are still lobbying for use of lockdowns.
4. We should not close schools because we don’t close them for the flu, which is a much deadlier disease than SARS-2 in that age group (March 18).
5. The reason the cases and deaths are so low in Asian countries is not because of better testing, tracing and lockdowns, as the experts have said and continue to say, but is because of “immunity in place” due to cross reactivity of SARS-2 with previously encountered coronaviruses. This is mediated by cross reacting memory B and T cells, secretory IgA (August 10, not yet proven).
6. We’re not experiencing “second waves” in the U.S. They are first waves in different parts of the country as the virus marches through different climate types in different regions (August 10).
7. There are not 40 million cases in the U.S. There are at least 160 million (October 17).

Infection Fatality Rate Has Been Wrong Since the Beginning

Early on during the pandemic, infection mortality rate claims varied from 2.7% to 7%, with most being in the 4% range. According to Sheftall, that’s “about 40 times too high” and ended up causing panic and fear in the public. He figured out the infection mortality rate was wrong because he noticed something important: The wide fluctuations in mortality rates didn’t add up:

“As a surgeon, we noticed that surgical outcomes are very close. From a very good surgeon to a very mediocre surgeon, the mortality and morbidity is very close.

Yet, when I heard the information about what had happened in Italy, where 7%, supposedly, of the people infected were dying and in Germany, where it was much lower, I’m thinking that doesn’t make sense because the Italians would call their German colleagues and find out if something was being done differently and change something, and the rate should be very close to the same. So, I knew there was a problem.”

Sheftall suggested that selection bias was being used in the counting of cases, and organizations such as the World Health Organization and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were drastically undercounting the number of people who were infected, which inflated the mortality rate.

Sheftall looked for data in which every case had been counted, ending up with a cruise ship, in which every person had been tested, and a small town in Germany that had also tested all residents. “When I crunched the numbers, the infection fatality rate came out to 0.14%, so I knew … there were some gross errors going on.”

Sheftall posted his findings on Facebook, only to be told he was wrong. He then wrote letters to Fox and CNN, hoping to share the information with the public, but he didn’t hear back.

“What happened, unfortunately, is that everybody accepted those numbers as gospel, if you will, and proceeded to make models that were way off. Epidemiologists appeared on television, and they were way off.

The general population, as I said before, began to panic and then the politicians were able to — and I’m not saying they were nefarious in this — but they were able to institute some policies, which were extremely destructive … I don’t think the general public would have agreed to lockdowns, for example, if they had known that the infection fatality rate is 0.1% … the same as the flu.”

Other experts, like Stanford University’s disease prevention chairman Dr. John Ioannidis — an epidemiologist who has made a name for himself by exposing bad science — have also criticized global lockdown measures, saying they were implemented based on flawed modeling and grossly unreliable data. Like Sheftall, Ioannidis suggested the infection fatality rate was actually 0.05% to 1%, with a median of about 0.25%.²

Shutting Down Schools ‘Makes Absolutely No Sense’

Sheftall cites COVID-19 survival rates by age, posted by the CDC September 10, 2020, which are as follows:

• Ages birth to 19: 99.997%
• Ages 20 to 49: 99.98%
• Ages 50 to 69: 99.5%
• Ages 70 and up: 94.6%

This translates into a 0.1% infection fatality rate, using the CDC’s own numbers — and the CDC is one of the agencies that cited a 4% infection fatality rate early on. Sheftall couldn’t find data on the survival rate of school-aged children from 5 to 17 years, but he did uncover that there were 51 COVID-19 deaths reported in that age range from March 1 to September 10, 2020.

“Now there are 56.4 million students in elementary, middle and high school in the United States so that means the chances by population, not by infection but by population, are less than 1 in a million per year for a student in school, and that’s very important because we’ve shut down the schools in America, which causes a lot of problems,” he said.

Given these numbers, shutting down schools “makes absolutely no sense,” as he noted that every year more than 200 school-aged children, on average, die from the flu during a five-month flu season. “So, if you want to be consistent … if you’re going to close the schools for SARS-CoV-2 you must close them every year for the flu because it’s actually much more severe in the school-age group.”

But closing schools has consequences, as has been made readily apparent during the pandemic. Interruptions in learning are common — “they did a survey in Boston and only half the children were logging in” to virtual learning, Sheftall said, while others don’t have money for a computer or internet connection. Other issues that may have been picked up on at school, like problems with vision or hearing, or cases of abuse, may also go unnoticed.

Download this Article Before it Disappears

Download PDF

Asymptomatic Testing Goes ‘Against Good Practice’

According to The Atlantic’s COVID Tracking Project, more than 230.3 million COVID-19 tests have been conducted in the U.S. as of December 20, 2020,³ which includes an unknown number of tests conducted on people with no symptoms.

The costs for such testing could be used for a more productive purpose, according to Sheftall. Cummins also notes that “it’s kind of unethical and it’s against good practice” to test asymptomatic people at such a massive rate. “The whole basis of medicine,” he says, is to test people with symptoms so you can find out what’s wrong and treat them accordingly. Sheftall continues:

“In 2017 to 2018 … between 70 and 80 million people in America got the flu … nobody noticed for the most part and no one was tested. I’m a doctor and I vaguely remember that it was a bad flu season. That was it. And yet with COVID we’re testing so many people you wouldn’t believe it.”

During a June 8, 2020, press briefing, Maria Van Kerkhove, the World Health Organization’s technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic, made it very clear that asymptomatic transmission is very rare, meaning an individual who tests positive but does not exhibit symptoms is highly unlikely to transmit live virus to others.

A study in Nature Communications also found “there was no evidence of transmission from asymptomatic positive persons to traced close contacts.”⁴ Meanwhile, the COVID-19 tests are problematic in and of themselves.

These positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests have been used as the justification for keeping large portions of the world locked down for the better part of 2020, despite the fact that PCR tests have proven remarkably unreliable with high false result rates.

A positive test does not actually mean that an active infection is present. The PCR swab collects RNA from your nasal cavity. This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA. However, the genetic snippets are so small they must be amplified in order to become discernible.

What this does is amplify any, even insignificant sequences of viral DNA that might be present to the point that the test reads “positive,” even if the viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive. According to Sheftall:

“When we see all these positive cases, some of them are older than they’re letting on. They’re calling them new cases. The test looks for messenger RNA fragments in the oral pharynx, OK? It’s the swab test. It’s an antigen test, OK, as opposed to an antibody test.

And those fragments can stay in there for months after the patient has recovered. That’s No. 1. And No. 2, think of the name — it’s polymerase chain reaction. The PCR test is an amplification test. It can take a tiny fragment and amplify it into a billion fragments …

There are different types of immunological responses to a pathogen, one of which is the barrier immunity. And you can have fragments of messenger RNA in your oral pharynx and have never gotten sick from the disease, never even registered on the scale, no bullet, no signal, no nothing because the barrier immunity injured the viruses early on and broke them into pieces, and then the PCR picks it up as a new test.”

Masks, Lockdowns Don’t Work

Sheftall also compiled daily new deaths for six countries, including the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain, Germany and Sweden. All of them have similar death curves, despite whether they instituted lockdowns or not. He also found a graph (pictured at 40 minutes in the video) in which scientists compared the number of cases in a region with how stringent the measures were by the government, including degree of lockdown, group restrictions and mask mandates.

“You can see that there’s no reverse correlation like you would expect … if the measures are not stringent you should see more cases, according to their thinking … [but] it’s the exact opposite of what the people were saying,” Sheftall said. In fact, the graph largely shows lower cases when less stringent measures were taken.

“It’s the same with mask introductions,” Cummins added. “If you look at around 10 or 12 countries where they brought in mask mandates, there was no impact on the curve … whatsoever so the empirical science of our own eyes is screaming at us: Masks and lockdowns don’t really move the needle much, maybe a little, but no one wants to know. It’s an ideology now. It’s a religion.”

Sheftall studied mask usage extensively and found mask mandates did not noticeably change the number of cases or deaths the way they should if they actually reduce transmissibility. Countries that used minimal masks were not worse off than neighboring countries with mask mandates.

“Due to statements by experts and CNN commercials claiming that masks prevent viral spread, mass hysteria descended on the world over the wearing of masks,” he said. There have been cases of hot coffee being thrown in the faces of people not wearing masks, fines issued and other hysteria, over a measure that’s not proven to work.

In fact, in the first randomized controlled trial of more than 6,000 individuals to assess the effectiveness of surgical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection found masks did not statistically significantly reduce the incidence of infection. Among mask wearers, 1.8% ended up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% among controls.⁵

When they removed the people who did not adhere to proper mask use, the results remained the same — 1.8%, which suggests adherence makes no significant difference.

Bringing in the Great Reset

When the science flies in the face of the restrictions being imposed, it becomes clear that there’s a sinister hidden agenda. Many of the global elite need this crisis and have been “fermenting panic for the past eight months. Why they’re doing it you can argue but the fact that they’re doing it is plain and obvious,” Cummins said, adding:

“The WHO drove the masks when it was utterly antiscientific. They’re not stupid, so why did they do that? The WHO equally knows the science on lockdowns and the analyses but they remorselessly recently pushed lockdowns again … they’re imploring governments to lock down hard, and they have to know that that’s the wrong thing to do.

So you can go to the World Economic Forum (WEF). They’ve made it clear that this is an enormous opportunity to bring in the Great Reset and to retool the world.”

Ultimately, Cummins believes there’s not one “single evil genius stroking a cat” that orchestrated a conspiracy, but rather COVID-19 presented an opportunity that multiple entities have used to further their own agendas. What you can do now is keep your eyes open and your ears tuned to the science, so you don’t fall victim to the unnecessary panic and fear they are seeking to cause:

“China certainly exploited a new nasty virus and saw it as an opportunity to send the fat, lazy, soft Westerners into a tailspin. Why not? And the WEF has been very clear on its goals, and it’s remorseless in driving them.

The WHO, the U.N., the European vaccine alliances, you know, have plans for vaccine passports by 2021, and they were published a year or two ago. I mean imagine you wanted vaccine and health passports by 2021 and then corona came along.

Can you imagine how you’d feel? You would salivate, you would see an enormous opportunity to move forward long plans and get them done in six months. There’s no conspiracy theory. It’s just unfortunate that a vast array of very powerful bodies all pretty much see enormous opportunity in Sars-CoV-2, and then they all probably, to greater or lesser extents, they talk to each other and communicate.

So, it’s like everyone’s got the big payday now and I think what we see is the result of … this huge remorseless general push toward hysteria because it will enable everyone’s goals and the whole of the pharmaceutical industry is salivating. It’s just one of those phenomena that unfortunately has been exploited beyond belief.”

By May 2020, it had become apparent that the standard practice of putting COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation with ventilators was a death sentence.¹ As early as April 9, 2020, Business Insider reported² that 80% of COVID-19 patients in New York City who were placed on ventilators died, which caused a number of doctors to question their use.

The Associated Press³ also publicized similar reports from China and the U.K. A U.K. report put the figure at 66%, while a small study from Wuhan, China, put the ratio of deaths at 86%. Data presented by attorney Thomas Renz in 2021 showed that in Texas hospitals, 84.9% of patients died after more than 96 hours on a ventilator.⁴

The lowest figure I’ve seen is 50%.⁵ So, somewhere between 50% and 86% of all ventilated COVID patients died. Compare that to historical prepandemic ratios, where 30% to 40% of ventilated patients died.

High-Flow Cannulas and Proning Were Always More Effective

Meanwhile, doctors at UChicago Medicine reported⁶ getting “truly remarkable” results using high-flow nasal cannulas in lieu of ventilators. As noted in a press release:⁷

“High-flow nasal cannulas, or HFNCs, are non-invasive nasal prongs that sit below the nostrils and blow large volumes of warm, humidified oxygen into the nose and lungs.

A team from UChicago Medicine’s emergency room took 24 COVID-19 patients who were in respiratory distress and gave them HFNCs instead of putting them on ventilators. The patients all fared extremely well, and only one of them required intubation after 10 days …

‘Avoiding intubation is key,’ [UChicago Medicine’s Emergency Department’s medical director Dr. Thomas] Spiegel said. ‘Most of our colleagues around the city are not doing this, but I sure wish other ERs would take a look at this technique closely.'”

The UChicago team also endorsed proning, meaning lying in the face-down position, which automatically improves oxygenation and helps alleviate shortness of breath.

Yet despite these early indications that mechanical ventilation was as unnecessary as it was disastrous, placing COVID patients on life support is standard of care to this day, more than three years later. How could that be?

How China and the WHO Created Ventilator Hysteria

In a September 30, 2020, Substack article,⁸ journalist Jordan Schachtel described how China and the World Health Organization came up with and nurtured the idea that mechanical ventilation was the correct and necessary first-line response to COVID:

“In early March, when COVID-19 was ravaging western Europe and sounding alarm bells in the United States, the WHO released COVID-19 provider guidance⁹ documents to healthcare workers.

Citing experience ‘based on current knowledge of the situation in China,’ the WHO recommended mechanical ventilators as an early intervention for treating COVID-19 patients. The guidance recommended¹⁰ escalating quickly, if not immediately, to mechanical ventilation.

In doing so, they cited the guidance being presented by Chinese medical journals, which published papers in January and February claiming that ‘Chinese expert consensus’ called for ‘invasive mechanical ventilation’ as the ‘first choice’ for people with moderate to severe respiratory distress.

The WHO further justified this approach by claiming that the less invasive positive air pressure machines could result in the spread of aerosols, potentially infecting health care workers with the virus.”

That last paragraph is perhaps the most shocking reason for why millions of COVID patients were sacrificed. They wanted to isolate the virus inside the mechanical vent machine rather than risk aerosol transmission.

In other words, they put patients to death in order to “save” staff and other, presumably non-COVID, patients. If you missed this news back in 2020, you’re not alone. In the flurry of daily reporting, it escaped many of us. Here’s the description given in the WHO’s guidance document.

Strangely enough, while the U.S. quickly began clamoring for ventilators, China started relying on them less, and instead exported them in huge quantities. As noted by Schachtel, “China was making a fortune off of manufacturing and exporting ventilators (many of which did not work correctly and even killed patients¹¹) around the world.”

Download this Article Before it Disappears

Download PDF

COVID Patients Effectively Euthanized

That ventilation and sedation were used to protect hospital staff was also highlighted by The Wall Street Journal in a December 20, 2020, article,¹² which noted:

“Last spring, with less known about the disease, doctors often pre-emptively put patients on ventilators or gave powerful sedatives largely abandoned in recent years. The aim was to save the seriously ill and protect hospital staff from COVID-19 …

Last spring, doctors put patients on ventilators partly to limit contagion at a time when it was less clear how the virus spread, when protective masks and gowns were in short supply.

Doctors could have employed other kinds of breathing support devices that don’t require risky sedation, but early reports suggested patients using them could spray dangerous amounts of virus into the air, said Theodore Iwashyna, a critical-care physician at University of Michigan and Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals in Ann Arbor, Mich.

At the time, he said, doctors and nurses feared the virus would spread through hospitals. “We were intubating sick patients very early. Not for the patients’ benefit, but in order to control the epidemic and to save other patients,” Dr. Iwashyna said ‘That felt awful.'”

As noted in a January 23, 2023, Substack article,¹³ in which James Lyons-Weiler revisits the ventilator issue and the shocking reason behind it, “euthanizing humans is illegal. Especially for the benefit of other patients. It should feel awful.”

The matter becomes even more perverse when you consider the fact that many “COVID cases” were patients who merely tested positive using faulty PCR testing.

They didn’t have COVID but were vented anyway, thanks to the baseless theory that you could have COVID-19 and be infectious without symptoms. Hospitals also received massive incentives to diagnose patients with COVID — whether they actually had it or not — and to put them on a vent.

Frontline Nurse Blew the Whistle on Vent Misuse

In September 2022, The Epoch Times asked the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to release its Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) data mining results. PRR¹ measures how common an adverse event is for a specific drug compared to all the other drugs in the database.

According to the standard operating procedures^2,3 for the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which is run jointly by the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the CDC is required to perform these data mining analyses.

Not only did the CDC refuse to release the data, but it also provided false information — twice — in response to The Epoch Times’ questions about the monitoring being performed. As reported by The Epoch Times back in September 2022,⁴ the CDC initially claimed PRR analyses were “outside the agency’s purview” and that no monitoring was being done by them.

Eventually, the agency admitted it was doing PRRs, starting in February 2021, only to later claim they didn’t perform any PRRs until March 2022. The Epoch Times also cited several papers in which the FDA and/or CDC claimed their data mining efforts had come up empty handed.⁵ Now, we find that was all a pack of lies.

CDC Monitoring Reveals Hundreds of Safety Signals

In reality, the CDC’s PRR monitoring reveals HUNDREDS of safety signals, including Bell’s palsy, blood clots, pulmonary embolism and death — all of which, according to the rules, require thorough investigation to either confirm or rule out a possible link to the shots. As reported by The Epoch Times in early January 2023:⁶

“The CDC analysis was conducted on adverse events reported from Dec. 14, 2020, to July 29, 2022. The Epoch Times obtained the results through a Freedom of Information Act request after the CDC refused to make the results public …

PRR involves comparing the incidence of a specific adverse event after a specific vaccine to the incidence after all other vaccines. A signal is triggered when three thresholds are met, according to the CDC: a PRR of at least 2, a chi-squared statistic of at least 4, and three or more cases of the event following receipt of the vaccine being analyzed. Chi-squared tests are a form of statistical analysis used to examine data.

The results obtained by The Epoch Times show that there are hundreds of adverse events (AEs) that meet the definition, including serious conditions such as blood clotting in the lungs, intermenstrual bleeding, a lack of oxygen to the heart, and even death. The high numbers, particularly the chi-squared figures, concerned experts.

For many of the events, ‘the chi-squared is so high that, from a Bayesian perspective, the probability that the true rate of the AE of the COVID vaccines is not higher than that of the non-COVID vaccines is essentially zero,’ Norman Fenton, a professor of risk management at Queen Mary University of London, told The Epoch Times in an email after running the numbers through a Bayesian model that provides probabilities based on available information.”

Myopericarditis Is Far From the Only Problem

One of the few side effects of the COVID jabs that the CDC has actually acknowledged is myocarditis (heart inflammation), and a related condition called pericarditis (inflammation of the heart sack). Alas, the PRR monitoring results reveal there are more than 500 other adverse events that have stronger warning signals than either of those conditions.

Josh Guetzkow, an Israeli professor trained in statistics at Princeton University told The Epoch Times:⁷

“We know that the signal for myocarditis is associated with something that is caused by the mRNA vaccines, so it’s more than reasonable to say that anything with a signal larger than myocarditis/pericarditis should be taken seriously and investigated.”

Guetzkow expanded on his commentary in a January 4, 2023, Substack article.⁸ Below is a summary list of some of the key findings from the CDC’s PRR analysis. Guetzkow goes deeper in his article, so for more details, I suggest reading it in its entirety.

For even more analyses and commentary, see Fenton’s Substack article, “The CDC’s Data on COVID Vaccine Safety Signals.”⁹ If you want to investigate the PRR data for yourself, you can download them from The Epoch Times’ January 3, 2023, article.¹⁰ You can also find them here.¹¹

It’s worth noting that the CDC didn’t perform its first safety signal analysis until March 25, 2022 — 15 months after the shots were rolled out. Why the long wait — especially since the CDC had announced it would begin monitoring in early 2021? Just consider, for a moment, how many lives have been lost because the CDC failed to properly monitor safety, and still drags its feet when it comes to warning people about the risks involved.

Download this Article Before it Disappears

Download PDF

FDA Still Refuses to Share Safety Data

The FDA is also required to perform safety monitoring using another technique called Empirical Bayesian data mining. The Epoch Times first asked the FDA to release its monitoring results back in July 2022,^13,14 but like the CDC, the FDA refused and insisted the data showed no evidence of serious adverse effects. In other words, “Just trust us. We’re experts.”

According to the FDA, the only potential signal they’d found through April 16, 2021, was for raised body temperature.¹⁵ Then, in mid-December 2022 — just four months after The Epoch Times tried to get these data — the FDA announced that pulmonary embolism (blood clots that block blood flow in the lungs) had met the threshold for a statistical signal, and continued to meet the criteria after in-depth evaluation, but it was only linked to the Pfizer jab.¹⁶

As noted by The Epoch Times,¹⁷ pulmonary embolism is also identified as a signal in the CDC’s PRR analysis for individuals as young as 12, which really ought to strengthen concerns.

The FDA also admitted it had already evaluated three other warning signals: lack of oxygen to the heart, immune thrombocytopenia (a blood platelet disorder) and intravascular coagulation (a type of blood clotting), but none of these continued to meet the threshold after analysis.

If the FDA was evaluating four warning signals, why did they tell The Epoch Times there was no evidence of ill effects, and why did they claim the only potential signal they’d found was slight fever? Are we to believe they discovered these signals after The Epoch Times asked for the monitoring results and then completed four in-depth investigations in four months?

Whatever the truth, it’s clear that both the CDC and FDA are not being transparent. Worse, they’ve hidden data, knowing it could mean the difference between life and death for hundreds of thousands of people.

CDC Has Ignored Clear ‘Death’ Signal

The CDC ignoring a clear signal for death is probably the most egregious example of its failures as a public health institution. As early as July 2021, Matthew Crawford published a three-part series^18,19,20 detailing how the CDC was hiding safety signals by using a flawed formula. In August that year, Steve Kirsch informed the agency of these problems, but was ignored.

Then, in an October 3, 2022, article,²¹ Kirsch went on to show how “death” should have triggered a signal even when using the CDC’s flawed formula (which is described in its VAERS standard operating procedures manual²²). Here’s an excerpt:²³

“The formula the CDC uses for generating safety signals is fundamentally flawed; a ‘bad’ vaccine with lots of adverse events will ‘mask’ large numbers of important safety signals … Let me summarize the key points for you in a nutshell: PRR [proportional reporting ratio] is defined on page 16 in the CDC document²⁴ as follows …

A ‘safety signal’ is defined on page 16 in the CDC document as a PRR of at least 2, chi-squared statistic of at least 4, and 3 or more cases of the AE [adverse event] following receipt of the specific vaccine of interest. This is the famous ‘and clause.’ Here it is from the document:

Only someone who is incompetent or is deliberately trying to make the vaccines look safe would use the word ‘and’ in the definition of a safety signal.

Using ‘and’ means that if any one of the conditions isn’t satisfied, no safety signal will be generated. As noted below, the PRR will rarely trigger which virtually guarantees that most events generated by an unsafe vaccine will never get flagged.

The PRR value for the COVID vaccines will rarely exceed 1 because there are so many adverse events from the COVID vaccine because it is so dangerous (i.e., B in the formula is a huge number) so the numerator is always near zero. Hence, the ‘safety signal’ is rarely triggered because the vaccine is so dangerous.”

A Fictitious Example

Using a fictitious vaccine as the example, Kirsch explained how an exceptionally dangerous vaccine will fly under the radar and not get flagged, thanks to this flawed formula:²⁵

“Suppose we have the world’s most dangerous vaccine that causes adverse events in everyone who gets it and generates 25,000 different adverse events, and each adverse event has 1,000 instances.

That means that the numerator is 1,000/25,000,000 which is just 40 events per million reported events. Now let’s look at actuals for something like deaths. For all other vaccines, there are 6,200 deaths and 1 million adverse events total.

Since 40 per million is less than 6,200 deaths per million, we are not even close to generating a safety signal for deaths from our hypothetical vaccine which killed 1,000 people in a year … The point is that a dangerous vaccine can look very ‘safe’ using the PRR formula.”

Calculating Death Signal for the COVID Jab

Next, Kirsch calculates the PRR for death for the COVID jab — using VAERS data and the CDC’s definitions and formula. As of December 31, 2019, there were 6,157 deaths and 918,717 adverse events total for all vaccines other than the COVID shot. As of September 23, 2022, there were 31,214 deaths and 1.4 million adverse events total for the COVID jabs. Here’s the formula as explained by Kirsch:²⁶

“PRR = (31,214/1.4e6) / (6,157/918,717) = 3.32, which exceeds the required threshold of 2. In other words, the COVID vaccine is so deadly that even with all the adverse events generated by the vaccine, the death signal did not get drowned out!

But there is still the chi-square test. Chi-square test results were 18,549 for ‘death,’ which greatly exceeds the required threshold of 4. The CDC chi-square test is clearly satisfied for the COVID vaccine. Because the death signal is so huge, it even survived the PRR test.

This means that even using the CDCs own erroneous … formula, all three criteria were satisfied:

A safety signal should have been generated but wasn’t. Why not? … Hundreds of thousands of American lives have been lost due to the inability of the CDC to deploy their own flawed safety signal analysis … It’s been known since at least 2004 that using reporting odds ratio (ROR) is a better estimate of relative risk than PRR.²⁷ I don’t know why the CDC doesn’t use it.”

The CDC is also hiding the severity of side effects in other ways. As explained by Fenton,²⁸ the way side effects are categorized by the CDC help obfuscate the scale of certain problems. For example, “cardiac failure acute,” “cardiac failure,” “infarction,” “myocardial strain” and “myocardial fibrosis” are listed as separate categories, even though in real life they’re all potential effects of myocarditis.

By separating them, you end up with fewer frequency counts per category, thereby giving you an underpowered chi-square test so that a warning signal is not triggered. If related categories were merged, far stronger safety signals would likely emerge.

CDC Has No Reasonable Defense

The CDC is responsible for monitoring both VAERS and V-Safe, and between these two databases, there’s no possible way they could ever say they didn’t know the shots were harming and killing millions of Americans.

The CDC also has access to other databases, including the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), which (before it was intentionally altered²⁹) showed massive increases in debilitating and lethal conditions, including a tripling of cancer cases.³⁰

The findings in these databases have never been brought forward during any of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meetings or the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) meetings, at which members have repeatedly voted to authorize the jabs to people of all ages, including infants and pregnant women.

They even added these toxic shots to the childhood vaccine schedule — which allows states to mandate them for school attendance — without addressing any of the 66 safety signals found in the CDC’s PRR analysis. The fact of the matter is that the CDC has known about these risks all along, and there’s no excuse for not sharing and acting on these data.

Help Spread the Word

Mainstream media are ignoring all of this, so help spread the word. Everyone needs to know what the CDC’s safety data reveal. To that end, here are a few suggestions for how you can help:

• Write or call your members of Congress and ask them to investigate the CDC’s safety monitoring — We cannot have a public safety agency that is incapable of monitoring safety and taking appropriate action when problems are found, be it correcting a flawed formula or announcing that a safety signal has been detected. Of course, they must also publish their findings once an investigation has been made.
• Contact your local newspaper and urge them to investigate and report on the CDC’s failure to act on safety signals.
• Share the data on social media and ask why no one in the media, Congress, academia or medical community is investigating these matters.
• Share this information with your doctor and members of the medical community.
• Also share it with university administrators, and ask them to explain how and why, in light of these data, they are still mandating COVID shots.

Originally published: April 6, 2020

While a limited number of drugs have been enlisted in the treatment of severe coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection, a number of nutritional supplements have risen to the forefront for their apparent usefulness. In addition to quercetin, zinc and vitamins C and D, vitamin B1 (thiamine) may be vital to protect against infectious respiratory illness.

Thiamine is also part of Dr. Paul Marik’s sepsis treatment, which calls for 1,500 milligrams (mg) of intravenous ascorbic acid every six hours, 200 mg of thiamine every 12 hours and 50 mg of hydrocortisone every six hours.¹

Sepsis, as you may have heard, is a major contributor in influenza deaths in general, and a primary cause for COVID-19 deaths specifically. In one clinical trial,^2,3 Marik, [formerly] a critical care doctor at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital in East Virginia, showed his treatment reduced sepsis-related mortality nearly fivefold.

More recent research,^4,5 published online January 9, 2020, found Marik’s sepsis protocol lowered mortality in pediatric patients as well. At the 30-day mark, controls and the hydrocortisone-only groups had a mortality rate of 28% while the treatment group had a mortality rate of just 9%.

Vitamin C, Thiamine and Steroids Have Synergistic Effects

All three ingredients in Marik’s sepsis protocol have synergistic effects, which seems to be why it’s so effective. Vitamin C is well-known for its ability to prevent and treat infectious diseases on its own.

Influenza,⁶ encephalitis and measles⁷ have all been successfully treated with high-dose vitamin C, and previous research has shown it effectively lowers proinflammatory cytokines and C-reactive protein.^8,9,10

Vitamin C and corticosteroids, however, have been shown to work synergistically. This was demonstrated in a study¹¹ by Marik in collaboration with John Catravas, Ph.D., a pharmacology researcher at Old Dominion University, and others, in which endothelial cells from lung tissue were exposed to lipopolysaccharide — a type of endotoxin found in patients with sepsis — in the absence or presence of ascorbic acid and hydrocortisone.

Interestingly, when either vitamin C or the steroid was administered in isolation, very little improvement in endothelial barrier function occurred. When administered together, however, the infection was successfully eradicated and the cells were restored to normal.

The addition of thiamine (vitamin B1) is also important. Not only is thiamine required for metabolism of some of the metabolites of vitamin C, thiamine deficiency syndrome (beriberi) has many similarities to sepsis, and thiamine deficiency is relatively common in critically ill patients.¹²

As noted in a 1955 study,¹³ thiamine deficiency is also prevalent in pulmonary tuberculosis, and the more severe the case, the more severe the thiamine deficiency.

Studies have also shown thiamine can be helpful for a long list of diseases and disorders, including mitochondrial disorders,¹⁴ heart failure,¹⁵ delirium,¹⁶ thyroid fatigue and Hashimoto’s (a thyroid autoimmune disorder).¹⁷ These and other health effects may help explain why thiamine works so well in conjunction with vitamin C and hydrocortisone for sepsis.

You can learn more about Marik’s sepsis protocol in “Vitamin C — A Game Changer in Treatment of Deadly Sepsis,” along with commonsense recommendations for how to lower your risk of sepsis in the first place.

You can also review Marik’s PowerPoint presentation, “Hydrocortisone, Ascorbic Acid and Thiamine for the Treatment of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,” presented at the 2020 Critical Care Reviews meeting in Australia.

Thiamine Deficiency Implicated in Severe Infections

Thiamine deficiency has also been implicated in severe infections specifically. A 2016 study¹⁸ in the journal Psychosomatics sought to investigate this by looking at 68 patients with Korsakoff syndrome, a memory disorder caused by severe thiamine deficiency.

While thiamine deficiency is often the result of alcohol misuse, it’s also associated with chronic infections, poor nutrition and/or malabsorption. As explained by the Alzheimer’s Association, “Thiamine helps brain cells produce energy from sugar. When levels fall too low, brain cells cannot generate enough energy to function properly.”¹⁹

In the Psychosomatics study, they found that 35 of 68 Korsakoff patients suffered severe infections during the acute phase of the illness, including meningitis, pneumonia and sepsis. According to the authors, “Infections may be the presenting manifestation of thiamine deficiency.”

Download this Article Before it Disappears

Download PDF

Thiamine Helps Regulate Your Immune Function

Another study²⁰ published in 2018 found thiamine helps limit Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) by regulating your innate immunity. According to this paper:

“… vitamin B1 promotes the protective immune response to limit the survival of MTB within macrophages and in vivo through regulation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPAR-γ).

Vitamin B1 promotes macrophage polarization into classically activated phenotypes with strong microbicidal activity and enhanced tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-6 expression at least in part by promoting nuclear factor-κB signaling.

In addition, vitamin B1 increases mitochondrial respiration and lipid metabolism and PPAR-γ integrates the metabolic and inflammatory signals regulated by vitamin B1 … We demonstrate that vitamin B1 enhances anti-MTB activities in macrophages and in vivo by down-regulating PPAR-γ activity.

Our data demonstrate important functions of thiamine VB1 in regulating innate immune responses against MTB and reveal novel mechanisms by which vitamin B1 exerts its function in macrophages.”

The Link Between Thiamine Deficiency and Fever

Thiamine deficiency is also associated with the development of high fever, and according to a letter to the editor,²¹ “Is Parenteral Thiamin a Super Antibiotic?” published in the Annals of Nutrition & Metabolism in 2018, thiamine injections are “likely to eradicate microbial infections” causing the fever.

The authors cite some clinical case reports in which thiamine injections were able to reverse a number of acute illnesses in which high fever was a factor, including one case where the patient presented with high fever, headache and asphyxia (feelings of suffocation), and another where a comatose patient had high fever and severe pneumonia.

“… another laborer with much milder pneumonia, 38°C fever with few rales in the left lung died within 24 h, although a full dose of penicillin G was used, but no thiamin was given,” the authors note.

“This sharp contrast between the two cases made such a deep impression that it was strongly remembered. Fifty-six years later, it became a life-saving suggestion for a critical case with fatal viral pneumonia.”

The authors go on to detail an even more remarkable case involving a 38-year-old Chinese woman who was brought to the hospital with high fever (39 to 40 degrees C), pain, swollen legs and bloody sputum. Laboratory testing showed she was anemic and had low platelets, severe pneumonia, femoral thromboses and heart failure. She also tested positive for hepatitis C.

“An exhaustive identification study revealed that the pathogen of her pneumonia was diagnosed to be an unknown kind of virus,” the authors note. “Pulmonary lesions were extremely severe, strange, and rare with multiple small perforations in the left lung …

After 12 days of immunoglobulin, anti-viral, antithrombotic, and antipyretic medication, she was about to die when her family promptly carried her home … At home, thiamin 200 mg and VB complex 1 ampule (containg thiamin 10 mg, riboflavin 2 mg, niacinamide 30 mg, pyridoxin 2 mg, pantothenic acid 1 mg) were injected thrice daily.

Temperature returned to normal after 2 days and leg edema disappeared in 5 days … After 58 days, she was checked in the Beichen Hospital … The results revealed a normal heart; hepatitis C negative … less effusion in the left thoracic cavity; pleural thickness especially on the left side but no adhesion. Lung perforation was absent … She thereafter enjoyed excellent health without any sign of embolism or pneumonia recurrence.”

About 10 months after her initial hospitalization, she underwent a second follow-up, which revealed normal blood counts and electrocardiography. Her lungs also looked completely normal on X-rays, “with no thickening or adhesion of pleura except for a few texture thickenings in the lungs.”

According to the authors, this case made them wonder whether thiamine might be “a super antibiotic.” “It seemed to be surely so and was emerging to be a powerful alternative in the event of antibiotics failing,” they said.

Thiamine Deficiency Might Impact Pandemics

The World Health Organization has also published information about the importance of thiamine and how to prevent deficiency during major emergencies.²² According to WHO:

“Thiamine deficiency occurs where the diet consists mainly of milled white cereals, including polished rice, and wheat flour, all very poor sources of thiamine. Thiamine deficiency can develop within 2-3 months of a deficient intake and can cause disability and death.”

Other evidence suggests thiamine insufficiency or deficiency can develop even faster than that, perhaps as quickly as two weeks, as its half-life in your system is only nine to 18 days.²³

The WHO report also points out that “Thiamine deficiency occurs sporadically in people who are socially isolated, suffer loss of appetite and self-neglect” — a point that is particularly pertinent in current circumstances of global “shelter in place” requirements. What’s more:

“The requirement of thiamine is increased when carbohydrates are taken in large amounts and is raised during periods of increased metabolism, for example, fever, muscular activity, hyperthyroidism and also during pregnancy and lactation. A diet based on polished rice is high in carbohydrates which augments the thiamine requirement and is compounded by a low thiamine content.”

Aside from rice, junk food of all kinds tends to be loaded with carbohydrates as well, which could necessitate a higher-than normal thiamine intake to prevent side effects of thiamine deficiency. In adults, thiamine deficiency is divided into two primary types:^24,25

• Dry beriberi (thiamine deficiency with peripheral neuropathy) — Polyneuropathy with paraesthesia of the extremities (especially the legs), reduced knee jerk and other tendon reflexes, progressive severe weakness and wasting of muscles, and greatly increased susceptibility to infections.
• Wet beriberi (thiamine deficiency with cardiomyopathy) — Edema (especially of the legs, but also the trunk and face), high cardiac output, ventricular failure, sinus rhythm, dilatation of arterioles, depressed erythrocyte and leukocyte transketolase, elevated serum lactate and pyruvate, and pulmonary congestion with pleural effusions; death from congestive heart failure may occur abruptly.

By dramatically increasing susceptibility to infections, thiamine deficiency could potentially have the ability to impact the spread of just about any pandemic infectious disease.

The Importance of Thiamine in Septic Shock

With regard to sepsis — which is a primary reason why people die from COVID-19 — thiamine may be of vital importance. In a Journal of Thoracic Disease article with the evocative title, “Do Not Forget to Give Thiamine to Your Septic Shock Patient!” the authors stress that:²⁶

“[Thiamine] is a water-soluble vitamin that is an indispensable constituent of cellular metabolism. A lack of this vitamin can, therefore, be potentially life-threatening … Thiamine diphosphate, also known as thiamine pyrophosphate (TPP) … is the most important and active form of this vitamin …

Thiamine pyrophosphate … acts in concomitance with magnesium to expedite various mitochondrial oxidative decarboxylation reactions.

Thiamine pyrophosphate is necessary as a cofactor for branched-chain ketoacid dehydrogenase complex essential for the metabolism of the branched-chain amino acids and for two critical complexes required for the mitochondrial synthesis of adenosine triphosphate (ATP): pyruvate and 2-oxoglutarate dehydrogenase (α-ketoglutarate) complexes …

Also, TPP serves as a coenzyme for transketolase, a cytosolic enzyme implicated in the pentose phosphate pathway that functions in maintaining cell redox status through the production of NADPH (reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate) and glutathione …

Lack of thiamine leads to alterations in intermediate metabolism that end-up in lactic acidosis …

Thiamine deficiency is also prevalent in septic shock patients, with rates ranging from 20% to 70% depending on the cutoff value used to define the presence of thiamine deficiency. Lack of thiamine reduces the flux of pyruvate to the Krebs cycle, thus increasing lactate production by altering the aerobic metabolism.

In a prospective, observational study, Donnino et al. investigated the relationship between thiamine levels and lactic acidosis in 30 septic shock patients …

After excluding patients with abnormal liver function tests, the authors observed a significant negative correlation between thiamine concentrations and lactic acidosis, implying a potential association between thiamine levels and lactic acidosis in septic shock patients with normal liver function.

Thus, the possibility that by decreasing the activity of pyruvate dehydrogenase complex, thiamine deficiency can contribute to increased production of lactic acid in critically ill septic patients exists.”

The authors cite additional research strongly suggesting “the administration of thiamine is advantageous in septic shock patients with severe thiamine deficiency (thiamine level ≤7 nmol/L).” Considering the safety of thiamine, even at high doses, the authors stress that “septic shock patients should be given thiamine … without waiting for the results of thiamine level.”

The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism guidelines for patients in intensive care situations are 100 to 300 mg of thiamine per day “during the first three days in the ICU for all patients with suspected thiamine deficiency.”²⁷

In cases of septic shock, however, dosages of 500 mg may be required. According to “Do Not Forget to Give Thiamine to Your Septic Shock Patient!”:²⁸

“Because anaphylaxis has been reported in rare instances, guidelines in the United Kingdom have recommended that thiamine should be administered over 15- to 30-minute interval in a mixture of saline solution or dextrose, with the intention of averting potential adverse reactions.”

Vitamins C, D, Thiamine and Magnesium for Critical Illness

A 2018 report²⁹ in Intensive Care Medicine also focuses on thiamine — here in conjunction with vitamins C and D. It cites research showing septic shock patients with thiamine deficiency who were given thiamine had far lower mortality (13%) than those who did not receive it (46%).³⁰ They were also far less likely to suffer kidney failure.

Like thiamine, acute vitamin C deficiency is very common during critical illness yet tends to go unnoticed. As noted in this report, “Acute vitamin C deficiency may contribute to hypotension, exaggerated inflammation, capillary leakage, microcirculatory compromise, oxidative organ injury, and impaired immune defense and wound healing.”

Vitamin D deficiency is also common, and can worsen illness and increase the risk of death from acute illness. According to the authors of this report:

“Preliminary data using novel methods suggest that glutathione and glutamate pathway metabolism, which are important for redox regulation and immunomodulation, are affected by vitamin D status …

The VITdAL-ICU study (n = 475) did not find a difference in the length of hospital stay between groups, but there was a significant reduction in mortality in the predefined subgroup of patients with severe vitamin D deficiency. The most recent meta-analysis concludes that vitamin D in the ICU may be associated with mortality reduction.”

Surprisingly, magnesium has not been given much, if any, attention in all this. It may be just as important for the prevention and treatment of infection, however, seeing how magnesium is required for the activation of both thiamine³¹ and vitamin D.^32,33,34

People ages 65 and older who received Pfizer’s updated (bivalent) COVID-19 booster shot may be at increased risk of stroke, according to an announcement made by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration.¹

The joint statement warns that the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), which uses near real-time surveillance to track vaccine safety, flagged the potential safety issue, revealing that those 65 and over were more likely to have an ischemic stroke 21 days after receiving Pfizer’s bivalent COVID-19 shot compared to 22 to 44 days later.²

US Health Agencies Downplay Stroke Risk

In their announcement, the CDC and the FDA made light of the VSD safety signal, stating within the first two paragraphs, “Often these safety systems detect signals that could be due to factors other than the vaccine itself. All signals require further investigation and confirmation from formal epidemiologic studies.”³

They frame the message as though they’re doing their duty to be transparent and open with the public regarding risks attached to COVID-19 shots. But most of the announcement details reasons why they believe you should still get boosted, no matter your age:⁴

“Although the totality of the data currently suggests that it is very unlikely that the signal in VSD represents a true clinical risk, we believe it is important to share this information with the public, as we have in the past, when one of our safety monitoring systems detects a signal. CDC and FDA will continue to evaluate additional data from these and other vaccine safety systems …

No change in vaccination practice is recommended. CDC continues to recommend that everyone ages 6 months of age and older stay up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccination; this includes individuals who are currently eligible to receive an updated (bivalent) vaccine.”

Updated Boosters Likely Causing a ‘Great Deal of Strokes’

According to Dr. Meryl Nass, a board-certified internal medicine physician with special expertise in vaccine safety and vaccine mandates, the fact that VSD produced a red flag is evidence that the problem is likely much worse than health agencies are letting on.

Not to mention, the FDA and CDC released the statement on a Friday night before a three-day weekend, “which is proof they wanted to bury it,” Nass said. Even Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo tweeted about the odd timing:^5,6

“What better time than a Friday afternoon for @CDCgov and @US_FDA to let Americans know that the mRNA shots they’ve been pushing may be causing strokes? Don’t worry, we’ll make sure the word gets out — just like we’ve been doing for months.”

Nass explained:⁷

“This is huge news, because the VSD database that produced the red flag for ischemic strokes (which comprise 80% of all strokes and are due to blood clots) has been analyzed by CDC in a manner that prevented it from showing red flags in the past. No red flag from myocarditis, heart attacks, sudden deaths, Bell’s palsy, etc.

In other words, they are using a bum algorithm or method that is designed to miss adverse event signals. Eventually CDC stumbled on a myocarditis signal in this database, but missed all the other obvious diagnoses. So if they are using the same crude technique and found strokes, that means there were a great deal of strokes, many more than would have been expected as the baseline rate.

Furthermore, the VSD is considered an active surveillance database of high reliability, which includes the medical records of 12 million Americans. This announcement probably means that not only are the bivalent vaccines worthless, but they are also considerably more harmful than the earlier, monovalent vaccines.”

Download this Article Before it Disappears

Download PDF

Concerns About Updated Boosters From the Start

The COVID-19 booster shots that generated the VSD safety signal for stroke are known as bivalent shots, or “updated boosters.” August 31, 2022, the FDA amended the emergency use authorizations (EUAs) of Moderna and Pfizer’s COVID-19 shots to authorize bivalent formulations to be used as booster doses at least two months after a previous booster or primary series of the shots.

“The bivalent vaccines, which we will also refer to as “updated boosters,” contain two messenger RNA (mRNA) components of SARS-CoV-2 virus, one of the original strain of SARS-CoV-2 and the other one in common between the BA.4 and BA.5 lineages of the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2,” the FDA stated.⁸

Yet, in June 2022, before the shots were even approved, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced that it, in partnership with the Department of Defense, had already agreed to purchase 105 million doses of Pfizer’s new COVID-19 shot — for $3.2 billion.⁹

The contract was intended to supply booster shots for the fall 2022 injection campaign and included options to purchase up to 300 million doses. The decision came after a June 28 meeting of the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), which recommended that an omicron-specific component be included in COVID-19 booster shots in the U.S.¹⁰

While Pfizer cited strong antibody responses from its retooled boosters, the booster shot studies did not reveal whether the shots prevent COVID-19 cases or how long they are effective.¹¹

Further, human data are only available for Pfizer’s boosters targeting BA.1; only animal data are available for the BA.4/BA.5 boosters that rolled out September 2022.¹² John Moore, professor of microbiology and immunology at Weill Cornell Medicine, told NPR, “For the FDA to rely on mouse data is just bizarre, in my opinion. Mouse data are not going to be predictive in any way of what you would see in humans.”¹³ Nass added:¹⁴

“This is the fastest rollout of a new vaccine in world history. How did it happen? Instead of this being a tale of human grit and ingenuity, it is a tale of human weakness and recklessness. Let me ask again: how did such a rapid vaccine rollout occur?

It occurred the only way it could possibly occur: by bending the rules, creating a new regulatory playbook and failing to obtain any human data for the new vaccines. The manufacturers did not have to go through months-long trials, and FDA did not have to pour over any human trial data, because there weren’t any. Let that sink in: the new BA.4/5 bivalent vaccines have only been tested in mice, not humans.”

‘CDC Is Lying to People … Stroke Risk Is Very Real’

Steve Kirsch, executive director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, also spoke out regarding CDC’s and FDA’s stroke risk announcement. While the health agencies stressed that no other safety systems, such as the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) or Pfizer-BioNTech’s global safety database, had flagged a stroke risk, Kirsch says this is a lie.

In fact, Kirsch states that the CDC admitted in a FOIA request that ischemic stroke triggered a safety signal in VAERS. If they were honest with the U.S. public, he notes, they would say:¹⁵

“OK, to be perfectly honest, we KNOW that the shot is causing strokes. In fact, there’s a safety signal for stroke in all the databases, but we’re just too darn corrupt to admit that and the mainstream press is too ignorant to ask us about it. So we lied. And we get away with it. Always.”

A spreadsheet obtained from the CDC under FOIA revealed 770 safety signals triggered in VAERS due to COVID-19 shots, including death, ischemic stroke, cardiac arrest, pulmonary thrombosis, Bell’s palsy, heart attack, deep vein thrombosis and more.¹⁶ Again, CDC and FDA’s announcement makes it sound like the safety signal is nothing to worry about. But if they were telling the truth, their warning would sound more like this, Kirsch states:¹⁷

“It’s a real safety signal of course. These shots are a disaster and nobody in the mainstream medical community has time to check out the data directly. We control the journals and we make sure that nothing gets published that goes against the narrative, so the medical community gets fooled.

Those who actually check out the data or talk to large geriatric practices or nursing homes and find out the truth are too afraid to speak out because they know they will lose their job, their hospital privileges, their NIH funding, and their license to practice medicine.

But most never get that far since we train them in medical school that vaccines are always safe and to always trust authority. That’s why most of the physicians think the vaccines are on the level. They do what they are told.”

Even Paul Offit Is Bashing Bivalent COVID Shots

When even vaccination proponent Dr. Paul Offit, director of the vaccine education center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, issues a “cautionary tale” about a shot, you know it’s got to be bad. Writing in The New England Journal of Medicine, Offit notes that he’s a member of VRBPAC and sat in on the June 28, 2022 presentation, when Pfizer and Moderna presented data on their bivalent shots:¹⁸

“The results were underwhelming. Bivalent boosters resulted in levels of neutralizing antibodies against BA.1 that were only 1.5 to 1.75 times as high as those achieved with monovalent boosters. Previous experience with the companies’ vaccines suggested that this difference was unlikely to be clinically significant.”

Despite this, the FDA advisory committee voted in favor of authorizing the shots, since they would be targeting omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5. “A series of rapid-fire policy decisions followed,” Offit explains, such that, less than four months after the advisory meeting, the CDC had recommended bivalent boosters for everyone 5 years of age and older.

“At that point, no data from humans, including immunogenicity data, were available for comparing the relative capacities of the monovalent and bivalent vaccines to protect against BA.4 and BA.5,” he says.¹⁹ Soon, however, data rolled in showing the bivalent boosters did not offer better protection than the former COVID-19 booster shots,²⁰ which were already failing.²¹ Offit says the bivalent boosters likely failed due to imprinting:²²

“The immune systems of people immunized with the bivalent vaccine, all of whom had previously been vaccinated, were primed to respond to the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2. They therefore probably responded to epitopes shared by BA.4 and BA.5 and the ancestral strain, rather than to new epitopes on BA.4 and BA.5.”

Even in reference to a CDC study²³ that found the bivalent shots resulted in anywhere from 28% to 56% extra protection, depending on how long ago their last COVID-19 shot was, Offit says, “Given the results of previous studies, it’s likely that this moderate increase in protection against probably generally mild disease will be short lived.”²⁴

Adding insult to injury, the COVID strains the bivalent shots target have largely disappeared. “By December 2022, the BA.4 strain was no longer circulating, and BA.5 accounted for less than 25% of circulating SARS-CoV-2 strains,” Offit says.²⁵

At this point, Kirsch summed up, the data is crystal clear that boosters aren’t working and are dangerous. “Paul Offit is no dummy; he’s not getting any more boosters,” he says. “Neither should you.”²⁶

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires first-class airline pilots to receive an electrocardiogram (EKG) starting at age 35, and continuing annually after age 40.¹ EKGs record the heart’s electrical activity to provide a measure of heart health and certain parameters must be met in order for pilots to be deemed fit to fly.

October 24, 2022, the FAA changed the EKG requirements necessary for pilots to fly — but not to make them safer. With no public announcement or explanation, the agency expanded the allowable range for the PR interval, a measure of heart function.²

Widening this parameter means those with potential heart damage, disease or injuries are now allowed to fly commercial aircraft, potentially putting passengers at risk, should they suffer a heart attack or other event while in the air. Why would the FAA make such a drastic and risky move without informing the public?

COVID Shots May Have Damaged Pilots’ Hearts

On an EKG, a normal PR interval measures 0.12 to 0.2 seconds.³ If the PR interval is shorter or longer than this, it can be indicative of a problem. According to Steve Kirsch, executive director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, the FAA widened the acceptable EKG parameters from a PR max of 0.2 to 0.3, and potentially even higher. He says:⁴

“They didn’t widen the range by a little. They widened it by a lot. It was done after the vaccine rollout. This is extraordinary. They did it hoping nobody would notice. It worked for a while. Nobody caught it. But you can’t hide these things for long. This is a tacit admission from the U.S. government that the COVID vaccine has damaged the hearts of our pilots. Not just a few pilots. A lot of pilots and a lot of damage.”

Kirsch gives five reasons why he’s confident these widened parameters were necessary due to the widespread heart damage pilots — and the U.S. public — experienced due to COVID-19 shots. According to Kirsch:⁵

“I believe it is because they knew if they kept the original range, too many pilots would have to be grounded. That would be extremely problematic; commercial aviation in the US would be severely disrupted. And why did they do that quietly without notifying the public or the mainstream media?

I’m pretty sure they won’t tell me, so I’ll speculate: it’s because they didn’t want anyone to know. In other words, the COVID vaccine has seriously injured a lot of pilots and the FAA knows it and said nothing because that would tip off the country that the vaccines are unsafe. And you aren’t allowed to do that.”

Five Clues COVID Shots Are Likely to Blame

Five factors suggest that pilots’ worsening heart health is due to COVID-19 shots, and not COVID-19. As noted by Kirsch, they include:⁶

1. The change in EKG parameters was made quietly. “If it was COVID, you can be public. But the vaccine is supposed to be safe.”
2. The timing of the change in October 2022, which is later than it would have been if COVID-19 were to blame. “If it was due to COVID, it would have happened well before now. They can make changes every month.”
3. The widespread injuries. “The vaccine creates far more injury to the heart than COVID.” For instance, an Israeli study of adults who did not get a COVID-19 shot but did get COVID-19 found the infection was not associated with myocarditis or pericarditis.⁷
4. Anecdotal reports from cardiologists about heart damage began post-shot.
5. Many sudden deaths have been reported post-shot.

Kirsch estimates that 20% of pilots screened may have suffered heart damage due to COVID-19 shots, based on an upcoming study set to be published in The Epoch Times. A Thailand study also revealed “cardiovascular manifestations” including rapid heartbeat (tachycardia), palpitation and myopericarditis in 29.24% of adolescents who’d received an mRNA COVID-19 shot.⁸

“But kids are indestructible so a 30% injury rate in kids translates into a higher rate for adults,” Kirsch says, adding:⁹

“Bottom line: The most logical conclusion is that the FAA knows the hearts of our nation’s pilots have been injured by the COVID vaccine that they were coerced into taking, the number of pilots affected is huge, the cardiac damage is extensive, and passenger safety is being compromised by the lowering of the standards to enable pilots to fly.

The right thing would be for the FAA to come clean and admit to the American public that the COVID vaccine has injured 20% or more of the pilots (based on their limited EKG screening), but I doubt that they will ever do that.”

Download this Article Before it Disappears

Download PDF

Pilot Has Heart Attack After Shot

In May 2022, The Epoch Times reported the case of Robert Snow, a pilot for American Airlines with 31 years of experience flying commercially and seven years as a pilot in the U.S. Air Force.¹⁰ Snow does not have coronary disease, but he suffered a cardiac arrest about six minutes after landing a plane he flew from Denver to Dallas Fort Worth.

According to the news outlet, “He believes that his cardiac arrest is connected to the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine he was forced to take in order to keep his job on November 4, 2021, even though he already had natural immunity from previously contracting the virus.” And he’s not the only one with that suspicion. Snow told The Epoch Times:¹¹

“I would just tell you that there are other pilots out there that have had concerns, not just pilots, also because it was an employee mandate. So we have flight attendants, we have mechanics, we have dispatchers, we have gate agents, you name it.

Of course, for pilots, we consider that a safety-sensitive job so we’re a little bit more concerned from the standpoint of aviation safety; but yes, I have received calls from other pilots and other communications stating that they have concerns but because of the nature of this, they’re afraid to come forward.”

Dr. Peter McCullough is a cardiologist, internist and epidemiologist and the chief scientific officer of The Wellness Company.¹² He also is one of the most published cardiologists in America, with over 1,000 publications and 660 citations in the National Library of Medicine, and is a recipient of the Simon Dack Award from the American College of Cardiology and the International Vicenza Award in Critical Care Nephrology for his scholarship and research.

He told The Epoch Times “there is no other explanation” for Snow’s cardiac arrest. “The MRI pattern is consistent. Indeed, it may have been vaccine-induced myocarditis …”¹³

McCullough also spoke with Joshua Yoder, an airline pilot and cofounder of U.S. Freedom Flyers, which formed to help pilots and other transportation industry employees oppose federal shot mandates.

Yoder’s group has received hundreds of reports from pilots who have suffered adverse events from COVID-19 shots, including chest pains, myocarditis and pericarditis. McCullough told Yoder that if every pilot who’d received a COVID-19 shot received a health screening, about 30% would fail due to shot-induced injuries.¹⁴

Doctors Call on FAA to Flag Pilots Who Received COVID Shots

McCullough, along with pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole, Robert Kennedy Jr. and others, sent a letter to the FAA December 15, 2021, calling on the agency to medically flag all pilots who received a COVID-19 shot and, within four weeks, have them undergo thorough medical reexaminations to include:¹⁵

• D-Dimer tests to check for blood clotting problems
• Troponin tests to check for Troponin in the blood, which is a protein released when the heart muscle has been damaged
• EKG analysis to check electrical signals that determine cardiac health
• Cardiac MRI
• PULS test to determine heart health

Adding cardiac MRI to pilots’ screening is “critical,” the letter said, explaining:¹⁶

“A recent study showed that using only ECG [EKG] results and symptoms to screen patients resulted in a 7.4 underdiagnosing of actual myocarditis, while the PULS test is also critical as a study published … showed that ‘MRNA COVID vaccines dramatically increase … inflammatory markers’ and that the risk of acute coronary syndrome more than doubled in those vaccinated …

… leading the authors to conclude that ‘the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines dramatically increase inflammation … on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle, and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.”

Will the US Federal Air Surgeon Investigate?

January 21, 2023, Kirsch spoke with the FAA’s federal air surgeon, Dr. Susan Northrup. She said she was aware of Snow’s case, but no one from the FAA had reached out to investigate the near-miss tragedy. Kirsch also emailed Northrup the names and contact information for several shot-injured pilots. Further, he noted:¹⁷

“More importantly, in that email, I also invited her to host a public roundtable at the FAA inviting people on both sides of the ‘safe and effective’ narrative so that the FAA could learn the truth. I just talked to Senator Ron Johnson and I can assure you that he’d be DELIGHTED to help her assemble a roundtable of doctors on both sides of the narrative to brief top FAA officials on the risks of these vaccines.

And I offered to publish her revised statement to the public so we can get the truth out that the vaccines are NOT safe and are disabling pilots. Here’s the kicker. The corruption at the FAA runs deep. Did you know that nobody at the FAA has ever called Bob Snow? How can the FAA investigate this incident without ever even talking to the pilot?”

At this point, Northrup has been duly informed of the very real potential that COVID-19 shots could be making it unsafe for jabbed pilots to fly. But then, she was probably already aware. Her husband, John Hyle, a pilot, refused the jab due to safety concerns. Whether or not a real investigation will happen, however, remains to be seen. Kirsch added:¹⁸

“So it’s not just a few ‘anti-vaxxers’ spreading ‘misinformation.’ Susan clearly realizes that intelligent people she clearly respects have legitimate concerns that cause them to refuse to take the shot. The narrative is falling apart.

We need public transparency on all of the things above. And we need it now before lives are lost. We’ve had a couple of close calls. The FAA needs to be proactive about this, not REACTIVE after a crash happens. What do you think will happen next?”

FAA Broke Its Own Rule Letting Pilots Fly After COVID Shots

In its Guide for Aviation Medical Examiners, the FAA states that aviation medical examiners should not issue medical certificates to pilots who’ve taken drugs the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved less than 12 months prior:¹⁹

“The FAA generally requires at least one-year of post-marketing experience with a new drug before consideration for aeromedical certification purposes. This observation period allows time for uncommon, but aeromedically significant, adverse effects to manifest themselves.”

Now, the FAA states pilots can resume flying just 48 hours after receiving a COVID-19 shot.²⁰ Leigh Dundas, an attorney who was the primary author of the FAA letter, told The Epoch Times:²¹

“The Federal Aviation Agency is charged with ensuring the safety of the flying public. Instead, as we speak the FAA, as well as the commercial airline companies, are acting in contravention of their own federal aviation regulations and associated guidance which tells medical examiners to NOT issue medical certifications to pilots using non-FDA approved products.

… The title of the section I’m talking about literally says ‘Do Not Issue — Do Not Fly’ and then instructs medical examiners to ‘not issue’ medical certifications to pilots using products that the FDA ‘approved less than 12 months ago’ …

The pilots are flying with products which are not even recently approved — in violation of the above wording — they are flying with injections in their bodies which were NEVER approved by the FDA at all (as no COVID vaccine which is commercially available in the U.S. has received FDA approval).”

It’s Not Only Pilots Whose Hearts Are Damaged

While the implications of commercial airline pilots flying with shot-induced heart damage raises significant safety concerns, it’s not only pilots who are affected. Any person who received a COVID-19 shot could face similar risks. As Kirsch noted:²²

“At a more conservative 20% injury rate, we are looking at 50M Americans with heart damage caused by the jab. As more studies are done, it’s going to be crystal clear why so many people are dying suddenly, especially kids. It’s also going to explain why nursing homes have lost up to 33% of their residents in 12 months where before they were losing only 1 or 2% a year.

… Confidence in the CDC and the medical community should hit rock bottom after it is revealed how extensive the damage caused by these vaccines is. The fact that … the FAA quietly changed their EKG guidance should at least open your mind to the possibility that I might be right. This narrative is going to start falling apart at an accelerated rate.”

The Indian cooking spice asafoetida^1,2 — a name that translates into “rotten resin”³ — also known as hing, hingu⁴ or heeng,⁵ is a gum obtained from a type of giant fennel. It has an offensive smell akin to that of rotting garlic and sweaty feet, but an appetizing savory, umami taste. In France, the herb is known as devil’s dung.

According to GoodFood.com,⁶ Jain and Brahmin Indians have long used it in lieu of garlic and onions. It’s also popular among those in whom onions cause digestive trouble.

While it is sometimes possible to locate asafoetida in its raw gum form, it’s most commonly sold as a ground powder mixed with flour, starch or turmeric. This is likely a good thing, as eating it raw can cause severe diarrhea and/or vomiting.⁷ It has a very strong odor and should be used in very small amounts. As noted by GoodFood.com:⁸

“Once a container of asafoetida has been opened it’s best to close it as soon as possible. Then, keep it hermetically sealed in an airtight plastic container, or double wrapped — at least. If the aroma escapes you will awake to find a house reeking of yesterday’s garlic …

Generally, the yellow, diluted asafoetida powder is used in about the proportion of a pinch or two to 250g of the main ingredient … longer cooking mellows it …

Asafoetida works best when first fried for five to ten seconds in hot oil until its pungency is dramatically obvious — make sure you have the extractor on or the window open. Then quickly add other ingredients to stop it burning.”

Health Benefits of Asafoetida

With its onion-garlic flavor, you can use it as a substitute for either of those ingredients. Many recommend using it in bean-based dishes, as it helps prevent gassiness.⁹

Its ability to cut gas is attributed to antibacterial compounds that impede the activity of gut bacteria responsible for flatulence.¹⁰ It also has a number of other health benefits,¹¹ including antibacterial, antiparasitic and antiviral properties.

In 2009, researchers discovered certain compounds in the herb were more effective at killing the H1N1 influenza virus than the commercial antiviral drug amantadine.^12,13

Another study¹⁴ found the ferulic acid in asafoetida has the ability to control fascioliasis,¹⁵ a zoonotic liver disease (meaning it can spread between animals and people) caused by eating watercress or other water plants contaminated with Fasciola hepatica and/or Fasciola gigantica.

According to a paper¹⁶ in the Pharmacognosy Review, asafoetida also has antispasmodic, carminative, expectorant, laxative and sedative properties, just to name a few. Historical uses include the treatment of hysteria, nervous conditions, bronchitis, asthma, whooping cough, infantile pneumonia and flatulent colic.¹⁷

According to the Pharmacognosy Review paper, it’s particularly beneficial for asthma, thanks to volatile oils that are eliminated through the lungs. It’s also been shown to work as a natural blood thinner and helps lower blood pressure. In traditional medicine in India, the herb is taken to help break up and eliminate kidney stones and gallstones.¹⁸

Historically, it has also been used as an antidote to opium. According to the Pharmacognosy Review, “Given in the same quantity as opium ingested by the patient, it will counteract the effect of the drug.”¹⁹

Asafoetida Has Anticancer and Life Extending Properties

Asafoetida also contains a number of chemicals shown to have anti-inflammatory, anticancer and antimutagenic activities.²⁰ As reported in the Pharmacognosy Review:²¹

“Dried resin, administered orally to Sprague–Dawley rats at doses of 1.25 and 2.5% w/w of the diet, produced a significant reduction in the multiplicity and size of palpable N-methyl-N-nitrosourea-induced mammary tumors, and a delay in mean latency period of tumor appearance.

Oral administration to mice increased the percentage of life span by 52.9%. Intraperitoneal administration did not produce any significant reduction in tumor growth.

The extract also inhibited a two-stage chemical carcinogenesis induced by 7,12-dimethylbenzathracene and croton oil on mice skin with significant reduction in papilloma formation.”

Similarly, a study²² published in the Journal of Ayurveda and Integrative Medicine in 2017 confirmed the asafoetida resin had antitumor effects against breast cancer. According to the authors:²³

“Our results showed that treatment with asafoetida was effective in decreasing the tumor weight and tumor volume in treated mice. Body weight significantly increased in female BALB/c mice against control.

Apart from the antitumor effect, asafoetida decreased lung, liver and kidney metastasis and also increased areas of necrosis in the tumor tissue respectively.”

Other studies²⁴ have also found the isolated ferulsinaic acid in asafoetida has life extending capability, increasing the mean life span of Caenorhabditis elegans by as much as 18.03%, and their maximum life span between 8.33% and 41.6%.

Improved heat stress tolerance and reductions in lipid peroxidation are thought to be responsible for this effect. According to the authors, “Ferulsinaic acid had therapeutic efficacy as an antioxidant with the possibility of its use as an antioxidant drug.”

With every passing day, the list of people suffering tragic consequences from the COVID mRNA shots grows longer. As of December 23, 2022, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) had received 33,334 reports of post-jab deaths, 26,045 cases of myocarditis and 15,970 heart attacks.¹

Many of these people and their stories have remained hidden from public view as social media have universally censored these stories. As a result, people who only read mainstream media are largely unaware of the damage being done. However, there is a population of people whose injuries and deaths have been far more public.

Over the past two years (2021 through 2022), more than 1,650^2,3,4,5,6,7 professional and amateur athletes have collapsed due to cardiac events and 1,148⁸ of them proved fatal. In his book “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022,”⁹ Edward Dowd writes extensively about the anomalous number of deaths now occurring among athletes, which, despite “fact checkers” best efforts to dismiss it as “normal,”^10,11 is anything but.

What Happened to Damar Hamlin?

More than likely, you’ve heard that Damar Hamlin, a 24-year-old Buffalo Bills football player went into cardiac arrest on live television after making a tackle during a January 2, 2023, game against the Cincinnati Bengals.^12,13 Team trainers and emergency medical staff performed CPR for more than nine minutes, which saved his life. After initially being placed in a medically-induced coma, Hamlin was reportedly on the mend within a week.¹⁴

Whether the COVID jab played a role in what happened to Hamlin is impossible to know for sure. Looking at the replays, it’s clear he took a very severe hit right to the chest right before his collapse, and this certainly could have caused the heart attack. At bare minimum, it’s not unheard of. Former Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker had a similar incident in 2017, as did hockey legend Chris Pronger in 1998.¹⁵

On the other hand, it’s also not inconceivable that the COVID jab — if Hamlin was in fact “vaxxed” — could have affected his heart, thereby playing a contributing role. We now know the COVID shot is associated with a significantly elevated risk of myocarditis, which in turn raises the risk of sudden cardiac death in contact sports.¹⁶

While the NFL enforced strict COVID jab rules for employees who have contact with players, the players and coaches were not subject to mandates.^17,18 That said, 95% of players did get the shot, according to the NFL league.¹⁹

Cardiologist Offers His View

In a January 4, 2023, Children’s Health Defense interview, Dr. Peter McCullough, a cardiologist and internist, reviewed what could have happened in Hamlin’s case. As noted by McCullough, a condition called commotio cordis (Latin for “agitation of the heart”) is known to occur in baseball when a player is hit hard on the breastbone, thereby causing cardiac arrest. There are approximately 20 to 30 such cases each year.

However, no such case has ever occurred in 100 years of pro football. Football players have padding that protects the breastbone, so in McCullough’s view, commotio cordis can likely be ruled out. The more likely cause for Hamlin’s cardiac arrest, he believes, is hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), or abnormal thickening of the heart muscle, which is the primary cause for athletes suffering cardiac arrest.

The reason why HCM is the No. 1 cause of cardiac arrest in professional athletes is because it causes few if any symptoms and often goes undiagnosed. Professional athletes undergo extensive medical evaluation and cardiovascular screening²⁰ before being given the green-light to play, and they also constitute the healthiest segment of society in general,²¹ so most heart problems are ruled out before they ever enter the field.

“The elephant in the room,” however, according to McCullough, is the COVID jab. Before these shots were rolled out, the average number of cardiac arrests in all European soccer and football leagues combined was 29 per year. Since the advent of the COVID shots, 1,598 European pro athletes have suffered cardiac arrest, giving us a comparative annual tally of nearly 800. Of those 1,598 cardiac arrests, 1,101 were fatal.

McCullough detailed these and other stats in a December 17, 2022, letter to the editor of the Journal of Scandinavian Immunology. The paper was co-authored by Panagis Polykretis, Ph.D., a researcher at the Institute of Applied Physics, which is part of the Italian National Research Council.²² McCullough and Polykretis have been, and still are, calling for a proper investigation of these deaths.

McCullough Suspects COVID Jab-Induced Myocarditis

McCullough and Polykretis suspect COVID jab-induced myocarditis is the explanation for this otherwise inconceivable increase in cardiac arrests among athletes, and McCullough believes it also tops the list of potential reasons for Hamlin’s cardiac arrest, considering 95% of NFL players had received the jab as of March 2022.²³

McCullough cites research showing about 2.5% of COVID jab recipients sustain heart damage, 90% of them being men. And, in about half of all jab-related myocarditis cases, there are no symptoms to alert you there might be a problem. As explained by McCullough, myocarditis causes scarring on the heart, and it is this scarring that causes an abnormal electrical rhythm (ventricular tachycardia) and sudden adult death syndrome.

There are now more than 200 scientific papers on jab-related myocarditis. A January 2023 study²⁴ in the European Journal of Pediatrics found high levels of circulating spike protein in 16 male high school students hospitalized with myocarditis induced by the shots, which again suggests the spike protein your body produces is a key pathogenic factor.

McCullough explains in greater detail how the shot may have triggered Hamlin’s cardiac arrest: During play, adrenaline is pumping, and when the heart is damaged this adrenaline rush is what triggers the cardiac arrest.

This helps explain not only the death of athletes on the field, or people dying while jogging, but also why so many are dying in their sleep, because adrenaline is released between 3 a.m. and 6 a.m., as your body readies to wake up.

1,696% Increase in Sudden Death Among Athletes

Whatever caused Hamlin’s cardiac arrest — and hopefully a careful medical investigation after his recovery will clarify what happened — there’s no doubt that athletes in general are dying in far greater numbers now than ever before.

In related news, a November 2022 report²⁵ by The Exposé showed the number of athletes who “died suddenly” between January 2021 and April 2022 was 1,696% above the historical monthly norm²⁶ between 1966 and 2004 — 42 per month compared to just 2.35 per month.

The following graph illustrates the rise in recorded athlete collapses and deaths between January 2021, the month the COVID shots started to roll out, and April 2022.

As noted by The Exposé:²⁷

“In all between Jan 21 and April 22, a total number of 673 athletes were known to have died. This number could, however, be much higher. So that’s 428 less than the number to have died between 1966 and 2004. The difference here though is that the 1,101 deaths occurred over 39 years, whereas 673 recent deaths occurred over 16 months …

The yearly average number of deaths between 1966 and 2004 equates to 28. January 2022 saw three times as many athlete deaths than this previous annual average, as did March 2022. So this is obviously highly indicative of a problem.

The 2021 total equates to 394 deaths, 14x higher than the 1966 to 2004 annual average. The Jan to April 2022 total, a period of 4 months, equates to 279 deaths, 9.96x higher than the annual average between 1966 and 2004.

However, if we divide the 66 to 04 annual average by 3 to make it equivalent to the first four months’ worth of deaths in 2022, we get 9.3 deaths. So in effect, by April 2022, deaths among athletes were 10x higher than the expected rate …

[B]etween 1966 and 2004. the monthly average number of deaths equates to 2.35. But between January 2021 and April 2022, the monthly average equates to 42. This is an increase of 1,696%.”

Risk of Cardiovascular Damage Soars After Second Shot

A nearly 1,700% increase in sudden cardiac-related death among athletes is inexplicable unless you take the experimental COVID jabs into account. Research²⁸ published in November 2021 found inflammatory markers — signs of cardiovascular damage — rose dramatically after the second COVID shot, and the risk of heart attacks and other heart-related problems more than doubled in the months following these injections.

Pre-jab, patients had an 11% five-year risk of heart attack. Post-jab, that risk rose to 25%, a 227% increase in risk. As reported by The Exposé, other statistics also reveal heart damage has become ubiquitous among those who got one or more mRNA jabs:²⁹

“Acute cardiac failure rates are now 475 times the normal baseline rate in VAERS. Tachycardia rates are 7,973 times the baseline rate. Acute myocardial infarction is 412 times the baseline rate.

The rates of internal hemorrhage, peripheral artery thrombosis, and coronary artery occlusion are all over 300 times the baseline rate … It doesn’t take a genius to work out that COVID-19 vaccination is the reason the monthly average number of athlete deaths was 1,700% higher than the expected rate by April 2022.”

Sudden Death: The No. 1 Cause of Death for Under 65s in 2021

In late December 2022, Steve Kirsch also published data showing the shots are a public health disaster.³⁰ According to the results of a survey Kirsch conducted, “sudden death” was the No. 1 cause of death in 2021 and 2022 among Americans under 65 who had received the COVID shot.

The second and third causes of death in this group were cardiac-related death and cancer respectively. Importantly, the incidence of turbo-charged cancer among the jabbed was also significant, and myocarditis killed more than COVID-19.

Among the unjabbed, the primary cause of death for people 65 and younger in 2021 and 2022 was hospital treatment for COVID. Incidences of sudden death, pulmonary embolism and turbo-charged cancers were all low, and there were no unknown causes of death, nor any myocarditis deaths. Kirsch summarized the three most stunning differences between the jabbed and unjabbed as follows:³¹

1. “Sudden death rates are off the charts for the vaccinated cf. unvaccinated for those <65 … It’s the #1 cause of death for this age group …
2. Myocarditis as a cause of death is registering now for both age ranges but only for the vaccinated …
3. Cardiac issues as a cause of death in vaccinated young people (<65) are significantly elevated vs. their unvaxxed peers.”

Learn CPR, It Saves Lives

While we cannot make any definitive statements about what caused Hamlin’s cardiac arrest, one thing that is not in doubt is that immediate and ongoing CPR is what saved his life. Nine minutes is a long time to give CPR, and most people will simply give up after two or three minutes. Hamlin’s case is proof positive that sometimes you need to give CPR for an extended period of time.

As many who got the experimental COVID shots will have some level of heart damage that raises their risk of cardiac arrest and sudden death, the need for CPR know-how is only going to grow. So, please, learn CPR. It could be the difference between life and death of someone you love. Also, consider investing in an automated external defibrillator (AED) for your home and/or office.

These machines are lightweight and battery operated. Sticky pads with sensors are attached to the chest and those electrodes send information to the computer inside the machine.

The AED computer will analyze the heart rhythm to determine if electric shock is needed. If required, the machine uses voice prompts to tell you what to do and when to do it. AED machines are safe to use and there are no reports of them harming bystanders or users or, of delivering inappropriate shocks.³²

When an individual suffers a cardiac arrest, the heart immediately stops beating. This means there is no blood being pumped to the body or brain. At this time it is critical for bystanders to:

1. Call emergency services (dial 911 in the U.S.)
2. Begin CPR
3. Apply the nearest automated external defibrillator (AED)

If you don’t have formal training, 911 dispatchers can give you specific instructions on using an AED and performing CPR until paramedics arrive. While you may hesitate, being afraid you could hurt the victim, at this time the person is clinically dead and can’t get any worse. Bystander CPR and AED can only help.

For cardiac arrest, CPR and treatment with an AED as needed (while awaiting emergency services) significantly increase the potential for survival and, importantly, lower the risk of permanent disability. It is now believed Hamlin has a good chance of neurological recovery, which would not have been possible had it not been for the fact that he received CPR for more than nine minutes.

Originally published: August 22, 2020

The video above features a recent vaccine debate between Robert F. Kennedy Jr., chairman of the World Mercury Project and founder/chief legal counsel for Children’s Health Defense, and Alan Dershowitz, a lawyer and legal scholar. Patrick Bet-David, founder of Valuetainment, moderated the event.

Dershowitz may seem like an odd choice for this discussion, but according to Kennedy, no health official has ever agreed to debate him on the issue of vaccine safety.

Bet-David also notes that every doctor invited to discuss the COVID-19 vaccine on his show declined the invitation. So, here, we get the perspectives of two prominent attorneys instead. The discussion initially grew out of a comment made by Dershowitz in another interview, where he said:

“You have no constitutional right to endanger the public and spread the disease. Even if you disagree, you have no right not to be vaccinated. You have no right not to wear a mask. You have no right to open up your business. And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to, literally, take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm.”

Should You Have the Right to Decide Your Medical Treatment?

According to Dershowitz’s interpretation of Constitutional law, you only have the right to refuse to be vaccinated against a disease that would affect only you. You do not have the right to refuse a contagious disease that might spread to others.

As far as COVID-19 vaccines are concerned, he does not foresee mandatory vaccinations being an immediate concern, for the simple reason that there won’t be enough vaccines to vaccinate everyone.

Listening to the likes of Bill Gates and others, however, this probably would not be a problem for long, as vaccine manufacturers are fully prepared to go into large-scale manufacturing once a vaccine gets green-lighted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Interpretation of 1905 Court Ruling Is Not Cut and Dry

As the basis and justification for his legal orientation on this issue, Dershowitz relies on a 1905 Supreme Court ruling in the matter of Jacobson v. Massachusetts. In “Don’t Relinquish Civil Liberties for False Sense of Security,” Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center, explained:

“Dershowitz … was quite reckless in the language he used. He basically said that the Supreme Court in 1905 (Jacobson v. Massachusetts), [gives] the right of state governments to come in and forcibly inject you with a vaccine. That’s not really what Jacobson v. Massachusetts said …

In that case, it was smallpox, because that was the only vaccine they had in 1905, but you have to read the Supreme Court decision very carefully to understand everything that the justices said.

They basically concluded — and I think wrongly so, because utilitarianism … is based on a mathematical equation that some can be inconvenienced or sacrificed for the greater good of a majority of people — that people [who] opposed smallpox vaccination could be required to be vaccinated during epidemics.

Even religious objections could be overridden. But there’s also language in that decision that says that the court is not to be interpreted as meaning that if an individual was at risk for being harmed by the vaccination, they were not meant to [have concluded] that ‘cruel and inhuman to the last degree’ would be the standard that would be used.

I think Dershowitz overstated the opinion, although it is a utilitarian opinion. It gives authority to the states to mandate vaccines because anything that is not defined in the Constitution as a federal activity is reserved for the states.

Public health laws, by and large in this country, are written by the states, and the federal authority is requiring vaccination for people crossing territorial borders of the United States [and the federal government] could mandate vaccines for interstate travel, crossing state borders.

But most public health laws that legislatures make are for the residents of the states, which is why we have a patchwork of [vaccine] laws in this country …

I’m very worried that some attorney is going to try to challenge the Jacobson [ruling] in the 21st century. I think that, probably, in any court right now, you’re going to get that ruling upheld and you’re going to get it strengthened. I would advise against [challenging] that one in the Supreme Court.”

Download this Article Before it Disappears

Download PDF

Then Versus Now

Kennedy, in turn, points out there is a “big Constitutional chasm” between this 1905 case and today’s vaccine mandates. The difference is indeed rather significant. Jacobson, who had been injured by a previous vaccine, took the case to the Supreme Court in an effort to avoid the vaccine — and the fine for refusing the vaccine, which at the time was $5.

When he lost, he paid the $5 fine, which Kennedy equates to a traffic ticket by today’s standards. There’s a big difference between paying a small fine, and being forcibly injected with a potentially hazardous vaccine, against your will. As noted by Fisher above, the judge in that 1905 case did not claim government had the right to go into someone’s home and forcibly vaccinate them, Kennedy says.

Dershowitz, in turn, agrees that the 1905 ruling “is not binding on the issue of whether or not you can compel someone to get the vaccine,” but that “the logic of the opinion … strongly suggests that the courts today would allow some form of compulsion if the conditions that we talked about were met: [the vaccines are] safe, effective, [and] exemptions [given] in appropriate cases.”

Will You Get the COVID-19 Vaccine?

Kennedy and Dershowitz were able to agree that the COVID-19 vaccine should remain voluntary, and only be mandated if the public health threat is truly extreme. One of the problems the vaccine industry has nowadays is that the trust in them has significantly eroded.

According to a recent poll^1,2 cited by Kennedy, about half of Americans say they want the COVID-19 vaccine; 27% say they will “definitely” refuse and another 12% say they will “probably” refuse it.

“Why do so many Americans no longer trust our regulatory officials and [distrust] this process?” Kennedy asks. “One of the reasons is … vaccines are a very different kind of medical prerogative.

It is a medical intervention that is being given to perfectly healthy people, to prevent somebody else from getting sick. And it’s the only medicine given to healthy people.

So, you would expect that we would want that particular intervention to have particularly great guarantees that it’s safe. Because we’re saying to an individual, we are going to make you make this sacrifice for the greater good … Our side of the bargain should be, we want this to be completely safe. But, in fact, what we know about vaccines … is that they’re unavoidably unsafe.”

1 in 40 Are Injured by Vaccines

We often hear that vaccine injuries occur at a rate of 1 in 1 million. This, however, is a gross underestimation. Kennedy discusses an investigation by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Agency for Healthcare Research Quality (AHRQ).

They conducted a machine cluster analysis of health data collected from 376,452 individuals who received a total of 1.4 million doses of 45 vaccines. Of these doses, 35,570 vaccine reactions were identified, which means a more accurate estimate of vaccine damage would be 2.6% of all vaccinations.

This means 1 in 40 people — not 1 in 1 million — are injured by vaccines, and a clinician who administers vaccines will have an average of 1.3 adverse vaccine events per month. In other words, we are asking 1 in 40 people to sacrifice their health in order to protect “hypothetical people from catching that particular disease,” Kennedy says.

Importantly, “it’s not hypothetical that vaccines cause injuries,” Kennedy says. The U.S. Vaccine Court has paid out $4 billion to patients permanently damaged or killed by vaccines, and that’s just a small portion of all the cases filed. According to Kennedy, less than 1% of people who are injured ever get to court, due to the high bar set for proving causation.

Vaccine Makers Have No Liability

Vaccine makers also have no liability for injuries. This worsens risks, as they have no real incentive to make sure their products are safe, not only in the short run, but also long-term.

And, as noted by Kennedy, the reason vaccine manufacturers were given immunity in the first place was because they admitted vaccines are unavoidably unsafe and there’s no way to make them 100% safe.

They were getting sued for injuries to the point they said they could not continue to manufacture vaccines, which is why the U.S. government in 1986 agreed to indemnify them against lawsuits under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, and set up a government-run Vaccine Court instead.

So, when you sue for a vaccine injury, you’re actually suing the U.S. government, and payouts are paid for by the U.S. public via a small fee tacked on to each vaccine sold.

100% of Moderna Vaccine Participants Suffered Side Effects

Kennedy goes on to discuss some of the disturbing preliminary results emerging from current COVID-19 trials. In the case of Moderna, its mRNA vaccine (mRNA-1273) was found to cause systemic side effects in 80% of Phase 1 participants receiving the 100 microgram (mcg) dose.^3,4

Side effects ranged from fatigue (80%), chills (80%), headache (60%) and myalgia or muscle pain (53%). After the second dose, 100% of participants in the 100-mcg group experienced side effects. This is important to note as, unlike the flu vaccine, the coronavirus vaccine will be a two-dose regimen and most likely recommended to be repeated annually, just like the flu vaccine.

The 45 volunteers were divided into three dosage groups — 25 mcg, 100 mcg and 250 mcg — with 15 participants in each. Even in the low-dose group, one participant got so sick he required emergency medical care. “That’s 6%,” Kennedy says.

In the high-dose (250 mcg) group, 100% of participants suffered side effects after both the first and second doses, and three of the participants suffered “one or more severe events.”

Keep in mind, the participants in Moderna’s Phase 1 trial were healthy individuals between the ages of 18 and 55.⁵ Kennedy recites some of the exclusionary criteria of these trials, such as you cannot be overweight, you must be a lifelong nonsmoker, you cannot have a family history of respiratory problems or seizures, you cannot have asthma, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis or other autoimmune disease.

“These are the people they’re testing the vaccine on, but that’s not who they’re going to give the vaccine to,” Kennedy says. Indeed, over 90% of Americans are metabolically unhealthy and struggle with chronic health conditions that can make them more prone to vaccine complications, yet these, and frail elderly, are most vulnerable to COVID-19 and would theoretically stand to benefit from the vaccine most.

If the vaccine causes severe side effects in young, healthy individuals, what will the results be in those who are old, frail and/or have underlying conditions or compromised immune systems?

“You’re going to see a lot of people dropping dead,” Kennedy predicts. “The problem is, Anthony Fauci put $500 million of our [tax] dollars into that vaccine. He owns half the patents. He has five guys working for him [who are] entitled to collect royalties.

So, you have a corrupt system, and now they’ve got a vaccine that is too big to fail. They’re not saying this was a terrible, terrible mistake. They’re saying, ‘We’re going to order 2 million doses of this [vaccine]’ … And, they have no liability … No medical product in the world would be able to go forward with a [safety] profile like Moderna has.”

Trust Is Earned

Admittedly, the interview is a rather long one — an hour and 20 minutes — but if you have the time, I encourage you to listen to it in its entirety, as Kennedy and Dershowitz cover far more than some of the key highlights I’ve summarized here. You could speed it up to 1.5 to 2 times, which is my approach for most videos now as there is so much video content to consume.

I would not be surprised if Kennedy’s prediction that the COVID-19 vaccine or vaccines will cause severe harm to a great number of people. I also disagree with Dershowitz’s position that anyone involved in medical manufacturing “obviously” has a keen interest in not hurting people.

Kennedy correctly points out that’s clearly not the case, seeing how drug companies have repeatedly been found to knowingly commit fraud in the name of profit. The opioid epidemic is but one glaring example where company executives knew they were causing harm and chose to do it anyway. Trust is earned, and the drug industry has, as Kennedy points out, eroded the public’s trust by their own malfeasance.

The drug industry and government health officials expect us to simply trust that a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine will be produced in record time. From my perspective, such trust would be misplaced. Their history simply doesn’t warrant it.

I’ve reviewed the historical failures of coronavirus vaccines in previous articles, as well as the potential hazards associated with mRNA vaccines. Importantly, we do not yet know what injecting mRNA to reprogram our DNA might actually do in the long run, since no mRNA vaccine has ever been licensed, but there’s reason to suspect it won’t be entirely beneficial.

The good news is that we probably will not even need a vaccine against COVID-19. As I have previously reviewed, there are loads of strategies to improve your immune system.

Other treatments like nebulized peroxide are really effective if you are already sick. And, as a foundational prophylactic, remember to optimize your vitamin D level, as vitamin D appears to significantly lower your risk, both of contracting the infection and developing severe symptoms, as reviewed in “Vitamin D in the Prevention of COVID-19.”

I’ve put together a comprehensive report on the topic of vitamin D for COVID-19 prevention, which you can download here.

This story is about resilience and joy that we need to hold on to as the bulldozer of tyranny is trying to bulldoze over our freedom and dignity, and then make our flattened selves thank the tyrants.

In this dystopian theater of absurd, where the bulldozer is going round and round, showing no promise of relief, we need a lot of resilience and a tight connection to our inalienable joy in order to deal with the bulldozer and keep our hearts protected.

That dystopian theater of absurd, a million of cruel bulldozers, going round and round, working in unison, from horizon to horizon — flattening everyone’s memory of dignity, personal autonomy, and free expression — is what the world is like today for so many. It is very abnormal. And yet, here we are, standing tall, our hearts are beating, giving us strength to resist the tyrants.

The abuse though … the abuse is so insane that it feels almost like a cartoon made by a sadistic cartoon director.

Telling on Your Loved Ones

In New Zealand, the director general of security Rebecca Kitteridge eyes, is asking good citizens to rat on their friends and neighbors. Here is the Guardian:

“New Zealand is rolling out a bespoke deradicalisation program as the threat from people holding violent anti-authority beliefs grows and its security agencies make an unprecedented plea for the public to report those showing signs of taking extremist action …

Rebecca Kitteridge, the director general of security, said her agency’s caseload was now an equal split between violent extremism motivated by identity, faith, and anti-authority views — a significant shift from a year ago when the latter did not feature on the threat landscape.

Such views gained momentum during New Zealand’s Covid-19 lockdowns and vaccine rollout, and some were on display during the occupation of the grounds of parliament.”

The official definition of “extremism” listed on the New Zealand government website is kind of peculiar:

“Religious, social or political belief systems that exist substantially outside of more broadly accepted belief systems in large parts of society, and are often seen as objectionable to large parts of society. Extreme ideologies may seek radical changes in the nature of government, religion or society or to create a community based on their ideology [emphasis mine].”

The important caveat is that under the bulldozer of the upside down language, those of us who seek authority over our own bodies are freaks of nature jeopardizing “our democracy” and “grandma killers.” (Let me ask once again though, whose democracy is it?)

Interestingly, it looks like that particular New Zealand program started just a couple of weeks before the “global coronavirus pandemic” was announced. No coincidence, nothing to look at. And now, the authorities in New Zealand are releasing a brochure for the general population on how to spot ‘em enemies of the people.

Generously, the brochure states that it only deals with violent forms of extremism, while “non-violent forms of extremism, however objectionable, lie outside the purpose of this booklet and outside NZSIS’s areas of focus.” Thank you, no, really, thank you.

Land to the Tyrants

According to the Telegraph, the Dutch government plans to buy and close down up to 3,000 farms to comply with EU nature preservation rules.

“The Netherlands is attempting to cut down its nitrogen pollution and will push ahead with compulsory purchases if not enough farms take up the offer voluntarily. Farmers will be offered a deal ‘well over’ the worth of the farm, according to the government plan that is targeting the closure of 2,000 to 3,000 farms or other major polluting businesses.

Earlier leaked versions of the plan put the figure at 120 per cent of the farm’s value but that figure has not yet been confirmed by ministers. ‘There is no better offer coming,’ Christianne van der Wal, nitrogen minister, told MPs on Friday. She said compulsory purchases would be made with ‘pain in the heart,’ if necessary.”

Van de Wal’s official title is “Minister for Nature and Nitrogen Policy.” What an amazing title. Meanwhile, the World Economic Forum is reminding us, peasants, that we may own nothing, still, but happiness is no longer a goal.

How Do We End This Torture?

This sadomasochistic, torturous circus gotta stop, and since there is no hero savior coming, it is our job to stop it. But how do we stop it? And can we stop it quickly?

I think that the honest answer is, it depends. Existentially, I think depends on how quickly we deal with the bad spiritual habits that we’ve collectively accumulated over many centuries of living under domination — be it the willingness to accept abuse — or the willingness to abuse others who are not “our kind.”

I believe that the possibility of victory is very real — and sooner or later, our lives will heal and shine with great beauty and true freedom — but our prospects of winning soon greatly depend on how quickly we let go of our egos, our pride, our attachment to various talking points — and start communing with the spirit like children, in defenseless honesty and trust, and without trying to dominate others in the name of our ideas.

There is a very understandable war cry among the very brave warriors of freedom, stating that our sole problem is the tyrants. To my senses, the tyrants — the terrible, despicable, sadistic tyrants — are definitely a problem.

They are criminal creatures. They have holes in their heart space. However, they are feeding on any kind of bad energy that we allow in our own lives, they are feeding on our centuries-old bad habits, and they just love it when we get dogmatic and act like mini-tyrants to prove our point, substituting the goal of doing what’s right with the goal of being right and having the last word in the conversation.

It is often said, and I say it myself, that we are in a spiritual battle — but it’s worth asking, what does it mean, and what kind of spiritual battle is it? In my opinion, the battle we are in is a battle for the love in our hearts, and for the sanctity of free will — and against the principle of domination.

It is not a battle for any talking points of any particular group of people. It is not a battle of isms. It is not a battle where one institutional belief tramples the other.

The spiritual battle is about our actual relationship with the infinitely alive spiritual forces, it’s about accepting the fact that we depend on the spiritual forces for everything in life, that we should be grateful and gracious, and that we partake in the creation by respecting our own souls and the souls of others, and by making choices from a place of love and gratitude for all the good things, some of which are completely beyond our understanding.

I think this battle will be won when we allow ourselves to relax into the mystery of life and be guided on how to win it on mysterious terms that are spiritually solid and beautifully healing. There is no formula for this. It’s just love. The absence of formulas is the beauty of our relationship with the sacred.

Our spirits really are sacred. The sanctity of our spirits does not depend on our ideas, they are just sacred. And I think that when we disallow the tyrants from riding our spirits — be it through ungrounded trust for them or through feeling fear — when we break our ties with the ghost of domination in earnest — miracles will happen. We have no way of knowing when it’s time for our victory. We don’t know when it’ll happen. But it will happen.

May our love shed bright light onto all the dark corners where the monsters were hoping to hide from the truth, may they be unable to hide, and may our love erase any fear. There is no fear in our hearts, there is no fear in our house of love. We will win, may we have the patience and the courage to do what it takes until we actually win, and may we heal ourselves and our loved ones completely. We will win, and may our love guide us to win the soonest.

About the Author

To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) is one of my favorite resources to keep current on everything COVID. They typically interview several experts every day and have amazing staff to compile the information in a useful format. I was excited when Polly Tommey from CHD told me that my interview with her earlier this year was the most viewed on their site. She invited me for another interview for the year in review.

So, with that background let me provide you with my view of the most important health stories of 2022.

People all over the world face a long list of growing crises, from food and energy shortages to worldwide tyranny and enslavement through programmable central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and the steady creation of a “one world government.”

It is crucial to understand these threats and take action to prepare for, resist and overcome them. By learning about these issues and taking steps to protect ourselves, we can work together to create a more resilient future.

The Crisis: The World Health Organization’s Pandemic Treaty

One of the most serious threats is the globalist cabal pursuit of a one world totalitarian government through the World Health Organization, under the guise of global biosecurity.

The WHO has drafted a global pandemic treaty on pandemic preparedness that would grant it absolute power over global biosecurity, such as the power to implement digital identities/vaccine passports, mandatory vaccinations, travel restrictions, standardized medical care and more. The treaty did not pass this year, but will most likely pass in 2023.

This treaty will change the global landscape and strip you of some of your most basic rights and freedoms. It’s a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy.

With this treaty in place, all member nations will be subject to the WHO’s dictates. If the WHO says every person on the planet needs to have a vaccine passport and digital identity to ensure vaccination compliance, then that’s what every country will be forced to implement, even if the people have rejected such plans using local democratic processes.

There’s also reason to suspect the WHO intends to extend its sovereign leadership into the health care systems of every nation, eventually implementing a universal or “socialist-like” health care system as part of The Great Reset. WHO Director-General Tedros has previously stated that his “central priority” as director-general of the WHO is to push the world toward universal health coverage.¹

And, considering the WHO changed its definition of “pandemic” to “a worldwide epidemic of a disease,”² without the original specificity of severe illness that causes high morbidity,^3,4 just about anything could be made to fit the pandemic criterion.

They could also declare a global pandemic for noninfectious threats, like global warming or even obesity. The declaration would allow them to circumvent all laws in place to preserve our freedom and implement tyrannical measures, like the lockdowns that were implemented in the COVID pandemic.

Action Item

Stopping this treaty will be quite difficult, as the World Health Assembly may or may not even accept public comment before making a decision. Your best bet right now is to sign up for the World Council for Health’s (WCH) newsletter.

The last time the World Health Assembly met to discuss the treaty, the WCH issued links and instructions on how to submit your comment. You can subscribe at the bottom of this page, or on the WCH’s home page. I and the CHD will also share details if they become available, so subscribing to our newsletters can give you a heads-up as well.

In the absence of instructions, you could reach out to your respective delegation and request that they oppose the treaty. A list of U.S. delegates can be found in James Roguski’s Substack article, “Speaking Truth to Power.”

For contact information for other nations’ delegates, I would suggest contacting the regional office and ask for a list (see “Regions” in the blue section at the bottom of the World Health Assembly’s webpage).

The Crisis: Normalizing Human Experimentation

One of the most egregious crimes against humanity occurred October 20, 2022, when the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) unanimously (15-0) voted to add unlicensed COVID-19 shots to the U.S. childhood, adolescent and adult vaccine schedules.⁵

By adding the shots to the vaccine schedule, the CDC is securing Pfizer’s and Moderna’s permanent liability shield so that no one can sue them for damages for injuries and deaths occurring as a result of the shots. It also opens the door for states to mandate the jab for school children.

The very same day, Pfizer announced it will raise the price on its COVID jab by about 400%,⁶ from $30⁷ per jab to somewhere between $110 and $130 once the current U.S. purchase program expires.

Pfizer has forecasted expected revenues into the foreseeable future and they’re not going to let real-world market demands dictate its revenue stream. Instead, they’re going to make up the difference through price hikes which, ultimately, will be paid by government and insurance companies.

The unconscionable actions of the CDC and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have also opened the door to make human experimentation the norm for future vaccines. The updated bivalent mRNA COVID shots, for example, were only tested on a few mice before they were authorized and released to the masses.

This is the new model for mRNA injection approvals, and it will spell disaster for humanity, especially if the WHO gets the power to dictate what we must take, and if international vaccine passports go through. At that point, humans become little more than experimental subjects for the transhumanist movement. They’re literally charging us to gamble on our lives on their latest gene therapies.

The Crisis: Plunging Life Expectancy

Something extraordinarily odd happened in 2020 and 2021, something that shaved nearly three years off the life expectancy in the U.S.⁸ While media blames this drop on COVID-19 infection, that makes no sense, because the average age of those who died from COVID was about 85, well over the life expectancy in 2019.

No, this massive drop in life expectancy is due to younger people dying decades earlier than they should, and the only factor that can account for that is the mass injection of people with an experimental bioweapon — the COVID jabs.

Allopathic medicine has been a leading cause of death in the U.S. for over two decades.^9,10,11 In future years, I believe the medical intervention sold as “COVID vaccines” will prove to be the No. 1 killer of Americans, and we’re already seeing that trend.

Don’t worry, if you understand the basics of health, you can easily avoid falling victim to this devious system. In this article, I will share the broad strokes you need to know to protect yourself and your family from the nefarious plans to take you out prematurely. By understanding these basics, you can take steps to improve your health and wellbeing, and to avoid falling prey to the harmful effects of this system.

The Crisis: The Fake ‘Food Is Medicine’ Agenda

Food and agriculture are also being overtaken and changed. The U.S. government has launched a “Food is Medicine” program,^12,13 which is nothing but another way for the government to seize control of the population. Food as medicine will be used to get you into their control system, and keep you there. The goals behind this “food revolution” are to:¹⁴

1. Get as many people as possible into SNAP (supplemental nutrition assistance) and WIC (women, infants and children) programs so that purchases and spending can be controlled through digital food tokens. Ultimately, everyone will be moved into a socialist food system based on government assistance tokens.

2. Integrate food and nutrition with health care so that food and health policies are under one umbrella. Food purchases and health records will be linked to your vaccine passport/digital identity.

3. Change food standards, food categories and nutrition. Traditional farming of grains and plants will be replaced with indoor vertical growing of patented GMO seeds, while animal farming will be regulated into oblivion in order to be replaced by insect farms (so-called micro livestock), gene-edited food and lab-grown meat.

The trap being laid out for us is that of a controlled socialist food system, where the state decides what you will eat. In the graphic below, included in a 2018 report¹⁵ by the Illinois Blockchain and Distributed Ledger Task Force, they show how they intend to control your “healthy eating token” usage through digital identity and digital currency.

Over time, what’s “healthy” will change as their control over agriculture and food manufacturing deepens. But government’s healthy food recommendations will never be accurate and true. Need proof? Just look at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy’s Food Compass,^16,17unveiled in late 2021 as the latest and greatest in nutritional science.

This tool is what will be used to guide health care and nutrition assistance programs in their selections. In this nutritional guidance tool, Lucky Charms, Frosted Mini Wheats, Honey Nut Cheerios, ice cream cones, chocolate covered almonds and almond M&Ms all have higher nutritional scores than cheddar cheese and ground beef.¹⁸

According to the Food Compass, you’ll be healthier if you replace whole egg, cheddar cheese and ground beef with literal candy. Can there be any doubt that its purpose is to lead people away from wholesome natural foods, toward processed and genetically engineered junk foods?

And, considering how vaccines are being tied in with biosecurity and digital ID, it’s not a far stretch to imagine that foods engineered to contain vaccines will be mandated through government food programs.

The Crisis: Food, Water and Energy Shortages

The world is facing a growing crisis of food and energy shortages, as well as widespread supply chain disruptions. In addition, both industries are being intentionally targeted and dismantled under the guise of combating climate change.

This is making it increasingly difficult for people to maintain food security, as inflation continues to rise. For example, on average, food prices in the United States were one-third higher in March 2021^19,20 than they were in March 2020. These challenges are only expected to worsen in the coming years.

Fertilizer prices are expected to double as a result of Russia’s ban on fertilizer exports. For some farmers, that will be a death knell that causes them to go out of business. The rest will be forced to charge more for their commodities, resulting in skyrocketing food prices.

The climate has also been uncooperative, causing poor harvests around the world. China, for example, has reported it expects the lowest harvest yields in history this year, thanks to serious flooding of its farmland in the fall of 2021.²¹ And then there are the many mysterious fires that have destroyed major food distribution facilities around the world.

All of these factors will likely result in serious food shortages and famine around the world over the coming year. Availability of potable water is also diminishing, which will raise prices.

Action Item — Secure Your Water Supply

One of the most important preparations you can make is to secure a supply of potable water, as you can survive far longer without food than you can without water. An ideal system to consider, especially if you also have a garden, is to install a large cistern to collect rainwater.

Since I have a full acre of land that I grow food on, I have a 5,000-gallon cistern that collects rainwater from the gutters on my roof. This serves to augment my irrigation system but is also a large emergency source of water. Another strategy is to install a series of connected rain barrels to your gutters. If you live next to a river or pond or have a swimming pool, you may not need a cistern as you can simply filter the water from them.

I discuss this and other strategies in “How To Secure Your Water Supply For Emergencies.” Also remember to stock up on means to purify less-than-ideal water sources. Examples include water purification tablets or drops, and/or independent water filtration systems.

There are portable inexpensive water filter pitchers like the Clearly Filtered Water Pitcher or Epic Nano Filter Pitcher, which can filter out pathogens and other impurities (meaning a filtration system that is not tied to the tap in your home, in case pumps go down and you have no tap water). Even a small survival water filtration system is better than nothing, as drinking contaminated water can result in serious illness and/or death.

Action Item — Stock Up on Shelf-Stable Foods

I recommend stocking up on healthy, nutritious foods that you eat on a regular basis anyway. That way, you can rotate your stock. In my view, animal protein would be one of the most important supplies to stock up on, which means you’ll need extra freezer storage. It would likely make sense to get another freezer to store enough meat for three to six months.

The key to making this work is to have a backup power supply, as there is a high likelihood the grid will go down and you will lose your investment. The most economical way to stock up on meat would be to get ground bison, beef or lamb. Ground meat is less expensive, but more importantly, takes up the least amount of space in your freezer. Avoid pork and chicken due to high linoleic acid content.

Another option is canned beef, which has long shelf-life and doesn’t require a freezer. Look for varieties that use salt as the only preservative. Canned wild Alaskan salmon, mackerel and sardines are also good options.

They contain healthy protein and fat while being low in toxic water pollutants and heavy metals. Just make sure they’re canned in water, not oil, as you can be guaranteed that it’ll be the worst oil possible. This is true even if it claims to be “olive oil.” Other nutritious foods with long shelf-life include:

Tallow, ghee and coconut oil — These healthy fats are very low in linoleic acid (LA) and are ideal for cooking and remain stable even without refrigeration.

Organic beef broth and/or collagen powder — Beef broth is an ideal source of collagen, but organic grass fed collagen powder will stay fresh longer. Collagen is the most common and abundant of your body’s proteins, and is required for bone health, tissue integrity and repair.

Whey protein — Whey protein is rich in leucine, which helps stimulate muscle protein synthesis, thereby promoting healthy muscle. Without a regular source of meat, it can be difficult to achieve enough leucine to maintain body protein from diet alone. Fortunately, whey can be easily stored and can serve as a resource to preserve your muscle mass.

Rice — Rice is a gluten-free staple that can be stored for long periods of time. Interestingly, white rice (my favorite is basmati) is far preferred over brown rice as the antinutrients in brown rice impair its role as a clean source of carbohydrates. Ideally, place the bag in a food-grade bucket together with an oxygen absorber or two, and make sure the lid is well-sealed.

Honey — In addition to being a natural sweetener, local unadulterated honey also has health benefits. For example, it’s an effective cough medicine and can help combat respiratory infections and bacterial infections, including antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Macadamia nuts — Nuts are frequently recommended as a good source of fiber, protein and healthy fats that will stay fresh for a long time without refrigeration, provided they’re in a sealed bag or container. However, the reason why this is a terrible idea is that all nuts except macadamia are loaded with very high levels of the dangerous fat linoleic acid. So, storing any nuts would not be helpful, as you would only be able to have around five a day.

I also recommend stocking up on nutritional supplements such as beef organ complex, essential minerals, omega-3, vitamin K2, magnesium, vitamin B complex and astaxanthin. Having a backup supply of pharmaceutical grade methylene blue is also a good idea.

Action Item — Secure Backup Energy Supply

To prepare for eventual energy shortages, brownouts, rolling blackouts or a complete shutdown of the power grid, consider one or more power backups, such as gas-powered generators and/or solar generator kits such as Jackery or Inergy. Having backup power can prevent the loss of hundreds of dollars worth of food if your home loses electricity for more than a couple of days.

Scale up and diversify according to what you can afford. Ideally, you’d want more than one system. If all you have is a gas-powered generator, what will you do if there’s a gas shortage and/or if the price skyrockets into double digits? On the other hand, what will you do if the weather is too overcast to recharge your solar battery?

You also need some way to cook water and food during a blackout. Here, options include (but are not limited to) solar cookers, which require neither electricity nor fire, small rocket stoves, propane-powered camping stoves and 12-volt pots and pans that you can plug into a backup battery.

The Crisis: Economic Collapse and Programmable Currencies

The fact that the world is heading toward total economic collapse is a mathematical certainty, and according to hedge fund “guru” and former BlackRock equity portfolio manager Edward Dowd, the collapse may begin in earnest before the end of 2024.

COVID provided cover for central banks and governments, allowing them to temporarily hide the reality that the financial system is crashing. The pandemic also allowed for the erection of a control system to shield governments and central banks from the fallout from collapsing food, energy and finance systems.

It allowed them to restrict travel and introduce digital IDs and central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) by linking them together with vaccine passports. Secretly, behind the scenes, a social credit system like the one in China is also being built. Facial recognition and artificial intelligence(AI) are crucial components in this digital prison system, and both are being widely implemented and expanded around the world.

The march toward CBDCs in the U.S. started last month when the The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Innovation Center, or NYIC, announced that it would be launching a 12-week proof-of-concept pilot for a central bank digital currency, or CBDC.²²

It seems like CBDCs are inevitable and will likely be mainstream in 2024. Initially they will be voluntary and strongly encouraged because of all the convenience they offer. You need to resist them as long as possible as capitulation into this system will mark the beginning of total electronic control into your digital prison.

The Plan Summarized

Ultimately, the plan is for everyone to have a digital identity, which will collect any and all information about you. It’ll be tied to your vaccination status, medical records, financial accounts, education and work history, your carbon footprint and your social credit score.

As shown in the graphic above, your digital identity will be required to unlock all aspects of life, from logging onto the internet to accessing social services, travel, food, shopping and financial services.

Anything you do in life will be reflected in your social credit score, and any aspect of your life can be used against you. Punishment for wrongthink, “bad behavior” or insufficient vaccinations can easily be meted out by automatic deduction of a fine from your bank account, a reduction in your social credit score, travel restrictions and much more.

Every aspect of your life will be monitored and controlled from the outside. For anyone who enjoys making their own decisions in life, programmable CBDCs are a death knell.

The currency will be programmable by the issuer, such as the central bank, a government agency or your employer. They can then decide when, how and on what you can spend your money. You also will not be able to save however you like, as some CBDCs may have expiration dates.

With CBDCs, You Lose Control of Your Health

CBDCs can also be programmed to only work for certain types of items, including certain types of food. If your health records indicate you have a health problem, your CBDCs can be programmed such that you cannot buy foods deemed unhealthy for you.

This could be anything from pizza and donuts to red meat, butter or raw milk. In this way, the globalist technocrats behind this system will have extreme, near-total control over your physical health.

The system will start by blocking junk food, but eventually it’ll switch to natural whole foods, as those are the ones they actually are trying to get rid of. As I’ll explain under the “food and medicine agenda” section below, they’re trying to transition the population (with the exception of themselves) into an all-patented diet, devoid of natural whole foods.

Action Items: Safeguard Your Assets

The financial collapse will likely take many mainstream news readers by surprise, because legacy media are not telling the truth. Those of you following alternative sources have the benefit of being able to prepare by protecting your assets.

The risk of banks doing bail-ins where they seize all of your money to cover their losses is high, as is the risk of hyperinflation, which will eat through your savings, and the risk of a stock market crash. To safeguard and minimize the loss of your assets, you can:

• Buy physical gold and silver.

• Buy property.

• Purchase crucial prepper items such as solar backup batteries, water catchment systems, long-term survival foods and seeds — things that can save your life in a grid-down, social unrest situation that may not be available later, or cost much more.

Since the economy is collapsing and inflation skyrocketing, your money is not doing you much good in the bank. You’re losing purchasing power with each passing month, and a bank bail-in could wipe you out completely. So, if you need survival items, buying them now might be one of the better investment strategies out there.

• “Invest” in tradeable goods.

• Investigate alternative investment vehicles — For example, there’s a new type of asset being developed on the stock exchange called Natural Asset Stocks, or Natural Asset Corporations. The government of Costa Rica, for example, is putting all government-owned forests and farmlands into a Natural Asset Corporation.

This is a type of stock different from anything we’ve seen so far. Basically, these stocks will allow fund managers, private investors and corporations to invest in natural assets. The part you end up owning is the ecosystem services of that land.

So, for example, you could own the environmental services resulting from the Billion Agave Project, which include carbon sequestration amounts and water savings. Over time, as the whole system matures and the soils are regenerated, your asset rises in value.

Other alternatives include gold and silver mining investments, and investment funds such as the one offered by Phinance Technologies, a global macro alternative investment firm founded by Edward Dowd, author of “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022.” These investments are based on reality trends Dowd sees coming as a result of the rising disability and death rates caused by the COVID jabs.

Action Items: Avoid the Digital ID and CBDC Traps

As for the CBDCs, the key is to refuse to sign up for it when it rolls out. The time to resist is right at the beginning, when adoption will be voluntary.

If adoption is poor, they’ll have a very hard time bringing their enslavement through financial control plan to fruition. If a majority goes along with it, eventually the system will become mandatory, and you’ll have little choice but to participate if you want to function in society.

Additionally, the international vaccine passport proposed at the 2022 G20 meeting is a central key in the effort to get everyone into the digital ID system. So, refusing to adopt vaccine passports is a crucial component of resistance to the digital prison system in its entirety.

You must also reject the vaccine passport unless you’re willing to be a medical lab rat for the rest of your life. Hundreds of new vaccines, including many mRNA shots targeting common diseases are in the pipeline for 2030, and having an up-to-date vaccination status will be one of the requirements to maintaining a valid passport. Vaccine refusal can then be used to nullify or “lock” your digital ID, leaving you unable to do, go or buy anything. So, in summary, to avoid the digital prison:

• Refuse to enter the coming CBDC system.

• Refuse adoption of digital ID/vaccine passports.

• Fight, on a local level, to prevent the expansion of facial recognition cameras and 5G.

• “Starve the beast” by cutting back on your online usage, social media in particular. The war on “domestic terror,” meaning the war on anyone who doesn’t agree with a one world government, is waged using surveillance, profiling and AI.

So, avoid sharing your data by minimizing your presence online. Also minimize your use of any and all data-gathering devices, such as AI assistants, smart devices and wearables, all of which feed your personal data into the AI profiling system.

Action Items — Build Community and Parallel Financial Systems

In addition to those things, we also need to promote the development and adoption of alternative systems and communities, and parallel economies that do not rely on or require CBDCs and digital ID/vaccine passports to function. To that end:

• Use more cash, as this will discourage stores from going all-digital.

• Get out of the inner cities, where financial collapse will be felt the hardest and pose the greatest risks to personal safety.

• Build community and local parallel economies.

• Build your own knowledgebase on how to grow and raise food, even if you’re not in a position to grow food right now. There are many free videos online that you can peruse. Ideally, download them so you can watch them offline, even if the internet goes down.

Books on homesteading and basic survival skills are also a valuable investment. “Back to Basics: A Complete Guide to Traditional Skills” is one option.

As a general rule going forward, you’ll want hard copies or copies on external hard drives of any information that you want to have access to in the future, as the internet is becoming increasingly scrubbed of important information. If using an external hard drive, make sure you store it in a faraday bag to protect the information from electromagnetic weapons.

Action Items — Take Control of Your Health NOW

One way to counter the fraudulent “Food is medicine initiative” and avoid becoming a statistic of early death is to take control of your own health and work to get as healthy as possible right now. In the longer term, you can also take steps to avoid relying on food assistance programs, which will always provide the least healthy options.

By taking control of your health and making informed choices about your diet, you can improve your overall wellbeing and protect yourself from the negative effects of this insidious agenda.

While optimizing your health is often thought of as something that is complicated, daunting, time-consuming, and expensive, I have good news for you. Simply implementing four key lifestyle strategies can set you on the right path:

1. Drastically limit your omega-6 linoleic acid (LA) intake — Excessive LA consumption is responsible for the vast majority of ill health and chronic disease. As consumption of vegetable oils and seed oils, the primary source of LA, has risen over the past 145 years, so have chronic disease rates.

LA is far more hazardous than sugar for Type 2 diabetes even.

LA causes excess oxidative stress resulting in mitochondrial dysfunction and radical loss of energy efficiency production. Excessive LA will also impair apoptosis (programmed cell death). As a result, dysfunctional cells are allowed to continue to grow, which can turn cancerous.

To minimize LA in your diet, avoid ALL processed foods, restaurant foods and condiments, virtually all seeds and nuts, most olive oil and avocado oils, and even organic chicken and pork. Of course, also do not use seed oils for cooking. Use tallow, ghee, butter, or coconut oil instead.

Ideally, consider cutting LA down to below 7 grams per day, which is close to what our ancestors used to eat. If you’re not sure how much you’re eating, enter your food intake into Cronometer — a free online nutrition tracker — and it will provide you with your total LA intake.

Cronometer will tell you how much omega-6 you’re getting from your food down to the 10th of a gram, and you can assume 90% of that is LA as long as you accurately enter the food and weights. It will also instantly rank order the foods with the most LA so you can know the biggest offenders. Anything over a total of 10 grams of LA a day is likely to cause problems.

2. Compress your eating schedule — Time-restricted eating (TRE) is a simple yet profoundly effective way to improve your metabolic flexibility so that your body will be able to burn both carbs and fats for fuel. An estimated 90% of Americans eat across 12 hours, which is a recipe for metabolic disaster.

To turn your health around, eat all your meals for the day within a six- to eight-hour window and fast for the remaining 16 to 18 hours. Also, be sure to eat your last meal three to four hours before bed.

However, if you are not unlike the 19 out of 20 people in the US that are metabolically inflexible and you are insulin sensitive, then this would be a far too aggressive eating window. You should extend your window to 8 to 10 hours and even 12 hours in the summer.

If you are insulin sensitive and use a rigid TRE window your body will increase your cortisol levels to increase your glucose level. This will produce inflammation and tissue damage. So best to have a longer eating window if you are already healthy.

3. Build muscle and combat frailty using blood flow restriction (BFR) training — If you don’t engage in resistance exercises, your risk of metabolic diseases goes up, as your muscle acts as a glucose sink. After meals, about 80% of glucose is deposited in your skeletal muscle.^23,24muscle is also the main energy user of fat in your body.²⁵

Lack of muscle (sarcopenia) often leads to insulin resistance, frailty, poor outcomes in illness and disease, delayed recovery and a greater risk of surgical complications, drug toxicity, falls, disability and death. Skeletal muscle also plays a major role in your metabolism, circulation and cognition, and serve an important endocrine function.

BFR involves modifying the arterial inflow and venous outflow while you’re working the muscle by placing an inflatable band around the extremity.²⁶ It’s a low-intensity resistance training, using weights that are just 20% to 35% of your one rep max. BFR works by tricking your body into believing that it’s moving far heavier weights than you’re actually using, generating compensatory metabolic responses and improved microcirculation.

With BFR training, you’re able to significantly enhance your strength and muscle mass using a fraction of the weight typically used, in about half the time it would normally take. It’s the best strategy I know of to increase muscle size, and it’s safe to use for everyone, including the elderly.

I recommend using the KAATSU intermittent hypoxia system developed by Dr. Yoshiaki Sato. BFR can be done with restriction bands, but KAATSU uses a device that provides intermittent and not just constant pressure, which is far safer. For a limited time, you can get 10% off using this link, http://www.kaatsu.com/go/NVIC.

4. Get regular sun exposure — Aside from excessive LA intake, another major contributor to mitochondrial dysfunction is lack of sun exposure. UVB triggers vitamin D production in your skin, which helps ward off infections and promotes mitochondrial health and cell health in general.^27,28

The near-infrared rays in sunlight also trigger melatonin production in your mitochondria.²⁹Melatonin is a master hormone,³⁰ a potent antioxidant³¹ and antioxidant recycler,³² a master regulator of inflammation and cell death,³³ and an important anticancer molecule.³⁴

Near-infrared light also increases mitochondrial ATP production and autophagy, structures the water in your body, and triggers the conversion of retinol (vitamin A) to retinoids, which are crucial for immune function.

Action Item — Build Resilience Against Fear

The COVID plandemic was successfully implemented through fearmongering. Ditto for the rollout of the COVID jabs. Fear is the most potent weapon The Great Reset cabal has at its disposal, and we can expect them to use it again and again.

The antidote to fearmongering is education and sharing the truth with others, and the perfect antidote to fear itself is love. For nearly the past three years, mainstream media, celebrities, health officials, medical professionals, family and friends publicly condemned, mocked and threatened those who didn’t agree with masking, social distancing, lockdowns and experimental injections.

Many of us still live with those scars. But we must not respond in kind as we move forward. If we want a more humane society, we must let our own humanity shine bright. If we say we stand for freedom and liberty, we must be consistent and not hypocritical.

At the end of the day, the solutions to all of the crises facing us really hinge on creating a new society. We need a reset, yes, but not The Great Reset advertised by the World Economic Forum and its derelict minions.

No, we need a reset in which the corrupting elements are cut out of the equation, and there’s corruption absolutely everywhere. In the school system, our food system, financial system, the stock market, our regulatory agencies, all throughout government and our intelligence agencies. It’s all rotten to the core. And we have but two choices: Accept the digital prison system handed down to us from the globalists, or rebuild our own parallel systems, outside of their control.

Genetic analysis using the Oak Ridge National Lab supercomputer called the Summit has revealed an interesting new hypothesis that helps explain the disease progression of COVID-19. A September 1, 2020, Medium article¹ by Thomas Smith reviewed the findings of what is now referred to as the bradykinin hypothesis.

As reported by Smith, the computer crunched data on more than 40,000 genes obtained from 17,000 genetic samples.

“Summit is the second-fastest computer in the world, but the process — which involved analyzing 2.5 billion genetic combinations — still took more than a week. When Summit was done, researchers analyzed the results. It was, in the words of Dr. Daniel Jacobson, lead researcher and chief scientist for computational systems biology at Oak Ridge, a ‘eureka moment.’”

The Bradykinin Hypothesis

Bradykinin is a chemical that helps regulate your blood pressure and is controlled by your renin-angiotensin system (RAS). As explained in the Academic Press’ book on vitamin D (which has a significant impact on the RAS):²

“The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) is a central regulator of renal and cardiovascular functions. Over-activation of the RAS leads to renal and cardiovascular disorders, such as hypertension and chronic kidney disease, the major risk factors for stroke, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, progressive atherosclerosis, and renal failure.”

The bradykinin hypothesis provides a model that helps explain some of the more unusual symptoms of COVID-19, including its bizarre effects on the cardiovascular system. It also strengthens the hypothesis that vitamin D plays a really important role in the disease.

The findings³ were published in the journal eLife July 7, 2020. Based on this new hypothesis, the researchers also suggest more than 10 potential treatments, most of which are readily available drugs already approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. I’ll review those later on.

As detailed in previous articles, your ACE2 receptors are the primary gateways of the virus, as the virus’ spike protein binds to the ACE2 receptor. As explained by Smith:⁴

“… COVID-19 infection generally begins when the virus enters the body through ACE2 receptors in the nose … The virus then proceeds through the body, entering cells in other places where ACE2 is also present: the intestines, kidneys, and heart. This likely accounts for at least some of the disease’s cardiac and GI symptoms.

But once Covid-19 has established itself in the body, things start to get really interesting … The data Summit analyzed shows that COVID-19 isn’t content to simply infect cells that already express lots of ACE2 receptors. Instead, it actively hijacks the body’s own systems, tricking it into upregulating ACE2 receptors in places where they’re usually expressed at low or medium levels, including the lungs.

In this sense, COVID-19 is like a burglar who slips in your unlocked second-floor window and starts to ransack your house. Once inside, though, they don’t just take your stuff — they also throw open all your doors and windows so their accomplices can rush in and help pillage more efficiently.”

Bradykinin Storm Likely Responsible for Lethal Effects

In addition to upregulating ACE2 receptors throughout your body, the SARS-CoV-2 virus also downregulates your body’s ability to degrade or break down bradykinin.

The end result is a bradykinin storm, and according to the researchers, this appears to be an important factor in many of COVID-19’s lethal effects, even more so than the cytokine storms associated with the disease. As bradykinin accumulates, the more serious COVID-19 symptoms appear.

Mounting clinical data suggest COVID-19 is actually primarily a vascular disease rather than a respiratory one, and runaway bradykinin buildup can help explain this.

How SARS-CoV-2 Attacks the Lungs

That said, COVID-19 certainly has a respiratory component, and it appears the virus attacks the lungs in more ways than one. For starters, bradykinin increases vascular permeability, essentially causing your blood vessels to leak fluid. In the lungs, this leads to fluid buildup that can trigger inflammation when immune cells also leak out into the lungs.

But the Summit data also show the virus uses yet another pathway, which raises production of hyaluronic acid (HLA) in your lungs. HLA has the ability to absorb more than 1,000 times its own weight in fluid, and when it combines with the built-up fluid in the lungs, the effect is devastating, as it ends up forming a thick hydrogel that makes breathing near-impossible.

When this happens — in severe cases — even mechanical ventilation becomes ineffective, as the alveoli in the lungs are simply too clogged with this gel-like substance that prevents oxygen uptake.

Note that the HLA produced in your lungs does not mean that using supplemental HLA is a bad strategy. It is only when HLA is produced locally in high concentrations in pathologic conditions like COVID-19 that it becomes problematic. Otherwise it has important physiologic benefits.

How SARS-CoV-2 Attacks Your Heart and Brain

SARS-CoV-2 can also affect heart function, causing arrhythmias and low blood pressure. About 1 in 5 COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalizations have experienced damage to their heart. Your heart has ACE2 receptors, so SARS-CoV-2 has the ability to infect your heart directly. Arrhythmias and low blood pressure can also be the result of a bradykinin storm.

In some cases, COVID-19 has also been known to trigger neurological symptoms such as dizziness, seizures, delirium and stroke, and this too can be explained by bradykinin buildup.

At high levels, bradykinin can lead to a breakdown of your blood-brain barrier, thereby allowing harmful compounds to flood your brain. Bradykinin itself also causes blood vessel leakage. Together, these effects can trigger inflammation, brain damage and a variety of neurological symptoms.

SARS-CoV-2 Mimics ACE Inhibiting Drugs

Interestingly, as reported by Smith:⁵

“Increased bradykinin levels could also account for other common COVID-19 symptoms. ACE inhibitors — a class of drugs used to treat high blood pressure — have a similar effect on the RAS system as COVID-19, increasing bradykinin levels.

In fact, Jacobson and his team note in their paper that ‘the virus … acts pharmacologically as an ACE inhibitor’ — almost directly mirroring the actions of these drugs.

By acting like a natural ACE inhibitor, COVID-19 may be causing the same effects that hypertensive patients sometimes get when they take blood pressure-lowering drugs. ACE inhibitors are known to cause a dry cough and fatigue, two textbook symptoms of COVID-19.

And they can potentially increase blood potassium levels, which has also been observed in COVID-19 patients. The similarities between ACE inhibitor side effects and COVID-19 symptoms strengthen the bradykinin hypothesis, the researchers say.”

Another side effect associated with ACE inhibiting drugs is the loss of smell and taste. This is also an early sign associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and it’s a primary symptom of zinc deficiency too.

Zinc, as explained in “Swiss Protocol for COVID — Quercetin and Zinc,” plays a vital role in immunity as well as in blood clotting, cell division, thyroid health, smell and taste, vision and wound healing, and can effectively inhibit viral replication.

Your body does not store zinc, and it’s poorly absorbed, which appears to be why the combination of zinc and zinc ionophores such as quercetin and hydroxychloroquine are so effective when taken at first symptoms.

Bradykinin Hypothesis Explains Other COVID-19 Symptoms Too

The bradykinin storm also helps explain other odd COVID-19 symptoms such as “COVID toes,” a condition in which your toes become swollen and bruised. This may be due to leaky vasculature in your toes.

As explained by Smith, it can also shed helpful light on the gender differences seen in COVID-19. Women tend to have a lower mortality rate than men, and this may be due to the fact that women have twice the level of certain proteins involved in the RAS system.

Image source: Daniel Jacobson et al. via eLife Sciences

Potential Treatments

The good news is that if bradykinin storms are to blame, there are a number of already existing drugs that can help prevent bradykinin storms, either reducing bradykinin or blocking its receptors. As noted in the study:⁶

“Several interventional points (most of them already FDA-approved pharmaceuticals) could be explored with the goal of increasing ACE, decreasing BK [bradykinin], or blocking BK2 receptors.

Icatibant is a BKB2R antagonist whereas Ecallantide acts to inhibit KLKB1, reducing levels of BK production. Androgens (danazol and stanasolol) increase SERPING1, although the side effects likely make these undesirable, but recombinant forms of SERPING1 could be administered to reduce BK levels.

It should be noted that any intervention may need to be timed correctly given that REN levels rise on a diurnal cycle, peaking at 4AM which corresponds with the commonly reported worsening of COVID-19 symptoms at night …

4-methylumbelliferone (Hymecromone) is a potent inhibitor of HAS1, HAS2, and HAS3 gene expression and results in the suppression of the production of hyaluronan in an ARDS model.

Hymecromone (4-methylumbelliferone) is approved for use in Asia and Europe for the treatment of biliary spasm. However, it can cause diarrhea with subsequent hypokalemia, so considerable caution should be used if this were to be tried with COVID-19 patients … Timbetasin may reduce COVID-19 related coagulopathies by increasing fibrinolysis.”

However, please understand that taking these drugs is absolutely not my recommendation. These are simply the conventional strategies that can be used if this hypothesis is correct.

Why on earth would we use dangerous drugs like these for a disease that they have not been tested on when we have so many other safe, inexpensive and highly effective interventions for COVID-19? Strategies like nebulized peroxide, ozone, molecular hydrogen, exogenous ketones, and quercetin with zinc.

Evidence for Vitamin D Strengthens

The researchers also highlight the usefulness of vitamin D, noting that “Another approach would be the modulation of REN levels via Vitamin D supplementation …” Vitamin D is involved in the RAS system,^7,8,9 and can reduce a compound called renin (REN), thereby preventing a deadly bradykinin storm. Renin is an endopeptidase, the function of which is to generate angiotensin 1 from angiotensinogen in your plasma.

Several investigations have highlighted the apparent influence of vitamin D in COVID-19 incidence, severity and mortality, and its effects on RAS further strengthens the idea that vitamin D may be a crucial component in your COVID-19 defense arsenal.

As explained in the 2004 paper,¹⁰ “Vitamin D: A Negative Endocrine Regulator of the Renin-Angiotensin System and Blood Pressure,” when the RAS system is inappropriately activated, high blood pressure can result.

One factor that influences your RAS is your vitamin D level, as it suppresses renin biosynthesis. If you are vitamin D deficient, your renin expression is stimulated, and based on the latest data, that may render you more prone to bradykinin storm.

The Evidence for Vitamin D

In a November 1, 2020 commentary¹¹ in the journal Metabolism Clinical and Experimental, JoAnn Manson and Shari Bassuk call for the elimination of vitamin D deficiency to effectively squelch the COVID-19 pandemic, noting that 23.3% of the total U.S. population have insufficient or deficient vitamin D levels, with people of color having disproportionately lower levels than non-Hispanic whites.

They list several types of studies showing vitamin D deficiency is “an important modifiable risk factor for COVID-19,” including:¹²

REALLY IMPORTANT: Optimize Your Vitamin D Level Now

For years, I’ve stressed the importance of optimizing your vitamin D level, especially in anticipation of flu season, and it seems clear it can go a long way toward protecting yourself against COVID-19 as well.

Aside from what’s already been mentioned, vitamin D also helps Type II cells in your lungs produce surfactant that aids in fluid clearance. When you’re vitamin D deficient, your entire RAS is deranged or dysfunctional, thereby raising your risk of both bradykinin storm and cytokine storm.

In closing, experts have been warning that SARS-CoV-2 may reemerge in the fall when temperatures and humidity levels drop, thereby increasing the virus’ transmissibility.

Now is the time to check your vitamin D level and start taking action to raise it if you’re below 60 ng/mL. An easy and cost-effective way of measuring your vitamin D level is to order GrassrootsHealth’s vitamin D testing kit and learn more about vitamin D and its impact on your health.

Knowledge is empowerment, and that is particularly true during this pandemic. To learn more about the influence of vitamin D on your health in general and COVID-19 in particular, see my vitamin D report.

By now, you probably understand the importance of hand-washing to prevent the spread of infectious illness. But did you know flushing your sinuses might be an even better way to inhibit the progression of a viral illness such as COVID-19? In an April 20, 2020, article,¹ Best Life features the recommendations of Dr. Amy Baxter, a pediatric emergency medicine physician in Atlanta, Georgia.

Nasal irrigation, she says, is a rarely discussed strategy that can help reduce the progression of illness in those who have tested positive for COVID-19 infection. In an April 2, 2020, response² to a BMJ paper about the lack of personal protection equipment on COVID-19 frontlines, professor Robert Matthews also brought up the importance and potential usefulness of oropharyngeal washing to protect health care workers from infection. As reported by Best Life:³

“Nasal irrigation, or a nasal wash, has long been considered an effective way to remove viruses or bacteria from sinus cavities.

According to Baxter, recent clinical trials show that nasal irrigation reduces the duration and symptoms for other viral illnesses like flu and the common cold, though it hasn’t yet been studied for COVID-19. Still, she has multiple reasons for believing that this approach can be effective in preventing coronavirus from worsening in a sick patient.”

Why Nasal Irrigation?

As noted by Baxter, researchers have found that the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 tends to be heaviest in the sinuses and nasal cavity. Regularly rinsing your sinuses therefore makes sense since it would help clear out the pathogen and prevent it from gaining a strong foothold and migrating into your lungs.

The age and gender discrepancies observed in COVID-19 also supports nasal irrigation. Children are at virtually no risk from COVID-19, while death rates among the elderly are at their highest. More men than women also die from the infection.

“Children don’t develop full sinuses until teens; males have larger cavities than women, and the cavities are largest [in those] over 70 years,” Baxter notes.

Research has previously demonstrated that nasal irrigation reduces the symptoms and duration of other viral illnesses such as the seasonal flu and common cold.

In one randomized controlled trial,⁴ nasal irrigation and gargling with hypertonic saline were found to reduce the duration of the common cold by 1.9 days and reduce transmission within the household by 35% by reducing viral shedding when done within 48 hours of symptom onset.

While it has not yet been studied as a preventive method for COVID-19 specifically, there’s reason to suspect nasal irrigation might be helpful.

Baxter points out that COVID-19 death rates in Southeast Asian countries such as Thailand, Vietnam and Laos have been surprisingly low, and nasal irrigation is common practice in those areas. According to Baxter, some 80% of the Southeast Asian population do it.

How to Irrigate Your Sinuses

Baxter suggests irrigating your sinuses any time you’ve been exposed to an infected individual or test positive for COVID-19. She recommends flushing your sinuses in the morning using a mixture of boiled lukewarm water (8 ounces) and povidone-iodine (half a teaspoon).

Povidone-iodine has been shown to effectively kill not only Klebsiella pneumoniae and Streptococcus pneumoniae bacteria, but to also rapidly inactivate SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, H1N1 influenza virus A and rotavirus after 15 seconds of exposure.⁵

The mixture used in this study: 7% povidone-iodine diluted 1-to-30, which equates to a total concentration of 0.23% povidone-iodine, inactivated over 99% of the coronaviruses causing SARS and MERS.

Either a neti pot or NeilMed sinus rinse bottle can be used. The water pressure you get from a sinus rinse bottle can provide a more effective flush. If higher pressure is uncomfortable, a neti pot, which relies on gravity, may be a more comfortable choice. In the evening, Baxter recommends flushing your sinuses again with a mixture of:

• 8 ounces of boiled lukewarm water
• 0.5 teaspoon baking soda
• 1 teaspoon table salt

Gargling May Also Be Helpful

You may also be able to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 migrating into your lungs by gargling. As noted by Dr. Neal Naito in a March 29, 2020, New York Times article,⁶ while there’s “no firm proof” that gargling can prevent COVID-19, there are virtually no downsides to the advice.

Like Baxter, Naito points out that many East Asian countries such as Japan see gargling as a commonsense hygiene practice.

“In East Asia, particularly in Japan, gargling is strongly encouraged by the national government, along with other practices like hand-washing, wearing face masks and social distancing, as a matter of routine hygiene during the regular cold and flu season.

(Not everyone, though, can gargle effectively, including some people with neck pain, stroke or dementia, as well as children generally under the age of 8.) Most of the early studies⁷ suggesting that gargling may help to prevent and treat upper and lower respiratory infections, not surprisingly, come from Japan,” Naito writes.

An over-the-counter povidone-iodine⁸ oral gargle solution, used for decades by the Japanese for the treatment of sore throat, appears most useful. One small study⁹ from Japan, published in 2002, found patients diagnosed with chronic respiratory disease who gargled with a povidone-iodine solution at least four times a day reduced their incidence of acute respiratory infection by about 50%.

Do Not Use Iodine-Based Skin Disinfectant for Gargling

Importantly, Naito stresses that povidone-iodine solutions sold as skin disinfectants are NOT suitable for gargling as they contain potentially harmful ingredients that should not be ingested.

“It’s critical that people not gargle with skin disinfectant solutions, including those that contain povidone-iodine,” he says. So, when using povidone-iodine for gargling, be sure to look for solutions such as Betadine formulated specifically as a sore throat gargle, not products intended for cuts and wound care.

Nebulized Hydrogen Peroxide — Another Prevention Strategy

While gargling and nasal irrigation may certainly be useful, I believe nebulizing hydrogen peroxide or colloidal silver may be even more effective. Dr. Thomas Levy¹⁰ has issued guidance¹¹ on how to use nebulized hydrogen peroxide for the prevention and treatment of viral respiratory infections, including COVID-19.

To inactivate viruses with hydrogen peroxide, all you need is a face mask that covers your mouth and nose and a nebulizer that emits a fine mist with properly diluted food grade hydrogen peroxide.

Typically, food grade peroxide comes in concentrations of 12%, which must be diluted down to 1% or less before use, as described in the chart below and video above. If you are using 3% hydrogen peroxide, then you would multiply the number in the first column by 4, or divide the second column by 4.

The microscopic mist, similar to smoke or vapor, can be comfortably inhaled deep into your nostrils, sinuses and lungs. Hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) consists of a water molecule (H₂O) with an extra oxygen atom, and it is the additional oxygen atom that allows it to inactivate viral pathogens.

Coronaviruses are held together by a lipid (fat) envelope. Soap, being amphipathic¹² — meaning it can dissolve most molecules — dissolves this fat membrane, causing the virus to fall apart and become harmless.

Hydrogen peroxide works in a similar way. You can find more details about the mechanism of action in my previous article, “Could Hydrogen Peroxide Treat Coronavirus?”

Some of your immune cells actually produce hydrogen peroxide to destroy pathogens. By killing the infected cell, viral reproduction is stopped. So, hydrogen peroxide therapy is in essence only aiding your immune cells to perform their natural function more effectively.

Hydrogen peroxide is also a key redox signaling agent that creates oxidative eustress.¹³ Contrary to oxidative stress or oxidative distress, oxidative eustress denotes an oxidative challenge that has positive or beneficial effects and is essential in redox signaling.

Many studies have looked into the use of hydrogen peroxide against different pathogens. One of the most relevant is a review¹⁴ of 22 studies, published in March 2020 in the Journal of Hospital Infection. They found 0.5% hydrogen peroxide effectively inactivated a range of human coronaviruses, including those responsible for SARS and MERS, within one minute of exposure.

If you’re already presenting with a runny nose or sore throat, Levy recommends using the nebulizer for 10 to 15 minutes four times a day until your symptoms are relieved. You can also use nebulized hydrogen peroxide for prevention and maintenance, which may be advisable during flu season, or while the COVID-19 pandemic is in full swing. According to Levy:¹⁵

“As it is a completely non-toxic therapy, nebulization can be administered as often as desired. If done on a daily basis at least once, a very positive impact on bowel and gut function will often be realized as killing the chronic pathogen colonization present in most noses and throats stops the 24/7 swallowing of these pathogens and their associated toxins.

If daily prevention is not a practical option, the effectiveness of this treatment is optimized when somebody sneezes in your face or you finally get off of the plane after a trans-Atlantic flight. Don’t wait for initial symptoms. Just nebulize at your first opportunity.”

In the video above, John Campbell, Ph.D., a retired nurse educator, compares the contradictions between the World Health Organization’s directives regarding the need for COVID shots in Africa and the actual situation on the ground.

As of December 12, 2022, the WHO was still calling on all countries to get the COVID jab into at least 70% of their populations.¹ Its original deadline for meeting this 70% threshold was mid-2022, but by June 2022, only 58 of 194 member states had reached this target.²

According to the WHO, jab supplies, technical support and financial support were lacking during the early days of the injection campaign but, now, those obstacles have been resolved. As a result, all countries now have the ability to meet the global target of 70%.

Low Jab Rates Threaten Low-Income Countries, WHO Claims

The “overarching challenge” right now is the administration of the shots, actually “getting shots into arms.”³ To address that, the WHO suggests integrating COVID-19 injection services “with other immunization services and alongside other health and social interventions.” This, they say, will maximize impact and “build long-term capacity.”

The WHO also stresses that “As people’s risk perception of the virus wanes, careful risk communication and community engagement plans need to be adapted to enhance demand for vaccination.” To ensure low-income countries get onboard to meet the 70% target, the WHO also launched The COVID-19 Vaccine Delivery Partnership in January 2022.

This is an international effort “to intensify country readiness and delivery support” in 34 countries with low COVID jab uptake. Partners include UNICEF, Gavi and the World Bank. According to the WHO:⁴

“Despite incremental success since its launch in January 2022, low and lower-middle income countries are facing difficulties to get a step change in vaccination rates.

This represents a serious threat to the fragile economic recovery, including due to the risk of new variants creating large waves of serious disease and death in populations with low vaccination coverage.

It also means accelerating the delivery of other COVID-19 tools and treatments is a crucial priority to help the world build up multiple layers of protection against the virus. Concerted and urgent action from countries, international partners and agencies, along with G20 Finance Ministers is required to increase vaccination levels and expedite access.”

In short, the WHO is really concerned that countries with low COVID jab rates will suffer lest they meet or exceed the target goal of jabbing 70% of their populations. But what is that concern based on? Certainly not the real world.

WHO’s Statements Contradict Real-World Situations

The statements made by the WHO contradict a number of real-world situations. For starters, while developed nations with high jab rates struggled with COVID-19 throughout much of 2021 and 2022, Africa avoided this fate, despite its single-digit jab rate.

Scientists are said to be “mystified” as to how Africa fared so well, completely ignoring data showing that the more COVID shots you get, the higher your risk of contracting COVID and ending up in the hospital.

Over the past year, researchers have been warning that the COVID jabs appear to be dysregulating and actually destroying people’s immune systems, leaving them vulnerable not only to COVID but also other infections.⁵ It stands to reason, then, that Africa with its low injection rate would not be burdened with COVID cases brought on by dysfunctional immune systems.

Secondly, variants have gotten milder (less pathogenic) with each iteration, albeit more infectious (i.e., they spread easier). So why is the WHO worried about “the risk of new variants creating large waves of serious disease and death in populations with low vaccination coverage”? What is that “risk” based on?

And, since COVID infection keeps getting milder, and has had a lethality on par with or lower than influenza^6,7,8,9,10 ever since mid-2020 at the latest, why is it still a “crucial priority” to accelerate delivery of COVID treatments?

As a reminder, according to a September 2, 2020 study in Annals of Internal Medicine, the overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio for COVID was a mere 0.26%. Below 40 years of age, the infection fatality ratio was just 0.01%. Meanwhile, the estimated infection fatality rate for seasonal influenza is 0.8%.¹¹

Report From Uganda

Campbell goes on to cite a large-scale survey by a community health partner in Uganda, which surveyed doctors, nurses and medical officers across the country, and “basically, they don’t see any COVID anymore,” he says.

They’re not getting the jab and they’re not getting tested for COVID either. There’s no need, because no one is getting sick with COVID — at least not to the point they need medical attention.

The Ugandan government has even stopped publishing COVID guidelines. From their perspective, the pandemic is over. The same sentiment appears common in other African countries as well. Given the situation on the ground, is it really a pressing need to jab 30 million people in Uganda against a disease they’re not getting sick from?

What Uganda does need is malaria treatments, mosquito nets, clean drinking water and antibiotics. “That is what the priorities on the ground seem to be,” Campbell says. So, what’s with the apparent disconnect between the WHO’s priorities and what’s actually happening in areas with low COVID jab rates? The WHO’s Catastrophic Contagion exercise^12,13 clues us in.

The Disconnect Reveals the WHO’s True Intentions

October 23, 2022, the WHO, Bill Gates and Johns Hopkins cohosted a global challenge exercise dubbed “Catastrophic Contagion,”^14,15 involving the outbreak of a novel pathogen called “severe epidemic enterovirus respiratory syndrome 2025” (SEERS-25).

Tellingly, this tabletop exercise was focused on getting African leadership involved and trained in following the pandemic script. Participants included 10 current and former health ministers and senior public health officials from Senegal, Rwanda, Nigeria, Angola and Liberia. (Representatives from Singapore, India and Germany, as well as Gates himself, were also in attendance.)

African nations just so happened to go “off script” more often than others during the COVID pandemic and didn’t follow in the footsteps of developed nations when it came to pushing the jabs. As a result, vaccine makers now face the problem of having a huge control group, as the COVID jab uptake on the African continent was only 6%.¹⁶

They cannot reasonably explain how or why Africa ended up faring so better than developed nations with high COVID jab rates in terms of COVID-19 infections and related deaths.¹⁷

The WHO desperately needs to get rid of this control group, so they’re enlisting and training African leaders how to push for widespread vaccination using the WHO’s talking points. This, I believe, is the only reason the WHO is still speaking about COVID-19 in catastrophic terms.

The WHO Needs Additional Pandemics to Secure Its Power Grab

At this point, it’s quite clear that “biosecurity” is the chosen means by which the globalist cabal intends to usher in its one world government. The WHO is working on securing sole power over pandemic response globally through its international pandemic treaty which, if implemented, will eradicate the sovereignty of member nations.

The WHO’s pandemic treaty is basically the gateway to a global, top-down totalitarian regime. But to secure that power, they will need more pandemics. COVID-19 alone was not enough to get everyone onboard with a centralized pandemic response unit, and they probably knew that from the start.

So, the reason we can be sure there will be additional pandemics, whether manufactured using fear and hype alone or an actual bioweapon created for this very purpose, is because the takeover plan, aka The Great Reset, is based on the premise that we need global biosecurity surveillance and a centralized response.

Biosecurity, in turn, is the justification for an international vaccine passport, which the G20 just signed on to, and that passport will also be your digital identification. That digital ID, then, will be tied to your social credit score, personal carbon footprint tracker, medical records, educational records, work records, social media presence, purchase records, your bank accounts and a programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC).

Once all these pieces are fully connected, you’ll be in a digital prison, and the ruling cabal — whether officially a one world government by then or not — will have total control over your life from cradle to grave.

The WHO’s pandemic treaty is what sets this chain of events off, as it will have the power to implement vaccine passports globally once the treaty is signed. The WHO will also have the power to mandate vaccines, standardize medical care and issue travel restrictions.

This treaty will likely pass this year, which means the WHO will either need to ramp up the COVID narrative again, or switch to another pandemic in order to justify these kinds of actions.

The Pandemic Treaty Is the Death Knell to Freedom Worldwide

It’s important to realize that the WHO’s pandemic treaty will radically alter the global power structure and strip you of some of your most basic rights and freedoms. It’s a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy.

Once signed, all member nations will be subject to the WHO’s dictates. If the WHO says every person on the planet needs to have a vaccine passport and digital identity to ensure vaccination compliance, then that’s what every country will be forced to implement, even if the people have rejected such plans using local democratic processes.

There’s also reason to suspect the WHO intends to extend its sovereign leadership into the health care systems of every nation, eventually implementing a universal or “socialist-like” health care system as part of The Great Reset. WHO Director-General Tedros has previously stated that his “central priority” as director-general of the WHO is to push the world toward universal health coverage.¹⁸

Prediction: Climate Lockdowns Are Next

Considering the WHO changed its definition of “pandemic” to “a worldwide epidemic of a disease,”¹⁹ without the original specificity of severe illness that causes high morbidity,^20,21 just about anything could be made to fit the pandemic criterion. This means that once they’re in power, they won’t need to rely exclusively on pathogenic threats.

They could also declare a global pandemic for a noninfectious threat, like global warming, for example. Such a declaration would then allow the WHO to circumvent laws that are in place to preserve our freedom, and allow for the implementation of tyrannical measures such as lockdowns and travel restrictions.

Indeed, the notion of “climate lockdowns” has already been publicly flouted on multiple occasions.²² As reported by The Pulse:²³

“Climate lockdowns and other restrictions will be framed as saving the people of the world from themselves. Who would ever disagree with such measures when it is framed under the guise of good will?

Like we saw with COVID mandates, if climate mandates ever take place they will be promoted as an extremely noble and necessary action. Those who disagree and present evidence that such actions are not useful or impactful, and instead cause more harm, will most likely be silenced, censored and ridiculed …

What would a climate lockdown look like? Well, if such an initiative were to take place, governments would limit or ban the consumption of many foods. They would ban or limit private-vehicle use, or limit the distance one can travel in a gas powered car or perhaps even by plane.

Working from home could eventually become the permanent norm if special carbon taxes are put in place. Such taxes could be imposed on companies, limiting driving or air miles, and extend to individual employees … Schools, especially those heavily influenced by teachers’ unions, could impose permanent online-only days.”

Officials Around the World Have Suggested Climate Lockdowns

As noted by The Pulse, a number of officials around the world have voiced support for climate lockdowns, completely ignoring the devastating effects the COVID lockdowns have already had. This just goes to show lockdowns were never about public health and never will be.

Among the climate lockdown enthusiasts we have Germany’s health minister Karl Lauterbach, who in December 2020 proclaimed that addressing climate change would require restrictions on personal freedom, similar to those implemented to “flatten the curve” of COVID.²⁴

British economics professor Mariana Mazzucato is another advocate for climate lockdowns, who in September 2020 warned that “In the near future, the world may need to resort to lockdowns again — this time to tackle a climate emergency.”²⁵

We also have the statements of Bill Gates²⁶ and the Red Cross,²⁷ both of which in 2020 claimed that climate change poses a greater threat to mankind than COVID, and must be confronted with the same urgency and resolve. The World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations and the WHO have also published articles stating their intent to “fight climate change” by shutting down society.²⁸

Notably, in “How to Fight the Next Threat to Our World: Air Pollution,” published by the WEF²⁹ and co-written by the director of WHO’s Environment and Health Department, it’s suggested that health and climate issues be combined into one. As noted in that article:

“We can confront these crises more effectively and fairly if we address them as one — and foster support across all sectors of the economy … COVID-19 has proven humanity’s inbuilt ability to rise up and act to protect the health of our most vulnerable people. We need to do the same with air pollution.”

Recall, as I mentioned above, if the WHO has sole power over global health, combining health and climate issues will automatically give the WHO the de facto power to issue climate lockdowns. Some claim climate lockdowns have already begun,³⁰ with the random shutting off of people’s power even though there’s no actual outage — sort of slow-walking people into accepting that the lights won’t always turn on.

That the WHO will jump at the opportunity to implement climate lockdowns can also be seen in the WHO Manifesto for a Healthy Recovery From COVID-19, which states:³¹

“The ‘lockdown’ measures that have been necessary to control the spread of COVID-19 have slowed economic activity, and disrupted lives — but have also given some glimpses of a possible brighter future.

In some places, pollution levels have dropped to such an extent that people have breathed clean air, or have seen blue skies and clear waters, or have been able to walk and cycle safely with their children — for the first times in their lives.

The use of digital technology has accelerated new ways of working and connecting with each other, from reducing time spent commuting, to more flexible ways of studying, to carrying out medical consultations remotely, to spending more time with our families.

Opinion polls from around the world show that people want to protect the environment, and preserve the positives that have emerged from the crisis, as we recover …

Decisions made in the coming months can either “lock in” economic development patterns that will do permanent and escalating damage to the ecological systems that sustain all human health and livelihoods, or, if wisely taken, can promote a healthier, fairer, and greener world.”

This manifesto also lays out many other aspects of The Great Reset agenda, including smart cities, travel restrictions, new food systems, a complete transition to green energy and more. But again, the thing that will really facilitate all of these changes is to have a centralized powerbase, and that is the WHO.

What Can You Do?

Stopping the WHO pandemic treaty will be difficult, as the World Health Assembly may or may not even accept public comment before making a decision. Your best bet right now is to sign up for the World Council for Health’s (WCH) newsletter.

The last time the World Health Assembly met to discuss the treaty, the WCH issued links and instructions on how to submit your comment. You can subscribe at the bottom of this page, or on the WCH’s home page. I and the CHD will also share details if they become available, so subscribing to our newsletters can give you a heads-up as well.

In the absence of instructions, you could reach out to your respective delegation and request that they oppose the treaty. A list of U.S. delegates can be found in James Roguski’s Substack article, “Speaking Truth to Power.”

For contact information for other nations’ delegates, I would suggest contacting the regional office and ask for a list (see “Regions” in the blue section at the bottom of the World Health Assembly’s webpage).

Evidence showing the COVID shots are a public health disaster keeps mounting. In late December 2022, Steve Kirsch¹ and Jessica Rose,² Ph.D., both published Substack articles detailing some of the latest evidence showing the shots are destroying people’s immune systems and have triggered an avalanche of turbo-charged cancers.

Kirsch’s article³ features results from a recent survey he conducted. It included four questions: age, whether the deceased was jabbed or not, year of death and cause of death. While the number of responses is low, major insights can still be gleaned by looking at the trends.

First, we have the baseline data from 2020, which show cancer was the No. 1 killer of Americans younger than 65, followed by hospital treatment for COVID. Turbo-charged cancers accounted for one-ninth of the cancer reports, and there were no reports of death from myocarditis.

Among seniors over the age of 65, preexisting conditions were the top cause of death in 2020. Cancer was second, COVID infection third and cardiac events fourth. There were no turbo-charged cancer deaths, nor any myocarditis deaths. Kirsch then gets into the differences between the vaxxed and the unvaxxed in 2021 and 2022.

What the Unvaxxed Died of in 2021 and 2022

In 2021 and 2022, the primary cause of death for people 65 and younger was hospital treatment for COVID. Incidences of sudden death, pulmonary embolism and turbo-charged cancers were all low, and there were no unknown causes of death, nor any myocarditis deaths.

The same went for people older than 65. Hospital treatment for COVID was the No. 1 killer. Heart attacks, turbo-charged cancer and sudden death were all low, and there were no deaths from myocarditis.

What the COVID-Jabbed Died of in 2021 and 2022

Among the COVID-jabbed aged 65 and younger, sudden death was the No. 1 cause of death in 2021 and 2022. The second was cardiac-related death and cancer was third. Importantly, the incidence of turbo-charged cancer among the jabbed was significant in this group, and myocarditis killed more than COVID-19.

Among those older than 65, cancer was the No. 1 cause of death, and the turbo-charged cancer rate is “huge compared to those without the vaccine.” Sudden death was also significantly elevated.

Stark Difference in Cancer Deaths Between Jabbed and Unjabbed

Kirsch summarizes the three most stunning differences between the jabbed and unjabbed:⁴

How COVID Jabs Raise Risk of Infections and Cancer

Exploding cancer rates is precisely what you would expect from a drug that impairs and destroys your immune system, which is what the COVID jabs do. The scientific paper “Innate Immune Suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccinations”⁵ describes how the COVID shots suppress your innate immune system by inhibiting the type-1 interferon pathway, which is the first-stage response to all viral infections.

The reason type-1 interferon is suppressed is because it responds to viral RNA, and there’s no viral RNA in the COVID shot. The RNA is modified to look like human RNA, so the interferon pathway doesn’t get triggered. As a result, the COVID jab makes you more susceptible to infections.

One mechanism by which the jab causes cancer has to do with the fact that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein obliterates 90% of the DNA repair mechanism in lymphocytes,⁶ a type of white blood cell that helps your body fight infections and chronic diseases such as cancer. That’s bad enough, yet that’s just one mechanism of many.

How the Jab Lowers Your Viral Clearance Capacity

Recent research^7,8 also shows that repeated jabs trigger a switch in the types of antibodies your body produces and lower your ability to clear viruses. Jessica Rose reviews these findings in her Substack article:⁹

“A paper was published in Science Immunology on December 22, 2022 entitled: ‘Class switch towards non-inflammatory, spike-specific IgG4 antibodies after repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination’¹⁰ …

[It] explains in wonderful detail how a class of antibody that commands a non-inflammatory response (more like tolerizing) is prominent in people who have been repeatedly injected with the modified mRNA COVID-19 injectable products.

Translation: Instead of the intended pool of spike-specific neutralizing IgG antibodies being dominant in multiply-injected people, a pool of antibodies associated with spike-specific tolerance are dominant in multiply-injected people.

Besides the tolerizing capacity, they also showed that the phagocytic enabling capacities were much reduced overall. These activities lead to clearance of viral pathogens. Reduce them → reduction in viral clearance capacity …

To be clear, this wasn’t a ‘maybe the antibody profile was a little different’ … This was a ‘whoa there’s a 48,075% increase in spike-specific antibodies between the 2nd and 3rd injections …

IgG4 antibodies among all spike-specific IgG antibodies rose on average from 0.04% shortly after the second vaccination to 19.27% after the third … [I]mportantly, that is not a typical consequence of repeat antigen exposure from either natural infections and vaccination.”

Spike Overexposure Also Opens the Door for Cancer

As noted by Substack author Brian Mowrey:¹¹

“This is a totally bonkers thing for an anti-spike-protein B cell to decide to do, and reflects B cell over-exposure to spike, which reflects super-excess production of spike by the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA code …

It is not normal to make IgG4 when repeat encounter with a virus is spaced out over a lifetime, but injection-prompted antigen exposure promotes this response, and mRNA vaccines accelerate this effect …

There is no reason to predict that this would be ‘good’ in an antiviral response … ‘Wearing out’ the immune response in this way is believed to contribute to the development of tolerance against tumors.”

So, to summarize the effects in layman’s terms, the switch from spike-specific neutralizing IgG antibodies to IgG4 antibodies switches your body from tumor suppression mode into tumor progression mode, as cancerous cells now can evade your immune system. You become “tumor tolerant” as your immune system is no longer scavenging for and eliminating cancer cells. Mowrey also points out that:¹²

“Once a B cell has switched to IgG4, it cannot switch to any other IgG subclass, as the genes for all those other base designs have been discarded. All future clones of this B cell will code for IgG4 receptor/antibody for the antigen in question.”

What Other Health Effects May Result?

For clarification, IgG4 is a subclass of the immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody type that responds to repeated and/or long-term exposure to an antigen. The mRNA shot evaluated here was that of Pfizer, and it was compared against Janssen’s viral vector-based shot. Moderna’s shot was not included. Notably, these results were not found among people who got Janssen’s shot, only Pfizer’s Comirnaty jab.

As noted by Rose:¹³

“… the bottom line here is that the Comirnaty product … induces a shift away from a viral clearing to a tolerance-inducing antibody class, and this is not the status quo for traditional vaccines or natural infections. The main problem here is … we have no idea of the effects of this ‘effect.'”

That said, we can look at what happens in people with IgG4-related disease, and start formulating hypotheses from there. As explained by Rose, a hallmark of IgG4-related disease is fibrosis, i.e., tissue scarring, which can lead to organ dysfunction, organ failure and even death if left untreated.

Rose is now researching the possible links between this antibody switching and the stringy white deposits found in COVID-jabbed people who died. Might it be a new form of connective tissue disease?

In addition to the potential for cancer cells to run amok (as discussed in the section above), IgG4 dominance may also have severe autoimmune implications seeing how the COVID jab spike protein share similarities with human proteins.

“Molecular mimicry has been shown¹⁴ in multiple publications to be a potential problem with regard to the spike protein whereby it has been shown to share motifs with human proteins,”Rose writes.¹⁵ “What this means is that autoimmunity potential against these human proteins is clear and present.

In the context of this recent publication showing a dominant IgG4 pool, I have to wonder what the implications of this dominant pool are for molecular mimicry. Are these IgG4 antibodies capable of tolerizing in the context of our own protein?”

Resources for Those Injured by the COVID Jab

If you got one or more jabs and suffered an injury, first and foremost, never ever take another COVID booster, another mRNA gene therapy shot or regular vaccine. You need to end the assault on your system.

The same goes for anyone who has taken one or more COVID jabs and had the good fortune of not experiencing debilitating side effects. Your health may still be impacted long-term, so don’t take any more shots.

When it comes to treatment, there are still more questions than answers, and most doctors are clueless about what to do — in part because they never bothered to give early treatment for COVID and therefore don’t understand how different medicines and supplements impact the spike protein.

So far, it seems like many of the treatments that worked against severe COVID-19 infection also help ameliorate adverse effects from the jab. This makes sense, as the toxic, most damaging part of the virus is the spike protein, and that’s what your whole body is producing if you got the jab.

Two doctors who have started tackling the treatment of COVID jab injuries in earnest include Dr. Michelle Perro (DrMichellePerro.com), whom I’ve interviewed on this topic, and Dr. Pierre Kory (DrPierreKory.com).

Both agree that eliminating the spike protein your body is now continuously producing is a primary task. Perro’s preferred remedy for this is hydroxychloroquine, while Kory’s is ivermectin. Both of these drugs bind and thereby facilitate the removal of spike protein.

As a member of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), Kory helped develop the FLCCC’s post-vaccine treatment protocol called I-RECOVER. Since the protocol is continuously updated as more data become available, your best bet is to download the latest version straight from the FLCCC website at covid19criticalcare.com¹⁶ (hyperlink to the correct page provided above).

The World Health Council has also published lists of remedies that can help inhibit, neutralize and eliminate spike protein. Inhibitors that prevent spike protein from binding to your cells include Prunella vulgaris, pine needle tea, emodin, neem, dandelion extract and the drug ivermectin.

Spike protein neutralizers, which prevent the spike from damaging cells, include N-acetylcysteine (NAC), glutathione, fennel tea, star anise tea, pine needle tea, St. John’s wort, comfrey tea and vitamin C. A March 2022 review paper¹⁷ suggests combating the neurotoxic effects of the spike protein using the flavonoids luteolin and quercetin.

Time-restricted eating (TRE) and/or sauna therapy can also help eliminate toxic proteins by stimulating autophagy. Several additional detox remedies can be found in “World Council for Health Reveals Spike Protein Detox.”

Other Helpful Treatments and Remedies

Other treatments and remedies that may be helpful for COVID jab injuries include:

Cancer rates have increased since the introduction of the COVID shots and is one of the top three leading causes of premature death among younger adults — a trend that in turn is driving down U.S. life expectancy.

In 2019, the average life span of Americans of all ethnicities was nearly 78.8 years.¹ By the end of 2021, life expectancy had dropped to 76.4² — a loss of nearly three years, which is an astounding decline. The leading causes of death in 2021 were heart disease, cancer and COVID-19, all three of which were higher in 2021 than in 2020,³ and both heart disease and cancer are potential side effects of the COVID jabs.

COVID Boosters Are Triggering Metastatic Cancer

November 26, 2022, The Daily Sceptic published a letter^4,5 to the editor of The BMJ, written by Dr. Angus Dalgleish, professor of oncology at St. George’s University of London, warning that COVID boosters may be causing aggressive metastatic cancers:

“COVID no longer needs a vaccine programme given the average age of death of COVID in the U.K. is 82 and from all other causes is 81 and falling,” Dalgleish writes.⁶ “The link with clots, myocarditis, heart attacks and strokes is now well accepted, as is the link with myelitis and neuropathy …

However, there is now another reason to halt all vaccine programmes. As a practicing oncologist I am seeing people with stable disease rapidly progress after being forced to have a booster, usually so they can travel. Even within my own personal contacts I am seeing B cell-based disease after the boosters.

They describe being distinctly unwell a few days to weeks after the booster — one developing leukemia, two work colleagues Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and an old friend who has felt like he has had Long COVID since receiving his booster and who, after getting severe bone pain, has been diagnosed as having multiple metastases from a rare B cell disorder.

I am experienced enough to know that these are not the coincidental anecdotes … The reports of innate immune suppression after mRNA for several weeks would fit, as all these patients to date have melanoma or B cell based cancers, which are very susceptible to immune control — and that is before the reports of suppressor gene suppression by mRNA in laboratory experiments. This must be aired and debated immediately.”

New Norm: Explosive Cancer Relapses

In a December 19, 2022, article⁷ in Conservative Woman, Dalgleish continues discussing the phenomenon of rapidly spreading cancers in patients who were in stable remission for years before receiving their COVID boosters. He notes that after his letter to The BMJ was published, several oncologists have contacted him to say they’re seeing the same thing in their own practices.

“Seeing the recurrence of these cancers after all this time naturally makes me wonder if there is a common cause?” he writes.⁸ “I had previously noted that relapse in stable cancer is often associated with severe long-term stress, such as bankruptcy, divorce, etc.

However, I found that none of my patients had any such extra stress during this time, but they had all had booster vaccines and, indeed, a couple of them noted that they had a very bad reaction to the booster which they did not have to the first two injections.

I then noted that some of these patients were not having a normal pattern of relapse but rather an explosive relapse, with metastases occurring at the same time in several sites … Scientifically, I was reading reports that the booster was leading to a big excess of antibodies at the expense of the T-cell response and that this T-cell suppression could last for three weeks, if not more.

To me, this could be causal as the immune system is being asked to make an excessive response through the humoral inflammatory part of the immune response against a virus (the alpha-delta variant) which is no longer in existence in the community.

This exertion leads to immune exhaustion, which is why these patients are reporting up to a 50% greater increase in Omicron, or other variations, than the non-vaccinated.”

A Change of Heart and Mind

Interestingly, in mid-2021, the Daily Mail published an article in which Dalgleish encouraged people to get the COVID shot, especially younger individuals.⁹ Dalgleish explains that, at the time, there was an “overwhelming push by the government and the medical community … that this would be in everyone’s best interest.”

So, he caved to the narrative, even though he had concerns from the start. Now, however, the environment has changed and there’s really no need for these experimental shots anymore.

His concerns further grew when his son developed myocarditis “after having a jab he did not want but that he needed for work and travel purposes.” A friend of his son, who was in his early 30s, suffered a stroke after his jab, and a relative of a close colleague died from a heart attack at the age of 34 after hers.

“I began to be highly alarmed that it was the vaccines causing these symptoms,” Dalgleish writes,¹⁰ “and that just as we had written¹¹ … a genetically engineered virus had serious implications for vaccine design.

This paper, which was suppressed and therefore did not appear in print for many months, reported that the sequence of the virus was completely consistent with having been genetically engineered, with a furin cleavage site and six inserts at places that would make the virus very infectious, and the reason this had such tremendous implications for vaccine design was that 80% of these sequences had homology to human epitopes.

In particular, we had noticed a homology with platelet factor 4 and myelin. The former is also certainly associated with what is known as VITT (low platelets and clotting issues) and the latter associated with all the neurological problems, such as transverse myelitis, both of which are now recognized as side effects of the vaccine even by the MHRA [Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency in the UK].”

Authorities Have Willfully Ignored All Warning Signals

Dalgleish says his team’s findings were eventually circulated among cabinet members and various medical committees, but everyone ignored them. As a result, many have been placed at unnecessary risk for serious injury and/or death.

As Dalgleish points out, young hearts over-express the ACE receptor that the virus was engineered to bind to. This binding with the ACE2 receptor is what “sets off the inflammatory response, which leads to myocarditis, pericarditis, stroke and deaths,” Dalgleish says.

This could explain the dramatic increase observed in deaths of young athletes who were jabbed: They simply have more ACE2 receptors that bind to the spike proteins created by the jab. Dalgleish continues:¹²

“When the facts change, or new facts emerge, the position of all those in authority directing mandates should change but unfortunately, they did not.

I tried desperately to point out that all the evidence that vaccines might have been useful in helping to curtail the pandemic was changing; that it was becoming very clear that there were highly significant side effects to the vaccine programme that Pfizer had gone to great lengths to cover up, and that it was only a court case in the US that led to them becoming available.

At this stage the whole vaccine programme should have been stopped but nobody seemed to want to address this, neither the Government, the medical authorities or the media.

Having written many articles for the Daily Mail arguing against lockdown and for it never to be used again, I was extremely keen to address my change of opinion on the vaccines and to warn people of their dangers particularly to younger people, and to point out there were no grounds at all for giving it to children.

Unfortunately, all my efforts and approaches to the mainstream media on this subject have been rejected. This, I believe, is something that will come back to haunt all those who introduced an Orwellian kind of suppression to the emerging truth, which labelled doctors trying to save their patients along the lines of ‘first do no harm’ as outcasts or villains.”

Scientific Proof COVID Jab Causes Cancer

Back in August 2022, The Exposé¹³ highlighted scientific evidence showing the COVID jabs can cause cancer of the ovaries, pancreas and breast, and that “a monumental cover-up is taking place to suppress the consequences … on women’s health.”

The research in question was that of Jiang and Mei, who published a peer-reviewed article showing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein obliterated the DNA repair mechanism in lymphocytes, a type of white blood cells that play an important role in your immune system. Lymphocytes help your body fight infection and chronic disease, including cancer. Professional data analyst Joel Smalley writes:¹⁴

“The viral spike protein was so toxic to this pathway that it knocked 90% of it out. If the whole spike protein got into the nucleus (in the ovaries), and enough of it was produced and hung around long enough before the body was able to get rid of it all, it would cause cancer. Fortunately, in the case of natural infection, this is unlikely to occur.

Unfortunately, the experimental mRNA toxshot induces spike protein to be produced (the full-length spike exactly matching — amino acid for amino acid — the full length of the viral spike protein¹⁵) in and around the cell nucleus and is produced for at least 60 days and almost certainly longer.¹⁶

‘Fact checkers’ said the viral spike protein doesn’t get in the nucleus despite the expert scientists showing that it absolutely does. Public health authorities and regulators said the vaccinal spike protein doesn’t get in the nucleus despite the mRNA manufacturers submitting pictures of it doing so to them as part of their emergency use application …

Jiang and Mei, quite logically and reasonably, cautioned that the mRNA spike protein would likely have the same effect as the viral spike protein on p53 and therefore cause cancer … [The] Jiang and Mei paper was retracted due to spurious ‘expressions of concern’ (EOC) about the methods of the study despite them being standard practice …

Well, despite the retraction, the spike protein circulating in large quantities, in the direct vicinity of the cell nucleus, for elongated periods of time, still has the potential to induce cancer in those cells (ovary, pancreas, breast, prostate, lymph nodes). These cancers can take years to develop and so it’s possible that we don’t see much of a safety signal for 5 or 10 years.”

As noted by Smalley, one of the authors of the EOC that led to the retraction of the paper was Eric Freed, Ph.D., who heads up the U.S. National Institutes of Health’s Center for Cancer Research.

He’s been a tenured investigator with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and NIH since 2002,¹⁷ the very agencies that funded Moderna’s mRNA jab, yet this conflict of interest was not disclosed in the EOC.

A Not so Rare Cancer Case

At the end of September 2022, The Atlantic¹⁸ featured the story of Belgian immunologist Michel Goldman, 67, who in the spring of 2021 got his first and second COVID shot. In the fall that year, he was diagnosed with lymphoma, cancer of the immune system.

Mere weeks after his body scan and diagnosis, he got his first booster, thinking he needed it since he’d soon become immunocompromised by the chemotherapy. But the booster caused a rapid decline in his health.

Another body scan at the end of September 2021, just three weeks after his first scan, revealed “a brand-new barrage of cancer lesions — so many spots that it looked like someone had set off fireworks inside Michel’s body,” Roxanne Khamsi writes:¹⁹

“More than that, the lesions were now prominent on both sides of the body, with new clusters blooming in Michel’s right armpit, and along the right side of his neck.

When Michel’s hematologist saw the scan, she told him to report directly to the nearest hospital pharmacy. He’d have to start on steroid pills right away, she told him. Such a swift progression for lymphoma in just three weeks was highly unusual, and he could not risk waiting a single day longer.

As he followed these instructions, Michel felt a gnawing worry that his COVID booster shot had somehow made him sicker. His brother [Serge, head of nuclear medicine at the hospital of the Université Libre de Bruxelles] was harboring a similar concern.

The asymmetrical cluster of cancerous nodes around Michel’s left armpit on the initial scan had already seemed ‘a bit disturbing,’ as his brother said; especially given that Michel’s first two doses of vaccine had been delivered on that side. Now he’d had a booster shot in the other arm, and the cancer’s asymmetry was flipped.

The brothers knew this might be just an eerie coincidence. But they couldn’t shake the feeling that Michel had experienced what would be a very rare yet life-threatening side effect of COVID vaccination.”²⁰

T Cells Gone Berserk

Goldman, who was an early champion of the mRNA COVID shots, now “suspected that he was their unlucky victim,” Khamsi writes.²¹ He decided to go public about his cancer despite fears “anti-vaxxers” would use it to argue against the COVID jab. His concern for people who had the same type of cancer he had won out.

There are approximately 30 different subtypes of lymphoma. The kind Goldman had — angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma — attacks follicular helper T cells, which play a crucial role in your body’s immune response to invading pathogens.

Helper T cells serve as a messenger between dendritic cells, which identify the pathogen, and B cells that make the appropriate antibodies. The mRNA COVID shots “are especially effective at generating that message, and spurring its passage through the helper T cells,” Khamsi writes.

This activation of helper T cells is part of what makes the COVID jabs work. But Goldman began to suspect that revving up those helper T cells might in some cases cause them to go berserk, resulting in tumors, or worsening of already existing ones.

Other Case Reports

Goldman was lucky. He lived to talk about it. Many others have not been so fortunate. And while he still believes he’s an “ultra-rare” case, he’s since received reports from other patients who suddenly developed angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma after their shots. As reported by Khamsi:²²

“Around the time of his February follow-up, Michel received a message from a doctor who had read his self-referential case report. The doctor’s mother had been diagnosed with the same subtype of lymphoma that Michel has following a COVID booster shot. More recently, he got an email from a woman whose sister had been vaccinated and received that diagnosis the following month.”

In August 2022, Frontiers in Medicine published a case report²³ describing “rapid progression of marginal zone B-cell lymphoma” following the COVID jab. The 80-year-old Japanese woman featured in the report developed a noticeable tumor the very next day after her first shot. According to the authors:²⁴

“Initially, we suspected head-and-neck benign lymphadenopathy as a side effect of vaccination. Nine weeks later, the number of swollen submandibular and parotid glands increased, and the lymph nodes further enlarged.

Finally, the right temporal mass was diagnosed as marginal zone B-cell lymphoma based on immunohistochemical and flow cytometry findings of biopsy specimens.

Our findings suggest that although 4-6 weeks of observation for lymph node inflammation after the second vaccination is recommended, malignancy should also be considered in the differential diagnosis of lymphadenopathy following vaccination.”

COVID Jab Is Far Less Effective in Lymphoma Patients

In May 2022, a single-center study²⁵ at Emory University discovered that the humoral immune response in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) was significantly reduced after getting a COVID jab, compared to people who did not have either of those diagnoses.

Patients with NHL or CLL also didn’t have nearly the same antibody response to the shot. Only 68% of them developed neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 after the second dose, compared to 100% of healthy controls. NHL/CLL patients who had undergone anti–CD20-directed therapies within one year of the first dose had the lowest antibody levels.

Turbo-Charged Cancers Are Becoming More Prevalent

Data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED)²⁶ — historically one of the most well-kept and most heavily-relied upon medical databases in the world — showed that, compared to the previous five-year averages, cancer among Department of Defense (DOD) personnel in 2021 skyrocketed.

Overall, cancers tripled among servicemen and their family members after the rollout of the COVID shots. Breast cancer went up 487%. Exploding cancer rates are also seen elsewhere. One of the first to warn that the shots might cause cancer was Dr. Ryan Cole, a pathologist who runs his own pathology lab.

He suspects the shots accelerate already existing cancers by way of immune dysregulation.²⁷ He noticed that cancers that were previously well-controlled would suddenly grow out of control and rapidly lead to death once they got the COVID jab.

Swedish pathologist, researcher and senior physician at Lund’s University, Dr. Ute Kruger, has also observed an explosion in rapidly advancing cancers in the wake of the COVID shots. For example, she’s noticed:^28,29

• Cancer patients are getting younger — The largest increase is among 30- to 50-year-olds
• Tumor sizes are dramatically larger — Historically, 3-centimeter tumors were commonly found at the time of cancer diagnosis. Now, the tumors they’re finding are regularly 4 to 12 centimeters, which suggests they’re growing at a much faster rate than normal
• Multiple tumors in multiple organs are becoming more common
• Recurrence and metastasis are increasing — Kruger points out that many of the cancer patients she’s seeing have been in remission for years, only to suddenly be beset with uncontrollable cancer growth and metastasis shortly after their COVID jab

These “turbo-cancers,” as Kruger calls them, cannot be explained by delayed cancer screenings due to lockdowns and other COVID restrictions, as those days are long gone. Patients, despite having access to medical screenings as in years past, are showing up with grossly exacerbated tumor growths, and she believes this is because the cancers are being “turbo-charged” by the mRNA jabs.

Disturbingly, as detailed in “How Cancer Deaths From the COVID Jabs Are Being Hidden,” analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) data suggests the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been filtering out and redesignating cancer deaths as COVID deaths since April 2021 to eliminate the cancer signal. The signal is being hidden by swapping the underlying cause of death with main cause of death.

In August 2022, provisional life expectancy estimates^1,2 for 2021 were released, showing Americans had lost nearly three years of life expectancy during 2020 and 2021. In December 2022, the finalized mortality report³ confirmed these shocking data.

Shocking Decline in US Life Expectancy

In 2019, the average life span of Americans of all ethnicities was 78.8 years.⁴ By the end of 2020, it had dropped to 77.0 years⁵ and by the end of 2021, it was 76.4.⁶ As detailed in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s finalized mortality report for 2021:⁷

“In 2021, life expectancy at birth was 76.4 years for the total U.S. population — a decrease of 0.6 year from 77.0 years in 2020 … For males, life expectancy decreased 0.7 year from 74.2 in 2020 to 73.5 in 2021. For females, life expectancy decreased 0.6 year from 79.9 in 2020 to 79.3 in 2021 … From 2020 to 2021, death rates increased for each age group 1 year and over …”

As Virginia Commonwealth University professor of population health Dr. Steven Woolf told USA Today,⁸ “That means all the medical advances over the past quarter century have been erased.”

Life Expectancy Has Dropped Across All Age Groups

Age-specific rates of death increased across all age groups as follows:⁹

As you can see, something very strange is going on here. While life expectancy dropped across all age groups, the age groups with the highest increases in mortality were working age adults, 25 through 54, followed by children between the ages of 1 and 4.

What’s Killing Younger Americans?

The leading causes of death in 2021 were heart disease, cancer and COVID-19, all three of which were higher in 2021 than 2020.¹⁰ Unintentional injury and stroke also significantly increased in 2021.

Heart disease, stroke and cancer are all now-known side effects of the COVID jabs. Unintentional injuries may also be due to the shots, as you may easily be injured if you pass out or suffer a heart attack or stroke while doing just about anything.

Woolf, however, believes low COVID-19 jab rates and general poor health of Americans are to blame for the increased mortality. In addition to disregarding the fact that the primary causes of death are side effects of the COVID shots, working age adults and children are also, comparatively speaking, the healthiest groups in general and ought to have a lower risk of death from any cause, but especially heart disease and cancer.

And, since they have a far lower risk of dying from COVID in the first place (compared to the elderly), a slightly lower COVID jab rate in this age group is unlikely to have made such a huge difference.

According to CDC data,¹¹ 84% of 25- to 49-year-olds got at least one dose and 71% is considered “fully ‘vaccinated.'” In the 50 to 64 year category, it’s 95% and 83% respectively. In the 65 and over category, 95% got at least one dose and 93% are “fully ‘vaccinated,'” so it’s not like there’s a major difference in jab rates.

‘Sudden Death Syndrome’ May Be Driving Down Life Expectancy

COVID-19 is an unlikely cause for the rapid decline in life expectancy for the simple fact that it’s not a major contributor to rising excess mortality. Excess mortality is a statistic that is related to but separate from life expectancy.

It refers to the difference between the observed numbers of deaths (from all causes) during a given time, compared to the expected number of deaths based on historical norms, such as the previous five-year average. (Formula: reported deaths minus expected deaths equals excess deaths.)

Across the world, excess mortality has dramatically risen since the start of the pandemic, and barely a day now goes by without a healthy adult suddenly dropping dead with no apparent cause. People have died during live broadcasts, in the middle of speeches and during dinner.

Clearly, they were feeling well enough to go to work, to an event or a restaurant, and something caused them to instantaneously die without warning. These are the people making up these excess death statistics. They shouldn’t be dead, yet something took them out.

Excess Deaths Took Off After the COVID Jab Rollout

While COVID-positive deaths were part of the equation in 2020, excess deaths really took off after the rollout of the COVID jabs, not during the height of the pandemic as one would expect if COVID-19 was the real killer.¹² Besides, we already know that “COVID-19 death” simply means that the person tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of death or just prior to it.

For the U.S., there were 3,440,546 deaths of all ages for the year 2020.¹³ The expected numbers were 3,028,959, so that was an excess of 13.6% (411,587 above expected). In 2021, there were 3,459,496 deaths of all ages, which was 16.4% above expectations. As of mid-April 2022, the excess death rate was already at 14.1%, with 1,041,538 reported deaths of all ages.

If the COVID jabs worked, you’d expect excess mortality to drop, yet that’s not what we’re seeing. We’re also not seeing mass death from COVID. The only clear factor that might account for these discrepancies is mass injection with an experimental gene transfer technology.

More Working Age Adults Were Coerced Into Taking the Jab

Life insurance data confirm that it’s working age adults who are dying in record numbers, which is what’s really driving down life expectancy. In the third quarter of 2021, the death rate of working-age Americans (18 to 64) was 40% higher than prepandemic levels, and these deaths were, again, not attributed to COVID.

As noted by Dr. Robert Malone in a January 2022 Substack article,¹⁴ workers were forced to accept the toxic COVID jabs at a higher frequency relative to the general population. This, I believe, is the real answer to why they’re dying at a disproportionate rate.

As for children under 4, well, toxins tend to be more dangerous to younger children, so it’s no great shock that the death rate for children has risen more than the rate of older people. After all, we’re now giving these toxic COVID jabs to babies as young as 6 months old.

Data Manipulation Hides Real Cause of Death

As mentioned, the leading causes of death in 2021 were heart disease, cancer and COVID-19. Data analysis by The Ethical Skeptic¹⁵ — self-described as a former intelligence officer and strategist — shows cancer deaths are now being mislabeled as COVID deaths. The suspicion is that this is an effort to hide the fact that the COVID shots have resulted in soaring cancer rates.

Seven of the 11 International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes tracked by the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics — including cancer — saw sharp upticks starting in the first week of April 2021, which is when large swaths of the American population were getting their first COVID jabs.

According to The Ethical Skeptic’s analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) data, the CDC has been filtering and redesignating cancer deaths as COVID deaths since Week 14 of 2021 to eliminate the cancer signal.¹⁶

The following two charts illustrate how cancer mortality is being artificially suppressed. As explained by The Ethical Skeptic:^17,18

“The set dynamics are complex, but the principle is straightforward. When a death cert lists Cancer as the UCoD [underlying cause of death] and COVID as MCoD [main cause of death] — the UCoD & MCoD are being swapped, and COVID is being listed as the UCoD 100% (425/wk).

“This results in 20% of all COVID deaths each week, also happening to be persons dying of Cancer — which is egregiously higher than it should be. This is clear over-attribution = equates to exactly the difference between the Cancer and All Other ICD-10 code lag curves.”

The problem facing the CDC, is … What does one do when COVID Mortality is no longer substantial enough to conceal the excess Cancer Mortality?”

So, to rephrase, what The Ethical Skeptic is saying is that 20% of the weekly so-called COVID deaths are cancer deaths, which is rather astounding. Swapping the underlying and main causes of death, listing COVID as the main cause, hides (to some degree) the fact that cancer deaths are going through the roof.

According to his analysis, the COVID shot is killing 7,300 Americans per week. COVID, meanwhile, is killing 1,740 people.¹⁹ What will the CDC blame when COVID disappears, and they can no longer swap the underlying and main cause of death designations? Time will tell.

In the meantime, cancer is already one of the leading causes that is prematurely killing Americans, and uncontrollable turbo-charged cancers only started to occur after the rollout of the COVID jabs.²⁰

Former NIH Director Blames Christian Misinformation

Former National Institutes of Health director Dr. Francis Collins recently suggested misinformation spread by White Evangelical Christians are driving vaccine hesitancy, and that it’s this religious “culture war” that is killing Americans.

Collins either has an agenda or is seriously confused, as statistics show whites in general had the highest COVID jab uptake rates when the jabs came out, and people who took it were far more likely to promote the jab than discourage it. As reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation:²¹

“… federal data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that 78% of the total population in the United States have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine …

Over the course of the vaccination rollout, Black and Hispanic people have been less likely than their White counterparts to receive a vaccine, but these disparities have narrowed over time and reversed for Hispanic people.”

Christians in general also haven’t been particularly “hesitant” about getting the jab. An investigation by the Public Religion Research Institute found²² 56% of white evangelical protestants got jabbed, as did 74% of White mainline protestants and 79% of white Catholics. For some reason, the jab rates among Black religious affiliations were not assessed, so we have no idea whether religion has influenced Blacks to reject the shot.

Bear in mind, the COVID jab rate for the U.S. as a whole (one dose or more) is 79%,²³ so Christians in general are about as average as you can get. Granted, evangelical protestants have a significantly lower rate, but is Collins suggesting white evangelicals are causing Blacks to reject the jab — because Blacks had, and still have, the lowest jab rates.²⁴

The Use of Scapegoats Is a Classic Prejudice Builder

As detailed in “Vaccines Are the New ‘Purity Test,'” the Nazis used a four-step process for dehumanizing Jews,²⁵ — prejudice, scapegoating, discrimination and persecution. By scapegoating Jews as dirty and diseased, the German public was indoctrinated into agreeing with, or at least going along with, the Nazis’ genocidal plan.

Over the past three years, we’ve seen how government officials have repeatedly tried to pin blame for the spread of COVID on one specific group or another. Fortunately, these narratives didn’t stick in the long term, but they did do significant harm for a time.

Collins’ attack on evangelical Christians is just the latest example of how they try to maintain control by seeding division among races, religious and political groups. The more we distrust and fear each other, the less we pay attention to the real criminals.

But, in order for this the division attempt to work, there must be a target, a scapegoat, toward which people can direct their frustration. COVID-19 is now endemic and a rare threat to anyone. COVID narratives are simply being recycled to keep the fear of illness and distrust among people going.

It’s important to realize, though, that fear is the No. 1 destroyer of freedom. The greater your fear, the more you’ll obey, and the more you obey, the more freedom you must give up. And freedoms relinquished are never voluntarily given back by those in power. People throughout the ages have always had to fight to regain freedoms lost.