Deadly Gene Based COVID Injections are the Biggest Medical Experiment on Humans in History

From [HERE] “This is the largest experiment performed on human beings in the history of the world.” Amid pushback against widespread COVID vaccine mandates, this statement could be easily dismissed as knee-jerk hyperbole, except that the speaker is Robert Malone, M.D., a virologist and immunologist who, in 1988 at the Salk Institute, developed the mRNA vaccine platform technology now used in many COVID-19 vaccines. He made the comment during a recent interview with Veronika Kyrylenko of The New American in reference to the accelerated push to vaccinate the world against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.

His assertion echoed what another highly qualified expert had already said: “Humans are now part of the largest experiment performed in the history of mankind.” This was from German microbiologist Sucharit Bhakdi, emeritus head of the Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene at the University of Mainz and former editor-in-chief of Medical Microbiology and Immunology. He warned The New American’s Alex Newman that COVID shots would prove lethal, and that boosters could “decimate world population.”

Other specialists agree. Emergency physician and attorney Simone Gold, who has worked in Washington, D.C., for both the surgeon general and the Labor & Human Resources Committee, calls the experimental vaccine push a “crime against humanity.” She explained to listeners of Church & State Radio that in the initial rollout, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to COVID-19 vaccines, a designation that allows unapproved medical products to be used in a crisis. Used, but not mandated — an important distinction because, according to Gold, mandates of experimental drugs violate the Nuremberg Code, ethical research principles intended to protect people from forced medical experimentation.

Have things changed now that the FDA has fully licensed the Pfizer vaccine? Not according to America’s Frontline Doctors(AFLD), the group Gold says she founded in response to political interference in the practice of medicine. AFLD’s White Paper on Experimental Vaccines for COVID-19 explains the dangerously unprecedented timetable of FDA drug testing, a process that normally takes years. COVID vaccines had EUA a mere 12 months after health officials detected the supposedly novel virus, and only nine months after the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a pandemic, leaving no time to monitor long-term effects in clinical trials. AFLD described it as “the shortest time scientists have ever been able to develop a new vaccination for a major disease,” recalling the 40-year record of failed attempts on the part of Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, to create an HIV vaccine.

Nevertheless, pundits claim the novel coronavirus justifies vaccine mandates. As of mid-December, WHO tallied more than 270 million confirmed cases and more than five million deaths worldwide. “SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are urgently needed to mitigate the consequences of the pandemic and protect from future outbreaks,” proclaimed the New England Journal of Medicine, claiming benefits outweigh risks in “a world that lacks a reliable treatment for COVID-19.”

This assertion flies in the face of successful treatments such as that developed by Dr. Peter McCullough, a Dallas internist and cardiologist and former medical professor at Texas A&M University School of Medicine. He testified before the Texas Senate Health and Human Services Committee in March that two independent studies confirmed the outpatient protocol he and several colleagues developed early in the pandemic could have drastically reduced hospitalizations and deaths. “We have over 500,000 deaths in the United States,” he noted. “The preventable fraction could have been as high as 85 percent,” or 425,000, had people realized that reliable treatments exist.

Other researchers find inflated numbers in official data, which belie the supposed need for draconian quarantines and mandates. Stanford University’s expert in disease prevention, John Ioannidis, M.D., incurred establishment wrath in 2020 when he tested COVID-diagnosed patients for antibodies to the virus. At a time when governments were using COVID hysteria to justify life-altering lockdowns and unhealthy mask mandates, Ioannidis’ results, published in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation, found that SARS-CoV-2 “has lower average IFR [infection fatality rate] than originally feared,” around 0.15 percent. This was markedly lower than the one-percent IFR that Fauci reported in congressional testimony and the three percent asserted by WHO, according to National Review. Ioannidis published further research this past July in the European Journal of Epidemiology noting the continued prevalence of misdiagnoses, overcounted deaths, and erroneous death certificates, and pointing out that most “deaths occur in people with several underlying diseases” instead of the population at large.

Regardless, WHO insists on reporting its inflated COVID death numbers. The emergence of the Omicron variant has given the agency’s director-general, Tedros Adhanom, occasion to declare at a December press conference in Geneva, “Surely, we have learned by now that we underestimate the virus at our peril.” He urged vaccination as the solution.

What’s in a Name?

Are COVID vaccines the answer? According to Bhakdi, the differences between these and traditional vaccines are significant and dangerous. He and his biologist/biochemist wife, Karina Reiss, explain why in their books Corona False Alarm? and Corona Unmasked

Prior to 2020, all vaccines contained weakened or inactivated viruses that stimulate the body’s immune system to produce defense mechanisms called “antibodies.” If the active virus infects you after vaccination, your antibodies recognize the intruder and stop it before it can do any damage.

COVID vaccines are different because they are gene-based. Instead of weakened or inactivated viruses, they contain a genetic recipe that tells your cells how to make viral spike proteins, with the hope that your immune system will react the same way that it does to traditional vaccines. Bhakdi and Reiss describe the shots as billions of “gene packages” that enter your bloodstream, where they are absorbed by endothelial cells that line your body’s blood vessels. Your cells start producing spike proteins, according to “package” instructions. Howver, the spike proteins damage your vascular lining, which stimulates platelets to form blood clots inside the vessels. Additionally, your immune system’s defense cells attack your endothelial cells because the latter have become viral factories. More vascular damage and clotting ensue.

This technology is new in the vaccine world. However, manufacturers get away with labeling their novel drugs as vaccines because since 2015 the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an agency heavily involved in their creation, has twice conveniently morphed the definition into an umbrella term that includes the new drugs. U.S. Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) tweeted this evolution of meaning and quipped, “They’ve been busy at the Ministry of Truth.”

Merriam-Webster took the cue from CDC in 2020, updating its dictionary just in time for public consumption. The advantages are obvious: the word “vaccine” has a familiar, innocuous connotation. Moreover, unlike other drugs, vaccines enjoy certain liability protection and can in some cases be legally mandated. In the pharmaceutical world, this redefinition is a gold mine.

As Big Pharma reaps benefits, the vascular damage that Bhakdi and Reiss described is wreaking havoc among the jabbed: strokes, heart attacks, heart inflammation, blood disorders, miscarriages, and many other post-COVID jab ailments reported in profusion to the federal government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Bhakdi and Reiss predicted these effects would be particularly pronounced in younger people due to their more robust immune systems. Unfortunately, their forecasts are playing out. A notable example is the growing number of post-jab injuries among young athletes worldwide. The Real Science blog maintains a documented list of the most serious cases, which as of mid-December totaled 337 cardiac incidents and 192 deaths since January 2021.

Japan, where the government mandates post-vax adverse event reporting, has similar results. Rates of death due to cardiovascular issues and stroke are “disproportionately high” in vaccinated individuals, according to the medical magazine Med Check, which published Japan’s data in September. Researchers estimate the “mortality risk of vaccination is 7 times higher than that of COVID-19” among people in their 20s and warn that, based on clinical trials, it is “ridiculous to consider vaccination for school children.”

The Emperor’s New Vaccine

You won’t hear those stories on the nightly news. “This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated,” declared President Biden in September. Major media dutifully blame the spread of SARS-CoV-2 on those who refuse to get the jab. “Germany and Austria seeing COVID cases rise among unvaccinated population,” laments a November ABC Newsheadline. “Unvaccinated Texans 40 times as likely to die of covid,” bemoans the Washington Post. And MSN.comreports, “Doctors see serious COVID-19 complications in unvaccinated pregnant women and their babies.”

It is Trump’s fault, of course. A National Public Radioanalysis contends, “People living in counties that voted heavily for Donald Trump … have been nearly three times as likely to die from COVID-19” as their Biden-supporting counterparts. NPRoffers a two-fold reason: Unvaccinated people tend to be Republicans, and “exposure to misinformation” runs “high among Republicans.”

News that doesn’t make the Google algorithm cut paints a different picture. The NBCaffiliate in Burlington, Vermont, reported a single-day record of new COVID-19 cases and one death in early December. The report notably failed to mention whether the deceased had been jabbed, but the state’s health department did not expect “a decrease in new infections during the next month.” How could this happen in blue-state Vermont, where the CDC brags more than 85 percent of residents have had at least one shot, and 73 percent are considered fully vaccinated?

California tells a similar story. In a flagrant blue-state display of yellow journalism, the San Diego Fox Newsaffiliate reported in December, “As vaccination rates lagged over the summer, COVID-19 cases surged,” leading readers to blame the unvaxxed. But California is another CDC darling, with nearly 75 percent of residents having received at least one jab by the end of June 2021. 

This blue-state phenomenon is confirmed worldwide. Case numbers have spiked in Iceland, reports the Health Ministry, despite the fact that more than 85 percent of adults are double-dosed. “Chile leads the Western Hemisphere in vaccinations,” announced the Washington Post, but “coronavirus is still surging.” Israel boasts one of the world’s highest vaccination rates, but official data published in the journal Science reveal that a majority of Israelis hospitalized with COVID are fully vaccinated. And health officials in what pundits call “the most vaccinated place on earth,” the tiny British territory of Gibraltar, cancelled Christmas events due to a recent dramatic rise in COVID cases, though every adult there is twice-jabbed.

Fact checkers brush aside damning evidence and blame variants, faulty math, waning immunity, or increasing tests translating into increasing numbers of cases (though they lambasted Trump in 2020 for pointing out the same phenomenon). Most objections are downright Orwellian. Here’s an example from BBCabout COVID-19 in Wales: “Although 80% of [COVID-hospitalized] patients have been double-dosed with a vaccine, public health officials said this is not evidence that the vaccine is not working.... The sheer numbers of people vaccinated … mean that statistically, double-vaccinated patients will be a significant portion of hospital patients.” USA Today echoed this illogic in a fact-check crying foul on reports of vaccinated individuals in England dying of COVID-19: “[E]xperts say it’s expected that the vaccinated would account for the majority of deaths as the number of people vaccinated rises.”

The absurdity is unanswerable. An analysis of VAERS data since 1990 shows no such breakthrough effect from other vaccines. The notable exception prior to VAERS was an outbreak of polio in the rushed vaccine rollout of 1955. The infamous Cutter incident involved inoculation batches accidentally infested with live polio virus. The disastrous consequences left 10 children dead and 200 with varying degrees of paralysis, according to a 2006 article in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. History repeats.

Vaccine Venom

Breakthrough COVID cases among the jabbed only tell part of the story. What about other adverse effects? Even without clinical data it is easy to surmise that COVID vaccines are injuring and killing huge numbers. Why else would so many healthcare professionals be willing to sacrifice their jobs to avoid the jab?

Blame goes to the vaccine injuries they are witnessing firsthand. “We’ve been seeing a lot [of severe side effects] in the hospitals just between the patients and employees that I work with,” Jennifer Bridges, R.N. told CNN’s Pulse of the People. “You don’t know until you take it if you’re going to get one of those reactions or not.” Bridges was the main plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by 117 former employees of a Houston hospital, fired for refusing their employer’s jab mandate. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes justified the hospital’s action as “saving lives” and sniffed that the nurses would “simply need to work somewhere else.” Hughes failed to explain his insinuation that it would be fine to endanger lives by working elsewhere unvaccinated.

Child endangerment: The CDC approved jabs for five-year-olds, though clinical trials in Japan provoked researchers to declare it “ridiculous to consider vaccination for school children.” (Photo credit: AP Images)

VAERS provides clues about why those nurses are squeamish about getting a shot: as of December, more than 20,000 deaths, more than 100,000 hospitalizations, and more than 33,000 people left permanently disabled after getting the jab. Tens of thousands more have endured miscarriages, heart attacks, severe allergic reactions, and other life-threatening conditions.

Although VAERS data relay only reported cases without proven causality, government agencies rely on it as an early-warning indicator, as infectious disease expert Dr. Peter McCullough told The New American. “In the 1976 swine flu pandemic we attempted to vaccinate 55 million Americans,” he said. “At 25 deaths, the program was killed.” He noted that today, typically a drug is pulled off the market when reporteddeaths reach 50. COVID vaccines have already outstripped that limit 400 times over, and deaths attributed to them are more than double the combined VAERS total credited to other vaccines in the previous 30 years.

Historically FDA’s decisions to pull drugs have not depended on proven causality because, the agency admits, due to the voluntary nature of VAERS reporting, its numbers likely account for a small fraction of actual cases. The Lazarus Report, a definitive Department of Health and Human Services study, found that “less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported.” If that holds true for COVID jabs, as many as two million victims have already perished. That’s why many healthcare professionals would rather face unemployment than this particular needlestick.

VAERS numbers are hardly an anomaly. Data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request to the U.K.’s medical regulatory agency reveal that deaths due to COVID vaccines in the first six months of 2021 were “407% higher than deaths due to all other vaccines combined in the past 11 years,” according to U.K. website The Exposé.

The World Health Organization maintains its own database, called VigiAccess, which collects drug side-effect information from its 172 member countries and territories. As of mid-December it had recorded nearly three million adverse events and deaths related to COVID shots, with totals climbing daily. An astonishing number include pre-born babies — e.g., spontaneous abortions, stillbirths, and other pregnancy-related complications. Were those children counted as people rather than clumps of cells, VigiAccess numbers would include thousands more victims.

Excess Mortality

There is another unnerving phenomenon repeating itself around the globe. Areas of high vaccination rates are experiencing overall excess mortality — even higher than mortality in 2020 when COVID shut down the world. The grassroots group Israeli People’s Committee discovered excess mortality in their country following the government’s coercive vaccine mandates: 18 percent overall and a startling 30 percent in the 20 to 29 age group, compared to past averages. Particularly alarming is the high correlation between the number of people vaccinated per day and the number of deaths per day, in the range of 10 days post-vaccination. Likewise, research in Germany, commissioned by state parliament member Dr. Ute Bergner, found higher excess mortality in areas of the country with higher vaccination rates.

Officials in the United Kingdom brag about their mass immunization program, which began in December 2020 and expanded by July to include those as young as 12. The Express reported in early November, “Last week was the 16th week in a row where the [Office of National Statistics for England and Wales (ONS)] reported extra or ‘excess’ deaths” unrelated to COVID. The same data show a mind-boggling 63-percent increase in deaths among teen boys since they started getting jabbed, compared to the same period last year, and a 44-percent rise above the national five-year average in deaths among 12- to 15-year-olds. Former New York Times reporter and science writer Alex Berenson analyzed the ONS mortality data and found that since April, “vaccinated English adults under 60 are dying at twice the rate of unvaccinated people the same age.”

Is this excess mortality mere coincidence, or is there a link to vaccines? “The correlation does not prove that excess mortality is caused by vaccination,” notes Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, on the AAPS website. (NPR fell into this same statistical trap when it reported excess COVID deaths in Trump-supporting counties.) “On the other hand, vaccination cannot be shown to decrease mortality, since mortality increased,” Orient said, pointing out that the data demand further research, and that regardless, no one should be denied the “fundamental human right to decline an injection.”

Non-negotiable Rights

Joe Biden has obviously forgotten the concept of fundamental human rights, along with his promise at a December 2020 event in Delaware about the jab: “I wouldn’t demand it to be mandatory.” Now, his tyrannical mandates aim to encompass most Americans, and his recently released COVID Action Plan prioritizes life-threatening vaccinations for children as young as five. Despite damning evidence that proves the collossal failure of COVID vaccines, his administration obviously intends to extend the mandates indefinitely and expects a mask-shackled, lockdown-weary public to submit.

But freedom-loving Americans are using constitutional means to protect their rights. The attorneys general from 27 states, together with more than 100 organ-izations and companies, filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court in mid-December to block Biden’s OSHA mandates. Courts are also intervening on behalf of the dying, as in the case of Chicago judge Paul Fullerton, who ordered a hospital to “step aside” and allow ivermectin for a dying man; the treatment saved his life. Meanwhile, grassroots movements are springing up. CNBC reported that “several hundred Google employees” recently signed a manifesto against vaccine mandates. Thousands of people are planning to gather in Washington, D.C., on January 23 for a grassroots “Defeat the Mandates: An American Homecoming” march planned by an international alliance of physicans, scientists, athletes, journalists, and celebrities.

Such stories are becoming more common. They promise an end to COVID tyranny, as more Americans wake up to their lab-rat status in this giant and deadly vaccine experiment. But they do not necessarily imply a return to normal, and that is a good thing. The pre-COVID world was one eager to surrender its God-given rights for a false sense of security. The outcome has been illicit quarantines, economic shutdown, censorship, and life-threatening injection mandates. America is ready for a new experiment in freedom.

In the Spectacle, Asymptomatic Transmission is the Sole Basis for Masks, Distancing and COVID Hysteria. In Reality, there are Over a Dozen Studies Proving Asymptomatic Transmission is Non-Existent

From [HERE] Asymptomatic transmission is the basis of masks, distancing and general hysteria. For this reason it is important to understand the fallacy of this paranoia and senseless fear. 
The below studies find the instance to be close to zero. Transmission of corona viruses and other influenza illnesses occur primarily only when symptoms are present and not from healthy asymptomatic people.

Covid-19: Asymptomatic cases may not be infectious, Wuhan study
indicates
. Shaun Griffin bmj.com

Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening
in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China

Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysisDownload

Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19Download

A-study-on-infectivity-of-asymptomatic-SARS-CoV-2-carriers-2Download

Evidence-of-asymptomatic-spread-is-insufficient-to-justify-mass-testing-for-Covid-19-The-BMJ-1Download

The original study that postulated asymptomatic transmission on March 5th, 2020, involving a Chinese woman visiting Germany for business. She was in fact taking cold medication and symptomatic at the time. Christian Drosten, M.D., coauthor and a influential virologist in Germany, helped promote asymptomatic transmission as a reason for harsh public health restrictions.

Transmission of 2019-nCoV Infection from an Asymptomatic Contact in GermanyDownload

Evidence-of-asymptomatic-spread-is-insufficient-to-justify-mass-testing-for-Covid-19-The-BMJ-2
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4436/rr-10Download

WHO June 5th 2020 Guidance recommending the use of masksDownload

WHO press conference-08 jun 2020. One page 12 Dr Maria Van Kerkhove states contact tracing reveals asymptomatic transmission to be “very rare.”Download

PANDA – A-miscarriage-of-diagnosisDownload

PANDA – The-PHE-data-that-goes-against-the-narrativeDownload

SARS-CoV-2 Transmission among Marine Recruits during QuarantineDownload

"We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe." 240 Scientists who published peer-reviewed research on health effects of electromagnetic fields [US Govt Only Trusts "Science" Funded by Big Tech or Pharma]

From [HERE] The telecommunications industry and their experts have accused many scientists who have researched the effects of cell phone radiation of "fear mongering" over the advent of wireless technology's 5G. Since much of our research is publicly-funded, we believe it is our ethical responsibility to inform the public about what the peer-reviewed scientific literature tells us about the health risks from wireless radiation.

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently announced through a press release that the commission will soon reaffirm the radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits that the FCC adopted in the late 1990s. These limits are based upon a behavioral change in ratsexposed to microwave radiation and were designed to protect us from short-term heating risks due to RFR exposure.  

Yet, since the FCC adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR at intensities too low to cause significant heating.

Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions:

“Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”

The scientists who signed this appeal arguably constitute the majority of experts on the effects of nonionizing radiation. They have published more than 2,000 papers and letters on EMF in professional journals.

The FCC’s RFR exposure limits regulate the intensity of exposure, taking into account the frequency of the carrier waves, but ignore the signaling properties of the RFR. Along with the patterning and duration of exposures, certain characteristics of the signal (e.g., pulsing, polarization)increase the biologic and health impacts of the exposure. New exposure limits are needed which account for these differential effects. Moreover, these limits should be based on a biological effect, not a change in a laboratory rat’s behavior.

The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" in 2011. Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) found “clear evidence” that two years of exposure to cell phone RFR increased cancer in male rats and damaged DNA in rats and mice of both sexes. The Ramazzini Institute in Italy replicated the key finding of the NTP using a different carrier frequency and much weaker exposure to cell phone radiation over the life of the rats.

Based upon the research published since 2011, including human and animal studies and mechanistic data, the IARC has recently prioritized RFR to be reviewed again in the next five years. Since many EMF scientists believe we now have sufficient evidence to consider RFR as either a probable or known human carcinogen, the IARC will likely upgrade the carcinogenic potential of RFR in the near future.

Nonetheless, without conducting a formal risk assessment or a systematic review of the research on RFR health effects, the FDA recently reaffirmed the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits in a letter to the FCC, stating that the agency had “concluded that no changes to the current standards are warranted at this time,” and that “NTP’s experimental findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage.” The letter stated that “the available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans due to exposures at or under the current limits.”

The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.

Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility).

Since 5G is a new technology, there is no research on health effects, so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. However, we have considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G. Little is known the effects of exposure to 4G, a 10-year-old technology, because governments have been remiss in funding this research. Meanwhile, we are seeing increases in certain types of head and neck tumors in tumor registries, which may be at least partially attributable to the proliferation of cell phone radiation. These increases are consistent with results from case-control studies of tumor risk in heavy cell phone users.

5G will not replace 4G; it will accompany 4G for the near future and possibly over the long term. If there are synergistic effects from simultaneous exposures to multiple types of RFR, our overall risk of harm from RFR may increase substantially. Cancer is not the only risk as there is considerable evidence that RFR causes neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely due to oxidative stress.

As a society, should we invest hundreds of billions of dollars deploying 5G, a cellular technology that requires the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in the U.S. close to where we live, work and play?

Instead, we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G Appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety.

Healthy, Black Woman Olympic Sprinter Forced to Get the Fake Vax is Diagnosed with Pericarditis, Heart Inflammation After Pfizer Booster Injection

Swiss Olympic sprinter gets pericarditis after Pfizer’s COVID booster

In a Jan. 17 social media post, swiss Olympic sprinter Sarah Atcho, a Black woman, said she is experiencing pericarditis after receiving a Pfizer booster shot.

On Dec. 22, Atcho received a booster because she “didn’t want to struggle with this when the season started” and was told it was safer to get Pfizer — even though she had Moderna the first time — to avoid cardiac side effects.

On Dec. 27, Atcho said she started experiencing tightness in her chest and felt dizzy while walking. A cardiologist diagnosed Atcho with pericarditis — inflammation of the thin membrane that surrounds the heart.

Atcho is not allowed to get her heart rate up for several weeks to allow her heart to rest and heal from the inflammation. Said she is upset nobody talks about the “heavy side-effects” young and healthy people are experiencing after receiving COVID vaccines. [MORE]

“I was told that it was safer to get Pfizer to avoid cardiac side effects,” she wrote.

“On December 27 I felt a tightness in the chest and started feeling dizzy while walking up the stairs. This happened a few more times until I decided to check with a cardiologist who diagnosed me with pericarditis (inflammation of the thin membrane surrounding the heart). I am now not allowed to get my heart rate up for a few weeks to allow my heart to rest and heal from the inflammation.” [MORE]

NYPD Arrest and Detain a 9 Year Old Black Girl and 5 Adults for Refusing to Show COVID Injection Papers at Natural History Museum

From [HERE] NYPD officers were heckled for arresting five organized anti-vax mandate protesters and detaining a nine year-old girl Wednesday after they barged into the Natural History Museum without showing proof of COVID vaccination.  

The arrests, which come amid soaring crime in the Big Apple, took place on Wednesday. Trouble began when a half-dozen purported members of the New York Freedom Rally - a group that has been staging anti-vax protests throughout the city - attempted to enter the Manhattan museum without showing their vaccine passports in violation of rules. Those require every visitor five years and older to show proof of vaccination. 

The nine year-old, named Jayla, was filmed sobbing as she was marched down the steps by two cops, with onlookers filmed heckling and abusing the NYPD officers over her apprehension. She and her unnamed mom were taken to a nearby precinct, and released two hours later. It is unclear if the youngster's mom will be charged.

The six anti-mandate activists affiliated with the New York Freedom Rally had made reservations to visit the museum on Wednesday, but were denied entry after failing to produce their COVID vaccine passports.

Nine-year-old and five adults detained for refusing to show vax cards

Their protest was documented by a Twitter user describing himself as an 'independent journalist' reporting on the anti-mandate movement in New York City. 

An argument with security and museum officials ensued and quickly escalated, even briefly turning into a shoving match, after one of the women in the group, Joy, was denied access to a bathroom, despite telling staff she was on her period. 

Protester Mitchell Bosch, who has gained notoriety by taking part in several recent anti-mandate stunts throughout the city, came to Joy's defense, yelling at the guards: 'I'll take on all of you! You'll have to drag me out.'

Bosch later laid down on the floor and presented museum staffers with an ultimatum: either they let him and the group visit the museum, 'or you call the police. That is the line. There is no negotiating.' 

NYPD officers were called to the scene and removed the protesters from the museum. 

Video shows the men, women and 9-year-old Jayla being escorted by cops, who are heckled by bystanders and slammed as 'f***ing cowards.' [MORE]

New, Complete Documentary "Planet Lockdown:" The Official COVID Narrative from Authorities, Big Pharma, Big Tech and their Dependent Media is One of the Biggest Lies in History

From [HERE] The official Covid narrative we have been fed by the governments and media over the last 2 years has been one of the biggest lies in history with no science to back up their lockdowns and restrictions and mandates.

Planet Lockdown in the United States released their feature-length documentary in ten languages on the 15th of January 2022. Watch the video below or download it here

Documentary – Planet Lockdown Documentary Film (planetlockdownfilm.com).

​A word from James - the director - about the film:

“For Planet Lockdown we spoke to some of the brightest minds in the world including epidemiologists, scientists, doctors, lawyers, protesters, a statesman and a prince. These brave souls had the courage to speak truth against all odds and inspire us to do the same".

Fake Ass Vax is Not Killing People? PayPal also Complicit in Genocide by Helping to Destroy Informed Consent: Terminates Accounts of Non-Profit Organizations Fighting Deadly COVID Injection Mandates

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

From [MERCOLA PDF] December 21, 2021, after business hours, PayPal notied the National Vaccine Information Center that it would no longer process donations from their supporters — effective immediately -

  • Other organizations also dropped by PayPal include the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) and Organic Consumer’s Association (OCA)

  • In October 2021, self-proclaimed “media watchdog” group Media Matters accused PayPal and GoFundMe of “hosting crowdfunding campaigns for organizations that spread harmful COVID-19 misinformation”

  • PayPal is actively researching transactions that fund hate groups, antigovernment organizations and extremists; it’s unclear, however, how they dene these terms or the groups that fall under them

  • Instead of ignoring, fearing or abandoning information that is being targeted with censorship, use censorship as a cue or guide that you should delve more deeply into the topic at hand to reveal the underlying truth

  • PayPal is the latest tech giant to join the censorship game, shutting down its services for a variety of nonprot organizations that are working to stop injection mandates.

    This increasingly orchestrated attack has targeted the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), Organic

Consumer’s Association (OCA) and many others — and should send a chill down the spine of anyone who values the freedom upon which the U.S. was founded.

Powerful forces are at play, and Big Tech is among them, working to suppress, discredit and silence certain science, speech and viewpoints. “No longer is there any doubt,” investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson reported, “that vaccine industry interests and other corporate and political interests are pulling the strings so that Big Tech moves to squash scientic views, studies, scientists, and opinions that are contrary to the narrative.”1

NVIC Triumphs Despite PayPal’s Attack

December 21, 2021, after business hours, PayPal notied NVIC that it would no longer process donations from their supporters — effective immediately. “In essence,” NVIC wrote in a news release, “PayPal wants to control your choices and tell you which nonprot charities you may and may not support. Pay Pal’s sudden and unexplained action against our donors comes in the middle of our annual end-of-year fundraising campaign.”2

PayPal’s attack against them is the culmination of Big Tech’s attempts to silence the nonprot. After NVIC held its Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination — Protecting Health & Autonomy in the 21st Century — in October 2020, they were increasingly targeted by mainstream media and a “political operative in the U.K.” During 2021, they were eliminated from Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube — yet their resolve to share the truth hasn’t wavered.

The same is true following PayPal’s announcement that they had cancelled NVIC’s account. It didn’t stop NVIC — the nonprot simply secured a new secure platform for donations. They announced December 24, 2021:3

“Just as we pivoted in early 2021 to establish our presence on new social media platforms, NVIC has quickly established a secure alternative to PayPal for processing your credit card donations ... NVIC is being heavily censored

because we have spoken the truth about vaccination, health and autonomy for 40 years.

While big tech and the forced vaccination lobby put out a steady supply of authoritarian propaganda promoting fear and hatred of those who engage in rational thinking, NVIC will continue to defend the legal right to make voluntary choices about vaccination without being punished for the choice made as we move forward with our mission to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and defend the informed consent ethic.”

The press following PayPal’s cancellation worked against the tech giant, as it prompted NVIC supporters to help in response. As Attkisson explained:4

“The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is one of the many fact-based advocacy groups that has suffered under the heavy hand of censorship from Big Tech acting on behalf of pharmaceutical/government/corporate interests. But victory can be found in a strategy that turns the censorship on its head.

If Americans can use censorship as a cue or guide to seek more information about that topic, person, or study, they defeat the intent of the censors.

After NVIC was dumped from PayPal so that donations from supporters could not be processed during a crucial fundraising campaign, the nonprot announced it had established a presence on an alternative fundraising platform. And the American people responded. NVIC has announced receiving substantial donations and support on the new platform, in part due to the attention the PayPal censorship gave to the issue.”

PayPal Claims Violations of ‘Acceptable Use’ Policies

In October 2021, self-proclaimed “media watchdog” group Media Matters accused PayPal and GoFundMe of “hosting crowdfunding campaigns for organizations that spread harmful COVID-19 misinformation.”5

Some of the organizations mentioned in the article include the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), America’s Frontline Doctors and Children’s Health Defense, which have been speaking out about early COVID-19 treatments and red ags about censorship since the beginning of the pandemic.

Dening them as “groups known for spreading medical misinformation,” the article, which itself is spreading misinformation, then calls out PayPal’s policies that do not allow users to “provide false, inaccurate or misleading information,” among others.6

In short, people and organizations are being censored, deplatformed and banned from social media and payment processing platforms for the crime of spreading “misinformation,” the meaning of which can change from day to day and from platform to platform.

In July 2021, Reuters also reported that PayPal planned to research transactions that fund hate groups, anti-government organizations and extremists. It’s unclear, however, how they dene these terms or the groups that fall under them.7

It’s a modern-day witch hunt, whereby the U.S. Department of Homeland Security even lists promulgating “false narratives” around COVID-19 as a top national security threat, which basically puts a “domestic terrorist” target on the backs of those of us who have been identied as the most prolic “superspreaders” of COVID-19 misinformation, whatever that “misinformation” happens to be.

In the case of OCA, which was also suddenly dropped by PayPal, it was said that they violated the company’s “acceptable use” policies. In a message to their subscribers and donors, OCA put it bluntly: “We are under attack.” They continued:8

“Last week PayPal, our credit card processor for hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations, (and recurring donations) cut off all of our accounts (OCA, Regeneration International, and Citizens Regeneration Lobby) with no notice, claiming that we were violators of PayPal’s “acceptable use” policies.

This outrageous attack on OCA’s fundraising is similar to the intimidation and censorship carried out by other Silicon Valley giants such as Facebook, who have threatened to cut off OCA and Millions Against Monsanto from our two million social media followers, unless we stop talking about the origins, nature, virulence, prevention, and treatment of COVID-19.

Subsequently we have been forced to put out two different versions of our weekly newsletter, Organic Bytes, one uncensored for our subscribers, one censored for distribution on social media. Needless to say OCA will not back down from our investigative reporting, our denunciations of corporate and government corruption and crime, and our truth-telling regarding genetic engineering and COVID-19.

We are exploring litigation against PayPal with lawyers and allied organizations who support free speech and truth-telling.”

Like NVIC, OCA wasn’t deterred by PayPal’s act of censorship; they simply switched to another credit card processor to continue on with their mission, despite the ongoing attempts at government intimidation and Big Tech censorship.

The PayPal Mafia

Many may not be aware of the close ties between PayPal’s early employees, who came to be known as the “PayPal Maa,” and big names in the tech industry today. As reported by Insider, “The payments company — launched as Connity in 1998 by Peter Thiel, Max Levchin, and Luke Nosek — grew to become a Silicon Valley giant.

It was acquired by eBay in 2002 for $1.5 billion in a deal that altered Silicon Valley history and helped spawn the careers of some of tech's most famous names.”9 This includes:10

  • Palantir — This data analytics software company was founded by Thiel in 2003; the idea came from his experiences with credit card fraud at PayPal. 9 10

  • Affirm — This company allows people shopping online to pay for products over time using an instant line of credit. It was founded in 2013 by Max Levchin, one of PayPal’s cofounders.

  • YouTube — YouTube founders Steve Chen and Chad Hurley worked at PayPal during its early days.

  • SpaceX — Elon Musk’s banking company X.com merged with Thiel’s company Confinity to become PayPal in 2001. Not only is Musk a former PayPal CEO, but he made $165 million when PayPal sold, which was used to start SpaceX.

  • LinkedIn — LinkedIn’s founder, Reid Hoffman, was a former executive vice president at PayPal.

Big Tech Censorship Is Rampant

PayPal terminating nonprofits is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Big Tech and its censorship of the information you see daily on the internet. Efforts to shut down public discussions and information are in full force, while Big Tech is also actively manipulating what you can and can’t see online, to the extent that they can alter perceptions of reality.

Zachary Vorhies, a former senior software engineer at Google and Google’s YouTube, uncovered more than 950 pages of confidential Google documents showing a plan to re- rank the entire internet based on Google’s corporate values, using machine learning to intervene for “fairness.”

He resigned in June 2019 and turned over the documents to the Department of Justice, then released them to the public via Project Veritas to expose Google’s censorship activities.11 Susan Wojcicki, the CEO of YouTube, made pushing down “fake news” and increasing “authoritative news” sound like a good thing, Attkisson reported,12 but when Vorhies looked at Google’s design documents, the fake news they were censoring wasn’t really fake.

“I was apolitical,” he said, “but I started to think, is this really fake news? Why are they denying it as fake news in order to justify censorship?” Part of this involved Google’s efforts at social reconstruction to correct “algorithmic unfairness,” which could be any algorithm that reinforces existing stereotypes.

Could objective reality be algorithmically unfair? Google says yes. Vorhies used the example of doing a Google search for CEOs, and the images returned included mostly men. Although it’s reality, this could be considered algorithmically unfair and, according to Google, justifies intervention in order to x it. He also uses the example of the Autofill search recommendations that pop up if you do a Google search.

Autofill is what happens when you start typing a search query into a search engine and algorithms kick in to offer suggestions to complete your search. If you type “men can,” you may get Autofill recommendations such as “men can lactate” and “men can get pregnant,” or “women can produce sperm” — things that represent an inversion of stereotypes and a reversal of gender roles.

We've been led to believe that whatever the Autofill recommendations are is what most people are searching for — Google has stated that the suggestions given are generated by a collection of user data — but that's not true, at least not anymore.

FLCCC Was Also Canceled by PayPal

In another example of Big Tech and PayPal’s overreach, they also shut down FLCCC’s donation platform October 15, 2021, “in violation of PayPal’s Acceptable Use Policy.”13 “Big tech must think we’re having a big impact,” FLCCC tweeted. “We are.”14 But again, it’s not only PayPal — this is an orchestrated effort by Big Tech, in concert with government, media, intelligence agencies and other forces. As FLCCC reported:15

“These attacks join LinkedIn and Vimeo, which removed our accounts, and YouTube, which began taking down our testimonial videos months ago. The powerful forces of Big Tech, Big Pharma, government, health authorities, and mainstream media continue to suppress us. There is nothing false in anything that we post.

This is an attack on our ability to fundraise, our free speech, and our efforts to share effective, safe COVID-19 prevention and treatment protocols to help people around the world stay out of the hospital — and to save precious lives impacted by this dangerous virus.”

What can you do? Fight back against the heavy hand of censorship by beating them at their own game. Instead of ignoring, fearing or abandoning the information that is being targeted with censorship, do as Attkisson suggested — use censorship as a cue or guide that you should delve more deeply into the topic at hand to reveal the underlying truth.

Sources and References

1 Sharyl Attkisson January 3, 2022

2, 3 NVIC December 24, 2021

4 Sharyl Attkisson January 3, 2022

5, 6 Media Matters October 7, 2021

7 Reuters July 26, 2021

8 Organic Consumers Association, We Are Under Attack

9, 10 Insider December 24, 2020

11 Project Veritas April 6, 2020

12 Full Measure January 10, 2021

13, 14 Twitter, FLCCC October 15, 2021

15 FLCCC Alliance, Mailchimp email

Dr. Peter McCullough: COVID Shots Inject Genetic Material into your Body that Program your Cells to Start Producing the Spike Protein which Can Do Near-Incomprehensible, Lethal Damage to your Health

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The COVID shots are based on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which is the most pathogenic part of the virus, responsible for the worst symptoms of COVID-19, such as the abnormal blood clotting seen in severely ill patients

  • Pzer’s and Moderna’s mRNA shots, and Janssen’s vector DNA shot, all inject genetic material into your body that program your cells to start producing this spike protein. They’re gene transfer technologies that instruct your body to produce a dangerous protein inside its own tissues

  • A Pzer biodistribution study showed both the mRNA and spike protein is widely distributed in the body. In particular, it accumulates in the ovaries. Despite that, reproductive toxicology studies were eliminated in the interest of speed

  • The average number of adverse event reports following vaccination for the past 10 years has been about 39,000 annually for all vaccines combined, with an average of 155 deaths. The COVID jabs alone now account for 701,126 adverse events in U.S. territories as of December 17, 2021, including 9,476 deaths

  • Cases of myocarditis explode after the second shot, and disproportionally affect boys; 90% of post-jab myocarditis reports are males, and 85% of reports occurred after the second dose. Cases are also inversely correlated to age, with younger boys being at greater risk. The estimated incidence for post-jab cardiac adverse events is 162 per million for boys aged 12 through 15, and 94 per million for boys aged 16 to 17

From [MERCOLA PDF] In the video presentation above, Dr. Peter McCullough, a highly credentialed and published cardiologist, internist and epidemiologist, and one of the primary physicians leading the charge to provide commonsense clinical wisdom into COVID treatments, explains what the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is and how it harms human biology — whether it comes from a natural SARS-CoV-2 infection or a COVID jab.

The presentation was given at the Burleson, Texas, COVID Symposium: A Legal Perspective, which streamed live December 3, 2021. He begins by addressing the necessity for safety whenever a new biologic product is launched. Safety is not something we can simply ignore, no matter what else is at stake. We must demand that whatever we’re given actually meets some kind of safety standard.

Warning bells started ringing in McCullough’s ears in the summer of 2020, long before the COVID shots were rolled out. “I was telling lawmakers that we’ve got a problem,” McCullough says, because corners were being cut that might result in a dangerous product. Safety studies, for example, were truncated down to a mere two months, which doesn’t allow for adequate evaluation.

Why Did They Use Spike Protein?

He also had several other concerns about the development program. Notably, the shots were based on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which by then we already realized is the most pathogenic part of the virus, responsible for the worst symptoms of COVID-19, such as the abnormal blood clotting seen in severely ill patients.

As explained by McCullough, the virus can be illustrated as a ball with spike-like protrusions on its surface. Those spikes are what’s causing the problems.

“They had been genetically altered and engineered in a lab in Wuhan, China” McCullough says, “to be particularly infectious, and to be particularly dangerous when they get into the human body.

The last thing you want in your body is one of those [spike proteins], let alone billions of them because [they] damage the brain, they damage the heart, they

damage bone marrow, they can tear up platelets and red blood cells. Very importantly, they damage blood vessels and cause blood clotting.”

Pzer’s and Moderna’s mRNA shots, and Janssen’s vector DNA shot, all inject genetic material into your body that programs your cells to start producing the spike protein. They’re gene transfer technologies.

In short, the shots instruct your body to produce a dangerous protein inside its own tissues. “We’ve never done that before in the history of medicine,” McCullough says, and for good reason: It’s a bad idea. “It’s almost like a science ction story going bad,” he says.

The idea is that by making your body produce this damaging spike protein, your body will react and ght it off, thereby creating immunity. However, in the process, the spike protein can do near-incomprehensible damage. In some people, the spike protein is lethal.

Uncontrolled Spike Protein Production

What’s more, we have uncontrolled production of spike protein, both in terms of quantity and time. The May 2021 paper,1 “Circulating SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Antigen Detected in the Plasma of mRNA-1273 Vaccine Recipients,” proved the spike protein circulated in the blood stream for an average of 15 days’ post-injection. The longest was 29 days.

This refuted the claim that the mRNA simply stayed in the arm and didn’t circulate out of the injection site. Logically, that claim doesn’t make much sense, and the Japanese government, early on, demanded Pzer do a study to show them where the injected mRNA actually goes.

Pzer did that biodistribution study,2 which showed both the mRNA and spike protein were widely distributed in animals’ bodies. In particular, it was found to accumulate in the ovaries. Despite that, the Pzer biodistribution data package reveals reproductive toxicology studies were eliminated in the interest of speed.

June 25, 2021, a paper was posted on the preprint server BioRxiv, showing the S1 portion of the spike protein remains detectable for up to 15 months after you recover from COVID-19.

“No wonder people have long-COVID syndrome,” McCullough says. “The body is trying to clean out this spike protein that’s not supposed to be there, 15 months after you’ve had the infection.”

McCullough points out that Bruce Patterson, the Stanford scientist who led that study, also continues to nd the whole spike protein — both the S1 and S2 segments — in patients who got the COVID jab, months post-injection.

So, as of right now, we don’t know when the spike protein production ceases. What we do know, with great certainty, is that the spike protein damages the human body and contributes to both acute and chronic health conditions and diseases.

Australia has already purchased 14 doses of the COVID jabs for every person. This is meant to cover them for seven years, at one dose every six months. As noted by McCullough, some people simply aren’t going to survive that kind of continuous and ever-increasing onslaught of spike protein.

Urgent Questions on Vaccine Safety

Clear danger signals were apparent in April 2021, and May 24, 2021, McCullough published a paper along with 56 other international scientists in the journal Authorea.3

The paper, “SARS-CoV-2 Mass Vaccination: Urgent Questions on Vaccine Safety that Demand Answers from International Health Agencies, Regulatory Authorities, Governments and Vaccine Developers,” demanded the injections be pulled from the market unless or until safety concerns are addressed. Key clinical concerns raised include:

The potentially hazardous mechanisms of action of the shots resulting in cell, tissue

The paper was sent to every health and regulatory agency in the world. Here we are in early 2022 and, well, you can see what the response was. It’s been nonexistent.

A Critical Appraisal of VAERS

In October 2021, Jessica Rose, Ph.D., with the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge in Israel, published a report in the Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law journal.4 The report, “Critical Appraisal of VAERS Pharmacovigilance: Is the US Vaccine Adverse

and organ damage

The presence of harmful spike protein in donated blood

Lack of genotoxicity, teratogenicity and oncogenicity studies

The effects of bioaccumulation in women’s ovaries

The potential for reduced fertility

The lack of a data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) to oversee clinical trials and post-market surveillance

The lack of human ethics committee to oversee clinical trials

The lack of restrictions on exempted groups from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) such as pregnant women, women of childbearing potential, COVID survivors (previously immune)

The lack of risk stratication for hospitalization and death in the clinical trials

The lack of data transparency

The lack of public risk mitigation (early and at-home treatment options)

Event Reporting System (VAERS) a Functioning Pharmacovigilance System?” details three primary problems found:

1. Deleted adverse event reports involving COVID jab injuries

2. Delayed entry of reports

3. Recoding of Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MeDRA) terms from severe to mild

It also includes bar plots showing the extreme difference between the COVID shots compared to all other vaccines on the market. If the shots were safe, the number of VAERS reports would remain relatively steady, not varying much from previous years, but what we see is a staggering spike in vaccine injuries reported in 2021.

The average number of adverse event reports following vaccination for the past 10 years has been about 39,000 annually, with an average of 155 deaths. That’s for all available vaccines combined.

The COVID jabs alone now account for 701,126 adverse events in U.S. territories as of December 17, 2021, including 9,476 deaths. If you include international reports that make their way into the VAERS system, we’re looking at 983,756 adverse event reports and 20,622 deaths.5

As staggering as these numbers are, they are just the tip of the iceberg. When you add in the underreporting factor, which is believed to be anywhere from ve to 40, the numbers are simply astronomical.

VAERS is an early warning system and is supposed to alert our government to potentially hazardous vaccines once they’ve been rolled out. The signal from VAERS is so clear there’s simply no doubt we have a safety problem on our hands.

Can COVID Shots Cause Death?

As noted by McCullough, there’s a very tight temporality to the shots in most deaths. Half have occurred within 48 hours of injection, and 80% have died within one week of their jab (be it the rst, second or third dose).6

Temporality is one of the 10 Bradford Hill criteria used to establish causal relationship. In order to be causative, one event must occur before another, and the shorter the duration between the two events, the higher the likelihood of a causative effect.

In June 2021, Scott McLachlan, Ph.D., at the University of London published an analysis7 of VAERS death reports concluding that 86% of post-jab deaths could be attributed to the shots. There was no other explanation for the deaths. McLachlan also looked at who’s getting killed by the shots and, sadly, it’s the same people the shots are intended to protect — our seniors.

In September 2021, Ronald Kostoff, Ph.D., published a report8 that also showed seniors were dying from the jab at far higher rates than other age groups. As noted by McCullough, this makes perfect sense because people die from COVID-19 due to the impact of the spike protein. Why would anyone assume they will survive having it produced in their own bodies?

Using the best-case scenario cost-benet analysis, Kostoff estimates that people aged 65 and older are ve times more likely to die of the COVID shot than from COVID-19 itself.

The reason for this is because if you take the shot, you’re guaranteed to be exposed to its risks, but you’re not guaranteed to get COVID-19 if you don’t take the shot. You may be exposed, or you may not. And not everyone develops a severe infection even when directly exposed.

COVID Jab-Associated Myocarditis in Children

In early September 2021, Tracy Beth Hoeg and colleagues posted an analysis9 of VAERS data on the preprint server medRxiv, showing that more than 86% of the children aged

12 to 17 who reported symptoms of myocarditis were severe enough to require hospitalization.

They also concluded that healthy boys have a “considerably higher” chance of being hospitalized with myocarditis post-jab than they are of requiring hospitalization for COVID-19.

According to McCullough, the FDA has heard these data twice in 2021 and never disputed them. Yet they’ve proceeded with recommendations to give the COVID jab to anyone with a pulse over the age of 5. It’s just shocking. Historically, as a rule, we’ve never given drugs to people when they’re more likely to harm than provide a benet.

What Hoeg et. al.10 showed is that cases of myocarditis explode after the second shot, and disproportionally affect boys. A full 90% of post-jab myocarditis reports are males, and 85% of reports occurred after the second dose. According to Hoeg et. al.:11

“The estimated incidence of CAEs [cardiac adverse events] among boys aged 12-15 years following the second dose was 162 per million; the incidence among boys aged 16-17 years was 94 per million. The estimated incidence of CAEs among girls was 13 per million in both age groups.

The incidence of CAEs was considerably lower after the rst dose across all age and sex groups. Median peak troponin was 5.2 ng/mL among boys aged 12-15 years, 11.6 ng/mL among boys aged 16-17 years, 0.8 ng/mL among girls aged 12-15 years, and 7.3 ng/mL among girls aged 16-17 years.”

Troponin Levels Reveal Massive Heart Damage

Troponin is a protein that helps regulate contractions of your heart and skeletal muscles. It’s a biomarker for heart damage, as your heart releases troponin in response to an injury. Elevated troponin is used to assess whether you’ve had a heart attack, for example.

Normal troponin levels are nearly undetectable, so even small increases can indicate heart damage. A level above 0.4 ng/mL is typically indicative of a heart attack and anything between 0.04 ng/mL and 0.4 ng/mL indicates there’s some kind of problem with the heart.12

So, the sky high post-jab troponin levels in these adolescent boys is anything but inconsequential. It can absolutely be life-threatening. Myocarditis can result in sudden death, as illustrated in an October 2021 case report13 from Korea, where the death of a 22-year-old man from acute myocarditis was causally linked to the Pzer shot.

“Without a doubt, it will kill kids,” McCullough says. Even if not acutely lethal, myocarditis can signicantly lower your life expectancy. Historically, the three- to ve- year survival rate for myocarditis has ranged from 56% to 83%.14 That means a certain percentage don’t make it past ve years because their heart is too damaged.

McCullough and Rose have also tried to publish an analysis on this topic. They submitted a paper15 on myocarditis cases in VAERS following the COVID jabs to the journal Current Problems in Cardiology. But after initially accepting the paper, the journal suddenly changed its mind.

You can still nd the pre-proof on Rose’s website though. What they show is that post- jab myocarditis is inversely correlated to age, so the risk gets higher the younger you are. They too found there’s a dose-dependent risk, with boys having a six-fold greater risk of myocarditis following the second dose.

Mortality in Adolescents Is Skyrocketing

McCullough’s assertion that the shot will kill some children is also starting to show in statistics. British data, for example, shows deaths among teenagers have spiked since that age group became eligible for the COVID shots.16

Between the week ending June 26 and the week ending September 18, 2020, 148 deaths were reported among 15- to 19-year-olds. During that same time period in 2021,

217 deaths occurred in that age group. That’s an increase of 47%, which has yet to be explained.

Deaths from COVID-19 also went up among 15- to 19-year-olds after the shots were rolled out. Signicant concerns have been raised about the possibility that COVID jabs might worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE).17 Is that what’s going on here? As reported by The Exposé, which conducted the investigation:18

“Correlation does not equal causation, but it is extremely concerning to see that deaths have increased by 47% among teens over the age of 15, and COVID-19 deaths have also increased among this age group since they started receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, and it is perhaps one coincidence too far.”

COVID Jabs Double Risk of Acute Coronary Syndrome

Aside from troponin levels, researchers have also found Pzer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 shots dramatically increase other biomarkers associated with thrombosis, cardiomyopathy and other vascular events following injection.19

People who had received two doses of the mRNA jab more than doubled their ve-year risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the researchers found, driving it from an average of 11% to 25%. ACS is an umbrella term that includes not only heart attacks, but also a range of other conditions involving abruptly reduced blood ow to your heart.

In Months, the Jabs’ Effectiveness Wanes to Zero

As should be evident by now, there are signicant risks to these COVID shots. But what about the benet side of the equation? As noted by McCullough, while the shots reduce the risk of death from COVID-19, the benet is vanishingly small.

A number of papers have been published calculating the absolute risk reduction of the shots, showing the four available COVID jabs in the U.S. provide an absolute risk reduction between just 0.7% and 1.3%.20,21

McCullough goes on to cite a December 1, 2021, New England Journal of Medicine study22 that compared the effectiveness of Pzer’s and Moderna’s injections among hospitalized veterans. Here too, they found that the shots had an effectiveness of less than 1% against all COVID-19 events, over the course of six months.

As of the end of October 2021, we had 22 studies showing the shots’ ecacy against all variants rapidly wane over the course of three to six months, eventually hitting zero.

For example, a Swedish study23 published October 25, 2021, looked at data from 842,974 pairs, where each person who had received two COVID jabs was paired and compared against an unvaccinated individual, to see if the vaccinated had fewer symptomatic cases and hospitalizations.

Early on, the double-jabbed appeared to have decent protection, but that quickly changed. The Pzer jab went from 92% effectiveness at Day 15 through 30, to 47% at Day 121 through 180, and zero from Day 201 onward. The Moderna shot had a similar trajectory, being estimated at 59% from Day 181 onward.

“ Vaccines aren’t viable if they can’t last a year! The minimum criteria to accept a vaccine ... is 50% coverage and it must last one year. These [COVI”D shots] aren’t cutting it. ~ Dr. Peter McCullough

The AstraZeneca injection had a lower effectiveness out of the gate, waned faster than the mRNA shots, and had no detectable effectiveness as of Day 121. All the while, millions of Americans have already had COVID24 and have natural immunity that doesn’t wane in this manner.

“Vaccines aren’t viable if they can’t last a year!” McCullough exclaims. “The minimum criteria to accept a vaccine ... is 50% coverage and it must last one year. These [COVID shots] aren’t cutting it. None of them are viable to be commercial products.”

The COVID-Jabbed Are Just as Infectious as the Unvaccinated

COVID jab mandates are even more irrational when you take into account the fact that they don’t prevent you from being infected, and studies have repeatedly shown that when you are infected, you have the same or higher viral load as unvaccinated individuals. What that means is you’re just as infectious as an unvaccinated person.

What’s more, as noted in a letter25 to the editor of The New England Journal of Medicine, the shots also have only minor inuence on viral clearance. If you get the COVID shot and come down with COVID, you might be sick for a day or so less than someone who is unvaccinated.

We Must Treat COVID Patients Early

McCullough closes out his presentation going over the all-important issue of early treatment. You need to treat COVID early and aggressively. You also need to hit it from multiple sides. No single drug can effectively treat all aspects of this infection (although the Omicron variant does not appear to have any of the blood clotting and low oxygen issues associated with the earliest strains).

Very few people need die from COVID as long as they get appropriate treatment early enough. The fact that our health authorities are to this day refusing to acknowledge successful treatment protocols is nothing short of a crime.

If you want to live, and if you want your family and friends to live, you’d be wise to ignore the CDC’s and FDA’s recommendation to wait until you can’t breathe and then go to the hospital, where they’ll give you toxic remdesivir and lethal ventilation. Instead, arm yourself with one or more early treatment protocols and make sure you have the basics in your medicine cabinet. Protocols you can use include:

The Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance's (FLCCC's) prevention and early at- home treatment protocol. They also have an in-hospital protocol and long-term management guidance for long-haul COVID-19 syndrome. You can nd a listing of

doctors who can prescribe ivermectin and other necessary medicines on the FLCCC website

The AAPS protocol
Tess Laurie's World Council for Health protocol America's Frontline Doctors

I reviewed all of these protocols and believe the FLCCC’s is the easiest and most effective. I’ve posted a summary of it below. However, I’ve altered some of the recommendations. Specically, I recommend:

Decreasing zinc dose from 100 mg to 50 mg elemental zinc, but only for three days, then decrease to 15 mg elemental zinc.

Increasing quercetin from 250 mg to 500 mg.

Add NAC to 500 mg per day.

When using vitamin C, I recommend liposomal vitamin C, 1,000 to 2,000 mg, four to six times per day.

When using honey, make sure it’s raw, not normal honey from the grocery store. Raw honey can be obtained online or at a health food store.

Add brinolytic enzymes like lumbrokinase, serrapeptidase or nattokinase, two to four tablets, two to three times a day, on an empty stomach (one hour before or two hours after a meal). This will help break down any microclots and can be used in lieu of aspirin.

I’ve also added a couple of therapies that they have yet to include:

Nebulized hydrogen peroxide — Nebulize 5 ml of 0.1% peroxide dissolved in 0.9% normal saline every hour or two. It’s best to use a nebulizer that plugs into the wall,

as these are more effective than battery operated ones. Intravenous ozone administered by a trained ozone physician.

Sources and References

1 Clinical Infectious Diseases May 20, 2021; ciab465
2 Trial Site News June 6, 2021
3 Authorea May 24, 2021
4 Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law October 2021; 3: 100-129 5 OpenVAERS Data as of December 17, 2021

6 Dare to Seek the Truth Dr. Peter McCullough
7 ResearchGate June 2021 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26987.226402
8 Toxicology Reports September 2021; 8: 1665-1684
9, 10, 11 medRxiv September 8, 2021 DOI: 10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866
12 Medical News Today June 7, 2019
13 Journal of Korean Medical Science October 18, 2021; 36(40): e286
14 European Heart Journal September 2008; 29(17): 2073–2082
15 Journal Pre-proof, A Report on Myocarditis Adverse Events in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in Association with COVID [...]
16, 18 The Exposé September 30, 2021
17 Int J Clin Pract. 2020 Oct 28 : e13795
19 Circulation November 16, 2021; 144(Suppl_1)
20 Medicina 2021; 57: 199
21 The Lancet Microbe July 1, 2021; 2(7): E279-E280
22 NEJM December 1, 2021 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2115463
23 Lancet Preprints October 25, 2021
24 Our World in Data December 15, 2021
25 NEJM December 23, 2021; 385: 26 (PDF)

Rebreathing CO2 increases blood pressure and leads to rapid heart rate, chest pain, confusion, twitches, headaches, fatigue, panic attacks and mass formation psychosis ("Mask Asphyxiation Disease")

From [HERE] Hypercapnia occurs when CO2 levels become elevated in the body. This happens when we rebreathe the gaseous waste air coming out of our mouths and noses, imposing harmful and dangerous effects on the mind and body. Rebreathing CO2 increases your blood pressure and leads to rapid heart rate, chest pain, confusion, twitches, headaches, fatigue, panic attacks and mass formation psychosis. Once this becomes perpetual, organ damage and asphyxiation probability increases. About two hundred million Americans are suffering from this relatively new syndrome resulting from being deprived of proper amounts of oxygen. It’s slow suffocation, and the Covid masks are to blame for all of it, whether homemade or N95.

Asphyxiation occurs when carbon dioxide interferes with the oxygenation of tissue. The long-term end result is death. Perpetual mask-wearing zombies are limiting the oxygen that enters the lungs, thus reducing oxygen in their blood, and therefore diminishing the oxygen and nutrients that are carried to body tissues, including the brain. Research reveals that prolonged use of Covid masks, homemade or N95, can cause anywhere from five percent on up to 20 percent loss of oxygen. [MORE]

Virginia’s New Governor Rescinds Unhealthy Mask and Deadly Vax Mandates for Schools, State Employees on First Day

From [HERE] Glenn Youngkin, Virigina’s first Republican governor to win statewide office since 2009, signed 11 executive orders on his first day that include rescinding vaccine mandates for state employees.

In his inauguration speech Saturday, Youngkin mentioned education as his policy priority. He promised to raise standards of education and teacher pay, and stated that he would “remove politics from the classroom.” His executive order that bans the teaching of critical race theory calls the framework “divisive,” prompting criticism from the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus.

Youngkin lamented the school shutdowns and the economic difficulties that have followed the pandemic. While doing so, he has also signed an executive order to “empower” Virginia parents in their children’s education and upbringing by allowing parents to make decisions on whether their child wears a mask in school. Additionally, he issued an executive directive to “restore individual freedoms and personal privacy by rescinding the vaccine mandate for all state employees.”

Other executive orders that the governor signed included establishing a commission to combat antisemitism, withdrawing from a regional greenhouse gas reduction initiative and declaring Virginia “open for business.” He also signed several directives including one that will cut “job killing regulations” by 25%.

As a first-time elected official, Youngkin takes office in the midst of two emergencies- a 30-day limited state of emergency aimed at the state’s hospitals that are struggling under the hike of coronavirus cases, and another ahead of a snowstorm predicted to hit Virginia on Sunday.

MIT Scientist Says It is 'Outrageous to Be Giving Fake Vax to Kids b/c There is Very Low Risk of Dying from COVID" and Warns Injections Likely to Cause ‘Crippling’ Brain Disease in Children

From [CHD] Giving young people COVID vaccines will likely cause an “alarming increase in several major neurodegenerative diseases,” Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D. told Fox News today.

It’s “outrageous” to vaccinate young people for COVID because they have a “very low risk” of dying from the virus, said Seneff, senior research scientist at MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

“When you look at the potential harm from these vaccines, it just doesn’t make any sense,” Seneff said. “And repeated boosters are going to be very devastating in the long term.”

Seneff told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham she’s done “a lot of research” to help her understand how COVID vaccines can lead to neurodegenerative diseases later on in life.

“It’s very disturbing,” she said.

Her research paper is [HERE] PDF. According to Seneff’s research:

“[B]oth the mRNA vaccines and the DNA vector vaccines may be a pathway to crippling disease sometime in the future. Through the prion-like action of the spike protein, we will likely see an alarming increase in several major neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson’s disease, CKD, ALS and Alzheimer’s, and these diseases will show up with increasing prevalence among younger and younger populations, in years to come.

“Unfortunately, we won’t know whether the vaccines caused this increase because there will usually be a long time separation between the vaccination event and the disease diagnosis.”

That latter point, Seneff said, is “very convenient for the vaccine manufacturers, who stand to make huge profits off of our misfortunes — both from the sale of the vaccines themselves and from the large medical cost of treating all these debilitating diseases.”

Researcher ​Dr. Tess Lawrie: Safe, Effective and Cheap Treatments for Treating and Prevent COVID, such as Ivermectin, are Suppressed So Authorities Can Push Deadly COVID Injections

Dr. Tess Lawrie is a world-class researcher and consultant to the World Health Organisation. In the video below she has decided to speak out in protest against the current medical establishment at considerable personal risk.  She co-founded the BiRD Group; an international consortium of experts dedicated to the transparent and accurate scientific research of Ivermectin, with particular emphasis on the treatment and prevention of Covid-19.  She discusses how there is no evidence of anyone suffering adverse reactions when using Ivermectin but there is considerable evidence of people suffering serious adverse reactions from the covid vaccines.

New CDC Data Shows One Million and Thirty Four Thousand (1,033,994) Reports of Adverse Events following COVID Injections. Data Includes Record of a 7 yr Old Dead 11 Days After Injection

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,033,994 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 1, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

The data included a total of 21,745 reports of deaths — an increase of 363 over the previous week — and 170,446 reports of serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 3,840 compared with the previous week.

Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 723,042 adverse events, including 9,936 deaths and 64,406 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 7, 2022.

Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.

Of the 9,936 U.S. deaths reported as of Jan. 7, 19% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 24% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 61% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

In the U.S., 516 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of Jan. 7, including 303 million doses of Pfizer, 197 million doses of Moderna and 18 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 7, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:

The most recent death involves a 7-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 1975356) from Minnesota who died 11 days after receiving her first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine when she was found unresponsive by her mother. An autopsy is pending.

  • 14 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation).

  • 22 reports of blood clotting disorders.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 7, 2022, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:  

The most recent death involves a 15-year-old girl from Minnesota (VAERS I.D. 1974744), who died 177 days after receiving her second dose of Pfizer from a pulmonary embolus. An autopsy is pending.

  • 62 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 96% of cases
    attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.

  • 589 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis with 578 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.

  • 149 reports of blood clotting disorders, with all cases attributed to Pfizer.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 7, 2022, for all age groups combined, show:

Brandon Says He'll Use Our Money to Buy Us Unwanted Masks [to remind us of "the emergency"] and Tests [that don't measure infectiousness] [Corpse Joe is Unlikely to be Alive for His Nuremberg Trial]

THE BLIGHT HOUSE ISSUED A “FACT SHEET” ABOUT TESTING AND MASKING THAT IS SCIENCE-FREE WITH ZERO CITATIONS. The Biden Administration to Begin Distributing At-Home, Rapid COVID-⁠19 Tests to Americans for Free.

According to FUNKTIONARY

BLIGHT SUPREMACY - genocide. , Genocide is the primary means of maintaining Blight Supremacy. (See Genocide and Racism.)

eugenics - the science of African extermination and of the gene that produces a people (ethnicity) with the object being African and melanated peoples of the world. 2) the science of Racism White Supremacy. Eugenics is a bogus pseudo-science founded by English psychoologist Francis Galton, used for purposes of white supremacy tactics made popular by Hitler in Nazi Germany but practiced earlier in the U.S.S.A. 3) the maniacal (Yuruguistic) philosophy of using genetic manipulation to create a better organism, better race or even a so-called master race by a lone totalitarian Dictator or a group of evil men under the veil of a Corporate State, i.e., Social Eugenics. 4) the racist belief held by many Caucasians that Africans and descendants of Africans are biologically moribund—and consequently were deficient in native or inborn intelligence and that the lack of intelligence would likely lead to a decline in the nation's collective intelligence. 5) the antidote of the Caucasian's unconscious fear of a Black Planet. 6) the artifice of attempting to make people appear to be other than they are. 7) the propaganda that African people should be done away with—exterminated. The name 'eugenics" was coined by the white psychologist Francis Galton. The triune objectives of Eugenics is selective ethnic genetic annihilation, population control (or depopulation), and selective breeding by a pathological strain of DNA. Eugenics essentially means, good white genetic stock; the selective breeding of white people and the mass extermination of African people. Mass incarceration, the homosexuality agenda (depopulation) grew out of the Eugenics movment. Read "War of the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race" by Edwin Black. (See: Genocide, Yurugu, Recombinant DNA, U.S. Sterilization Laws, Freemasony, Theosophy, Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments, Planned Parenthood, Neuropean, Weiteko Disease, Racism White Supremacy, Similac, PLC, Caucasian & Inferiority Complex)

Eugenicide - Neuropean-style genetic ethnic cleansing. (See: Yurugu, Fascism, United Nations & Weiteko Disease)

Biocide: the attempted annihilation of all life, which is the intent of Doggy and CrimethInc. (See: Doggy & CrimethInc.)

genocide - the intentional decreasing of the people of a given population or asili, particularly in the interests of another population or value system that wishes to control the resources of the victims. 2) the cide-show of the World Health Organization (WHO). (See: Population Control)

According to undeceiver Ishmael Reed:

genthanasia - the non-violent weeding out of undesirables or the slow motion extermination of non-white people. 2) Having failed to achieve victory through violent means the white supremacists have resorted to subtler means, referred to non-violent ethnic cleansing. “Genthanasia takes the form of placing an embargo on supplies that were promised to Puerto Rico, leading to 4,000 deaths. Poisoning of water in Flint, like creating smallpox epidemics among Indian tribes. Predictably, the bureaucratic rogues who were responsible for lead poisoning have had their convictions overturned by a friendly Colonial court. Genthanasia includes slavery with a different name, like private prisons where inmates are forced to work or starve. Where the deaths of prisoners are withheld from the public. The withholding of adequate housing, leading to disease-ridden street living noted in the headlines of USNews (23 April 2019), The Homeless Are Dying in Record Numbers on the Streets of Los Angeles. The assigning of Black and Latinx children to the service industries and placing a freeze upon their opportunity to advance by criminalizing pre-school and grade school students and applying suspensions to black and brown students in a disproportionate manner. One could add the administration’s denial of global warming, which is leading to thousands of deaths in the global south, nations that did not cause the problem. The U.S. is the Biggest Carbon Polluter in History.2 The Department of Health and Human Services reports that blacks, browns and reds bear the brunt of health hazards from living in toxic neighborhoods. Under the heading, More likely to live near polluting industries and breathe polluted air, African-Americans are three times as likely to die from asthma-related causes than white Americans. What else is this but another example of slow-motion extermination? Such actions against blacks, browns and reds indicate that the thinkers, hidden from the public and who finance pundits and publications, will go to any lengths to fulfill the desire of the founders and the Pilgrims, to create a white land ordained by God.”

Scientific Evidence Proves Masks Don't Work [there are no randomized studies for cloth, surgical, or N95 masks showing they stop COVID] and in 2020 Govt Health Authorities Around the World Agreed

From [HERE] and [KIRSCH] The Scientific evidence suggests face masks as worn by the general public do not work.

Government health ministers around the world said in 2020 face masks as worn by the general public do not work.  They are telling you to wear them because it creates fear and it keeps the threat of a virus in everyone's mind. 

Healthy people with no symptoms should not be wearing masks because asymptomatic people cannot spread a virus they do not have.  https://www.thehardtruth.co.uk/asymptomatic-transmission

 Dr. Paul E. Alexander, a Canadian epidemiologist, wrote: “Surgical and cloth masks, used as they currently are, have absolutely no impact on controlling the transmission of Covid-19 virus, and current evidence implies that face masks can be actually harmful.” (American Institute for Economic Research, Feb. 11, 2021.)

 ‘Masks and respirators do not work. There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.  Furthermore, the relevant known physics and biology, which I review, are such that masks and respirators should not work. It would be a paradox if masks and respirators worked, given what we know about viral respiratory diseases: The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (<2.5μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective-dose is smaller than one aerosol particle.  The present paper about masks illustrates the degree to which governments, the mainstream media, and institutional propagandists can decide to operate in a science vacuum, or select only incomplete science that serves their interests. Such recklessness is also certainly the case with the current global lockdown of over 1 billion people, an unprecedented experiment in medical and political history.’ — DR. D. G. Rancourt, Ontario Civil Liberties Association, former tenured and Full Professor of physics at the University of Ottawa, Canada (11 April, 2020)

​“I cannot recall any time in human history when nearly universal use of masks throughout society has successfully controlled the spread of disease,” Dr. Mikovits said. “The data support the opposite. That is, masks suppress the immune system, render the mist vulnerable to infection, and amplify more viruses in the compromised who become victims and further spread the disease among family and close contacts” - Dr. Judy Mikovits

 Literally there are dozens of articles, videos and studies by doctors, OSHA inspectors, professors and health professionals which show that masks worn by the general public do not stop the spread of a virus in fact they contribute to the virus spreading and to lowering your immune system.  Cases and deaths rose in every country after mask mandates where brought in, shouldn’t it have been the opposite.  Masks should have been brought in at the height of the covid cases and deaths in March\April not when there was no cases and deaths in July 2020.  They were brought in at this time to keep the fear in the minds of the public that the virus is still among us when it actually was not.  The wearing of masks keeps people fearful and that is why governments will not tell you to remove them for a long time, perhaps years.  Make people fearful and you can make them do anything.

​A 2020 study conducted by a team of Danish researchers has found that face masks have no effect in controlling the spread of COVID-19. 

A study conducted by a team of Danish researchers has found that face masks have no effect in controlling the spread of COVID-19. The new finding comes at a time when WHO is strictly advocating people to wear masks to contain the pandemic effectively.

​The study which is known as the Danmask-19 trial was conducted in the Spring 2020 with more than 3,000 participants. During the time of this trial, the general public was not asked to wear masks as a precautionary measure to control coronavirus.

​Out of the 3,000 participants, 1,500 people were given surgical masks. Researchers also made sure that these participants are changing these masks every eight hours. After one month, PCR tests were conducted on these 1,500 participants, and the results were compared with non-mask users.

​The results were pretty surprising, as there was no significant difference between mask users and non-maskers when it comes to getting contracted with coronavirus. According to the study report, 1.8 percent of mask users were infected with coronavirus when compared to 2.3 percent of non-maskers.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

A September 2020 report by the CDC found that more than 70 percent of COVID-positive patients contracted the virus in spite of faithful mask wearing while in public. Moreover, 14 percent of the patients who said they “often” wore masks were also infected. Meanwhile, just four percent of the COVID-positive patients said they “never” wore masks in the 14 days before the onset of their illness. 

The authoritative New England Medical Journal investigated the circumstances necessary for contamination. The conclusion of five scientists is that face masks are of no use at all. Infection only occurs after someone has been standing very close to an infected person with symptoms for several minutes.

​‘We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection’ — New England Journal of Medicine (21 May, 2020)

​Public health authorities define a significant exposure to covid-19 as face-to-face contact within one and a half meters with a patient who has covid-19 symptoms. That contact must be maintained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes).

​A large scale study was conducted to determine once and for all, whether face masks are useful for dentists. The result of this historic study was surprising:

​'These and other studies show that viruses or other submicron particles are not filtered by face masks.' - Dr John Hardie, BDS, MSc, PhD, FRCDC

 It should be concluded from these and similar studies that the filter material of face masks does not retain or filter out viruses.  Viruses are very, very, very small. Microns across. You can only see them with an electron microscope. As such the weave of a cloth mask provides almost no resistance to their passage.

The advice above from the WHO was in March 2020 but they changed their minds later on or where pressured to.

​A very extensive study carried out by nine scientists shows that the prolonged use of face masks in fact increases the risk of infection!

​'This study is the first RCT of mouth masks, and the results warn against the use of face masks. Moisture retention, re-use of face masks and poor filtration can lead to an increased risk of infection.' - BMJ Medical Report

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

There’s also the issue of other possible complications, such as hypercapnia, an excess of carbon dioxide in the blood caused by re-breathing your own expelled air.  It’s also been shown that mask use can exacerbate chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) and perhaps other respiratory issues as shown in the study below.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31992666/

Face mask manufacturers warn: no protection against a virus.

Some honest manufacturers of face masks correctly inform their users that their products offer no protection against covid-19 and other viruses. If these medical ear loop masks - that have multiple layers (!) - don't help, then the self fabricated masks offer no protection either.

On the contrary: they block oxygen flow, which weakens the body and therefor weakens the immune system, which results in higher risk of infection.

47 studies confirm ineffectiveness of masks for COVID and 32 more confirm their negative health effects

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/47-studies-confirm-inefectiveness-of-masks-for-covid-and-32-more-confirm-their-negative-health-effects/

 Are Face Masks Effective? The Evidence.

https://swprs.org/face-masks-and-covid-the-evidence/

 Peer-reviewed research concludes face masks are harmful to health and ineffective

https://wickedtruths.org/en/peer-reviewed-research-concludes-face-masks-are-useless-and-dangerous

 There is this study from the U.S National Library of medicine

The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19.

Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/

 The Science is Conclusive: Masks and Respirators do NOT Prevent Transmission of Viruses

https://www.sott.net/article/434796-The-Science-is-Conclusive-Masks-and-Respirators-do-NOT-Prevent-Transmission-of-Viruses

Masks Are neither Effective nor Safe: A Summary of the Science

https://www.technocracy.news/masks-are-neither-effective-nor-safe-a-summary-of-the-science/

 Watch the video titled ‘Why Masks Do More Harm than Good’ – by Dr. Michael Gaeta -https://vimeo.com/424254660

 Ben Swann: The Truth about Face Masks

https://vimeo.com/439643593

 Masks are neither effective nor safe: A summary of the science

https://www.primarydoctor.org/masks-not-effect

 Masks don’t work – a review of science relevant to Covid-19 social policy by Dr. Denis Rancourt PhD

https://thewallwillfall.org/2020/06/23/masks-dont-work-a-review-of-science-relevant-to-covid-19-social-policy/

 Twenty Reasons Mandatory Face Masks are Unsafe, Ineffective and Immoral

https://www.globalresearch.ca/twenty-reasons-mandatory-face-masks-are-unsafe-ineffective-and-immoral/5735171

 The Study below with over 8000 subjects found masks “did not seem to be effective against laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections nor against clinical respiratory infection.”

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0240287

 A recent study in the journal Cancer Discovery found that inhalation of harmful microbes can contribute to advanced stage lung cancer in adults. Long-term use of face masks may help breed these dangerous pathogens.

https://www.wakingtimes.com/long-term-mask-use-may-contribute-to-advanced-stage-lung-cancer-study-finds/

 Wearing the Face Mask: Who is putting our Children at Risk, SARS-CoV-2 or the Actions of our Governments?

https://www.globalresearch.ca/wearing-the-face-mask-who-is-putting-our-children-at-risk-sars-cov-2-or-the-actions-of-our-governments/5723961

 COVID-19: Continuous Wearing of Mask Aggravates Risk of Infection. “Psychological Terrorism”? By Dr. Pascal Sacre

https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-continuous-wearing-of-mask-aggravates-the-risk-of-infection-psychological-terrorism/5719704

 Masks: The Science & Myths by Dr. Lee Merrick MD

https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com/custom_videos/mask-myths/

 A very extensive study carried out by nine scientist’s shows that the prolonged use of face masks in fact increases the risk of infection!

'This study is the first RCT of mouth masks, and the results warn against the use of face masks. Moisture retention, re-use of face masks and poor filtration can lead to an increased risk of infection.' - BMJ Medical Report

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

 A July 2020 review by the University of Oxford, Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine found that there is no evidence that cloth masks are at all effective against virus infection or transmission.
• Jefferson, Tom & Heneghan, Carl, Masking lack of evidence with
politics, Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, July 23, 2020
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidencewith-politics/

A July 2020 study by Japanese researchers found that cloth masks “offer zero
protection against coronavirus.”
• Naoya Kon, Cloth face masks offer zero shield against virus, a study shows, The Asahi Shimbun, study by Kazunari Onishi.
 http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13523664

“This experiment reconfirmed that wearing cloth and gauze masks can’t prevent virus infection.”

In an August 2020 article, Denis G. Rancourt, PhD, a Researcher, Ontario
Civil Liberties Association, debunks supposed “studies” purporting to support
compelled face mask use for the general population.
• See Rancourt, Face masks, lies, damn lies, and public health officials: “A growing body of evidence” August 2020.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343399832_Face_masks_lies_damn_lies_and_public_hea [MORE]

Since CDC Has Admitted PCR Tests Can't Identify Active COVID Infection, What Does It Mean For Those Who Died w/a Positive Test? Did they have an active infection? If not, What is the Real Death Count?

Dr. Joseph Mercola states: What’s the Real Death Count?

The CDC’s belated admission that the PCR test can’t identify active infection raises another question: What does this mean for those who died with a positive test? Did they actually have an active infection? If not, should they have been designated as COVID deaths?

The obvious answer to the last two questions is, of course, no. The vast majority were likely false positives, and the real death toll from COVID-19 considerably lower than we’re led to believe. The CDC undoubtedly knew this all along, seeing how they’ve been relentlessly criticized for their recommendation to run the PCR at a CT of 40. They’re trying to pretend that they just realized this, but that’s simply not believable. [MORE]

Previously Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi and Dr. Karina Reiss wrote the following

How dangerous is the new “killer” virus?

Compared to conventional coronaviruses. Gauging the true threat that the virus posed was initially impossible. Right from the beginning, the media and politicians spread a distorted and misleading picture based on fundamental flaws in data acquisition and especially on medically incorrect definitions laid down by the World Health Organization (WHO). Each positive laboratory test for the virus was to be reported as a COVID-19 case, irrespective of clinical presentation(15). This definition represented an unforgiveable breach of a first rule in infectiology: the necessity to differentiate between “infection” (invasion and multiplication of an agent in the host) and “infectious disease” (infection with ensuing illness). COVID-19 is the designation for severe illness that occurs only in about 10% of infected individuals(16), but because of incorrect designation, the number of “cases” surged and the virus vaulted to the top of the list of existential threats to the world.

Another serious mistake was that every deceased person who had tested positive for the virus entered the official records as a coronavirus victim. This method of reporting violated all international medical guidelines(17). The absurdity of giving COVID-19 as the cause of death in a patient who dies of cancer needs no comment. Correlation does not imply causation. This was causal fallacy that was destined to drive the world into a catastrophe. Truth surrounding the virus remained enshrouded in a tangle of rumours, myths and beliefs.

A French study, published on March 19, brought first light into the darkness(6). Two cohorts of approximately 8,000 patients with respiratory disease were grouped according to whether they were carrying everyday coronaviruses or SARS-CoV-2. Deaths in each group were registered over two months. However, the number of fatalities did not significantly differ in the two groups and the conclusion followed that the danger of “COVID-19” was probably overestimated. In a subsequent study, the same team compared the mortality associated with diagnosis of respiratory viruses during the colder months of 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 (week 47-week 14) in southeastern France. Overall, the proportion of respiratory virus-associated deaths among hospitalised patients was not significantly higher in 2019–2020 than the year before(18). Thus, addition of SARS-CoV-2 to the spectrum of viral pathogens did not affect overall mortality in patients with respiratory disease.

Regarding the number of deaths

How can the aforementioned be reconciled with the official reports of the
horrifying number of COVID-19 deaths? Two numbers must be known if the
danger of a virus is to be assessed: the number of infections and the number of deaths.

How many were infected by the new virus?

Attempts to answer this question were beset by three problems:

  1. How reliable was the test for virus detection?

The virus is present in the nasopharynx for approximately two weeks, during
which time it can be detected. How is this done? Viral RNA is transcribed into DNA and quantified by the so-called polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The first assay for the new coronavirus was developed under guidance of Professor Christian Drosten, Head of the Institute for Virology at the Charité Berlin. This test was used worldwide in the initial months of the outbreak(19). Tests from other laboratories followed(20).

Diagnostic PCR tests must normally undergo stringent quality assessment and be approved by regulatory agencies before use. This is important because no laboratory test can ever give 100% correct results. The quality control requirements were essentially shelved in the case of SARS-CoV-2 because of
declared international urgency. Consequently, nothing was really known regarding test reliability, specificity and sensitivity. In essence, these parameters give an indication of how many false-positive or false-negative results should be expected. The test protocol from the Drosten laboratory were used worldwide, and test results played a key role in political decision-making. Yet, data interpretation was often largely a matter of belief. What did Drosten himself say on Twitter(21)?

Sure: Towards the end of the illness the PCR is sometimes positive and sometimes negative. Here, chance plays a role. When you test a patient twice as negative and discharge him as cured, it is indeed possible that you can have positive test results again at home. But this is still far from being a re-infection.

Several physician colleagues have informed us of similar haphazard results with patients who had been tested repeatedly during their hospitalisation. Is it particularly surprising that goats and papayas tested positive for the virus in
Tanzania? The criticism by the President of Tanzania regarding the unreliability of the test kits was of course immediately dismissed by the WHO(22).

But today it is perfectly clear that the test result is error-prone, as is every
PCR(23,24). How much so, and whether there are significant differences among the presently available tests, cannot be determined because of lack of data.

So let us assume that the PCR test is incredibly good and produces 99.5%
correct results. That sounds, and would indeed be, exceptional – it means that
one can expect only 0.5% false-positives. Now take the cruise ship “Mein Schiff 3”. After a crew member had tested positive for the virus, almost 2,900 people from 73 countries were forced into “ship quarantine”. Many had been on board for nine months. Complaints reached the outside world about the “prison-like” conditions, psychological problems abounded and nerves were frayed(25).

Nine positive cases were reported after testing was completed. One person
who tested positive had a cough, the other eight were without symptoms. Might they have belonged to the 0.5% false-positive cases, as perhaps the very first case had been? Where were the true-positives that must theoretically have been there? Were they possibly tested as false-negatives or were all positive tests false?

In the context of false results, we should consider the following: when the
epidemic subsided (in Germany, in mid-April,) PCR testing became a dangerous source of misinformation because numbers of new cases were derived from the “background noise” of false-positive results. When all 7,500 employees of the Charité Berlin (one of Europe’s largest university hospitals) were tested from April 7 to April 21, 0.33% were positive(26). True or false?

When positive test rates drop below a certain limit, it is senseless to continue
mass screening for the virus in non-symptomatic individuals. And use of
numbers acquired under these circumstances as a reason for implementing any measures should not be tolerated.

  1. Selective or representative? Who was tested?

There is only one way to approximate how many people are infected during an epidemic with an agent that causes high numbers of unnoticed infections: at sites of an outbreak, the population must be tested as extensively as possible. But scientists who called for this during the coronavirus epidemic(27,28) were ignored.

Instead, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), the German federal government
agency and research institute for disease control, stipulated at the beginning that only selective testing should be carried out – exactly the opposite of what should have happened. And as the epidemic ran its course, the RKI stepwise altered the testing strategy – always in the diametrically wrong direction(29).

At first, only people who had been in a high-risk area and/or had been in
contact with an infected person and also presented with flu-like symptoms were to be tested. At the end of March, the RKI then changed the recommended test criteria to: flu-like symptoms and, at the same time, contact with an infected person. At the beginning of May, the President of the RKI, Professor Lothar Wieler, announced people with even “the slightest symptoms” should be tested(29).

The responsibility for translating these dubious decisions into action lay
entirely within the hands of the local health authorities. A co-worker at our lab was a typical example: the coach of her handball team was coronavirus positive. The players – all from different administrative districts – were sent home on 14-day quarantine. One player developed symptoms with coughing and hoarseness and wanted to get tested but was refused on the grounds that she had no fever. A player from a neighbouring district had no symptoms but the local health authority ordered a test despite this fact.

This resulted in chaos, caused by the appalling ineptitude of the authorities
from top to bottom. What would have been urgently needed instead were
scientifically sound studies to clarify basic issues of virus dissemination. As
many as possible should have been tested in outbreak areas. Antibody responses in those that had tested positively could have subsequently been assessed.

Only a single such study addressing these questions was undertaken in
Germany: the Heinsberg investigation conducted by Professor Hendrik Streeck, Director of the Institute for Virology at the University of Bonn. Aware of the importance of the preliminary data, these were presented at a press conference – where Streeck was torn apart by the disbelieving media(30,31). The fatality rate was ridiculed as being impossible because it was ten times lower than what acknowledged experts and the WHO had been spreading as established facts. After completion of the study, final results essentially confirming the preliminary report were again presented, and again deemed by the media to be flawed and inconclusive. But the results of the study spoke for themselves(32) – and they contradicted the panic propaganda of the media.

3. The number of conducted tests directly influences infection statistics

A third factor added to the statistical mess. Imagine that you wanted to count the number of a migratory bird species in a large lake district. There are hundreds of thousands but your counting device can only count 5,000 per day. Next day, you ask a colleague to help, and together you arrive at 10,000 counts. The day after that, two more colleagues join in and 20,000 birds are counted. In short, the higher the testing capacity/number of tests, the higher the numbers – as long as innumerable unidentified cases abound, as with SARS-CoV-2(16,32–36). The more tests are performed, the more COVID-19 cases are found during the epidemic. This is the essence of a “laboratory-created pandemic”.

Now recall that the test has neither 100% specificity nor 100% sensitivity –
meaning that occasionally you would mistake a log for a bird. Therefore, even
after all our birds have long since moved on, you would still “find” many by just
performing a sufficient number of tests.

In conclusion, no reliable data existed regarding the true numbers of infection at any stage of the epidemic in this country. At the peak of the epidemic, the official numbers must have been gross underestimates – in the order of 10 or even more. At its wane at the end of April in Germany, the numbers must also have been gross overestimates.

Basing any political decisions on official numbers at any stage was fallacy.

How many deaths did SARS-CoV-2 infections claim?

Here, again, we have the dilemma of definition: what is a “coronavirus death”?

If I drive to the hospital to be tested and later have a fatal car accident – just as my positive test results are returned – I become a coronavirus death. If I am diagnosed positive for coronavirus and jump off the balcony in shock, I also become a coronavirus death. The same is true for a sudden stroke, etc. As openly declared by RKI president Wieler, every individual with a positive test result at the time of death is entered into the statistics. The first “coronavirus death” in the northernmost state of Germany, Schleswig-Holstein, occurred in a palliative ward, where a patient with terminal oesophageal cancer was seeking peace before embarking on his last journey. A swab was taken just before his demise that was returned positive – after his death(37). He might equally well have been positive for other viruses such as rhino-, adeno- or influenza virus – if they had been tested for.

This particular case did not need more testing or a post-mortem to determine
the actual cause of death.

However, with the emergence of a new and possibly dangerous infectious disease, autopsies should be undertaken in cases of doubt to clarify the actual cause of death. Only one pathologist ventured to fulfil this task in Germany. Against the specific advice of the RKI, Professor Klaus Püschel, Director of the Institute of Forensic Medicine, Hamburg University, performed autopsies on all “coronavirus victims” and found that not one had been healthy(38). Most had suffered from several pre-existing conditions. One in two suffered from coronary heart disease. Other frequent ailments were hypertension, atherosclerosis, obesity, diabetes, cancer, lung and kidney disease and liver cirrhosis(39).

The same occurred elsewhere. Swiss pathologist Professor Alexander Tzankov reported that many victims had suffered from hypertension, most were overweight, two thirds had heart problems and one third had diabetes(40). The Italian Ministry of Health reported that 96% of COVID-19 hospital deaths had been patients with at least one severe underlying illness. Almost 50% had three or more pre-existing conditions(41).

Interestingly, Püschel found lung embolisms in every third patient(39). Pulmonary embolisms usually arise through detachment of blood clots in deep veins of the leg that are swept into the lungs. Clots typically form when blood flow sags in the legs, as when the elderly spend the day seated and inactive. A high frequency of lung embolisms was already described in deceased influenza patients 50 years ago(42). Thus, we are not on the verge of discovering a unique property of SARS-Cov-2 that would heighten its threat, but we do bear witness to the absurd situation where the elderly seek to protect themselves by obeying the chant that sounds around the world: “Stay at home”. Physical inactivity is pre-programmed, thromboses included? Swedish epidemiologist Professor Johann Giesecke recommended exactly the opposite: As much fresh air and activity as possible. The man knows his job!

The number of genuine COVID-19 fatalities remained unknown outside Hamburg. The situation was no better in other countries. Professor Walter Riccardi, adviser to the Italian Ministry of Health, stated in a March interview with “The Telegraph” that 88% of the Italian “coronavirus deaths” had not been due to the virus(43).

The problem with coronavirus death counts is such that the numbers can be viewed as nothing other than gross overestimates(44). In Belgium, not only fatalities with a positive COVID-19 test entered the ranks but also those where COVID-19 was simply suspected(45).

Scientific competence did not seem to rule the agenda of Germany’s RKI. Fortunately, there are scientists who stand out in contrast. Stanford Professor John Ioannidis is one of the eminent epidemiologists of our times. When it became clear that the epidemic in Europe was nearing its end, he showed how the officially reported numbers of “coronavirus deaths” could be used to calculate the absolute risk of dying from COVID-19(46).

The risk for a person under 65 years in Germany was about as high as a daily drive of 24 kilometres. The risk was low even for the elderly ≥ 80 with 10 “coronavirus deaths” per 10,000 ≥ 80-year olds in Germany (column at the far right).

Calculation of this number is simple. About 8.5 million citizens are ≥ 80 years in Germany. About 8,500 “coronavirus deaths” were recorded in this age group. This leads to an absolute risk of coronavirus death of 10 per 10,000 ≥ 80 year-olds. Now realise that every year about 1,200 of 10,000 ≥ 80-year olds die in Germany (black column, data from the Federal Office of Statistics). Nearly half of them due to cardiovascular diseases (CVD), almost a third from cancer and around 10% (over 100) owing to respiratory infections. The latter have always been caused by a multitude of pathogens including the coronavirus family. It is obvious that a new member has now joined the club, and that SARSCoV-2 cannot be assigned any special role as a “killer virus”.

This is underlined by another observation. Severe respiratory infections are registered by the RKI in the context of influenza surveillance. The vertical line marks the time when documentation of SARS-CoV-2 infections was started. Was there ever any indication for an increase in the number of respiratory infections(47)? No, the 2019/20 winter peak is followed by typical seasonal decline. And note that the lockdown (red arrow) was implemented when the curve had almost reached base level.

CITATIONS

(15) “Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Situation Report—61,” World Health Organization, March 20, 2020, https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200321-sitrep-61-covid-19.pdf.

(16) Michael Day, “COVID-19: Four Fifths of Cases Are Asymptomatic, China Figures Indicate,” BMJ 369, (April 2020): m1375, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1375.

(17) “Regeln zur Durchführung der ärztlichen Leichenschau,” AWMF Online (Germany), revised January to October 2017, https://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/054-002l_S1_Regeln-zur-
Durchfuehrung-der-aerztlichen-Leichenschau_2018-02_01.pdf
.

(18) Audrey Giraud-Gatineau et al., “Comparison of Mortality Associated with Respiratory Viral Infections between December 2019 and March 2020 with That of the Previous Year in Southeastern France,” International Journal of Infectious Diseases 96 (July 2020): 154–56, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.05.001.

(19) Victor M. Corman et al., “Detection of 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by Real-Time RTPCR,” Eurosurveillance 25, no. 3 (January 2020): 2000045, https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045.

(20) Sonja Gurris, “Corona-Tests werden Geheimwaffe,” n-tv (Cologne), March 30, 2020, https://www.ntv.de/panorama/Corona-Tests-werden-Geheimwaffe-article21678629.html.

(21) Christian Drosten, Twitter post, April 13, 2020, 4:42 p.m., https://twitter.com/c_drosten/status/1249800091164192771.

(22) Australian Associated Press, “WHO Rejects Tanzania Claim Tests Faulty,” Examiner (Launceston), May 8, 2020, https://www.examiner.com.au/story/6749732/who-rejects-tanzania-claim-tests-faulty.

(23) Yafang Li et al., “Stability Issues of RT-PCR Testing of SARS-CoV-2 for Hospitalized Patients Clinically Diagnosed with COVID-19,” Journal of Medical Virology 92, no. 7 (July 2020): 903–8, https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.25786.

(24) Gurris, “Corona-Tests werden Geheimwaffe.”

(25) Ines Nastali, “Police Intervenes on Quarantined Mein Schiff 3,” Safety at Sea, May 6, 2020, https://safetyatsea.net/news/2020/police-intervenes-on-quarantined-mein-schiff-3-2.

(26) “Wenig Infektionen beim Charité-Personal,” Deutsches Ärzteblatt (Berlin), May 13, 2020, https://www.aerzteblatt.de/nachrichten/112809/Wenig-Infektionen-beim-Charite-Personal.

(27) John P. A. Ioannidis, “Coronavirus Disease 2019: The Harms of Exaggerated Information and Non-Evidence-Based Measures,” European Journal of Clinical Investigation 50, no. 4 (April 2020):e13222, https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13222.

(28) Sucharit Bhakdi, open letter to Angela Merkel, March 26, 2020, PDF available to download until March 31, 2021, https://c.gmx.net/@824224682608695698/cI1TagSeQmi0WlXK-m8vWA.

(29) Patrick Gensing and Markus Grill, “40 Prozent mehr Tests in Deutschland,” Tagesschau (Hamburg), May 6, 2020, https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/corona-tests-rki-101.html.

(30) Julia Bernewasser, “Das sind die ersten Lehren der Heinsberg-Studie,” Der Tagesspeigel (Berlin), April 9, 2020, https://www.tagesspiegel.de/wissen/zwischenergebnis-zurcoronavirus-uebertragungdas-sind-die-ersten-lehrenderheinsberg-studie/25730138.html.

(31) Paula Schneider, “‘Unwissenschaftlich’: Statistikerin zerlegt Heinsberg-Studie, auf die sich Laschet stützt,” Focus (Munich), April 15, 2020, https://www.focus.de/gesundheit/news/hoffe-dass-wirdarausnur-wenig-ueber-corona-lernen-statistikerin-zerlegtheinsbergstudie-keine-transparenz-keinwissenschaftlicher-standard_id_11881853.html.

(32) Hendrik Streeck et al., “Infection Fatality Rate of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in a German Community with a Super-Spreading Event,” preprint, medRxiv, June 2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.04.20090076.

(33) “Field Briefing: Diamond Princess COVID-19 Cases,” National Institute of Infectious Diseases (Japan), February 19, 2020, https://www.niid.go.jp/niid/en/2019-ncov-e/9407-covid-dpfe-01.html.

(34) Kenji Mizumoto et al., “Estimating the Asymptomatic Proportion of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Cases on Board the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship, Yokohama, Japan, 2020,” Eurosurveillance 25, no. 10 (March 2020): 20000180, https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.10.2000180.

(35) Tara John, “Iceland Lab’s Testing Suggests 50% of Coronavirus Cases Have No Symptoms,” CNN, April 3, 2020, https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/01/europe/iceland-testing-coronavirus-intl/index.html.

(36) Rongrong Yang, Xien Gui, and Yong Xiong, “Comparison of Clinical Characteristics of Patients with Asymptomatic vs Symptomatic Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Wuhan, China,” JAMA Network Open 3, no. 5 (May 2020): e2010182, https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.10182.

(37) “Erster Todesfall in Schleswig-Holstein,” Der Spiegel, March 17, 2020, https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/coronavirus-erster-todesfall-in-schleswig-holstein-a-6db5f0b0-b662-45b0-bdb4-603684d4dc92.

(38) Bettina Mittelacher, “Mediziner: Alle Corona-Toten in Hamburg waren vorerkrankt,” Berliner Morgenpost, April 27, 2020, https://www.morgenpost.de/vermischtes/article228994571/Rechtsmediziner-Alle-Corona-Toten-hattenVorerkrankungen.html.

(39) Dominic Wichmann et al., “Autopsy Findings and Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study,” Annals of Internal Medicine 173, no. 4 (August 2020):268–77, https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-2003.

(40) Nikita Jolkver, “Coronavirus: Was die Toten über COVID-19 verraten,” DW Akademie (Bonn), April 30, 2020, https://p.dw.com/p/3baZF.

(41) SARS-CoV-2 Surveillance Group, Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Patients Dying in Italy, report based on available data on July 9, 2020, https://www.epicentro.iss.it/en/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID-2019_9_july_2020.pdf.

(42) O. Haferkamp and H. Matthys, “Grippe und Lungenembolien,” Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 95, no. 51 (1970): 2560–63, https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0028-1108874.

(43) Sarah Newey, “Why Have So Many Coronavirus Patients Died in Italy?,” Telegraph, March 23, 2020, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/have-many-coronaviruspatients-died-italy.

(44) Gregory Beals, “Official Coronavirus Death Tolls Are Only an Estimate, and That Is a Problem,” NBC News, April 15, 2020, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/official-coronavirus-death-tollsare-
only-estimate-problem-n1183756
.

(45) Karolina Meta Beisel, “Warum Belgien die höchste Todesrate weltweit hat,” Tages-Anzeiger (Zurich), April 22, 2020, https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/warum-belgien-die-hoechstetodesrateweltweit-hat-825753123788.

(46) John P. A. Ioannidis, Cathrine Axfors, and Despina G. Contopoulos-Ioannidis, “Population-Level COVID-19 Mortality Risk for Non-Elderly Individuals Overall and for Non-Elderly Individuals without Underlying Diseases in Pandemic Epicenters,” Environmental Research 188 (September 2020): 109890, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.109890.

(47) “GrippeWeb,” Robert Koch-Instituts, https://grippeweb.rki.de.