Tuesday, August 31, 2021

60% of Those Older Than 50 Who Die From Covid Are Double Vaxxed


The oft-repeated refrain right now is that we’re in a “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” meaning those who have not received the COVID jab make up the bulk of those hospitalized and dying from the Delta variant. For example, August 20, 2021, England’s chief medical officer professor Chris Whitty tweeted:1,2

“Four weeks working on a COVID ward makes stark the reality that the majority of our hospitalized COVID patients are unvaccinated and regret delaying. Some are very sick including young adults. Please don’t delay your vaccine.”

Curiously, if you take the time to actually look at the data, you’ll find that this blanket statement is rather deceptive. Here’s a graphic published in the Evening Standard, sourced from Public Health England:3

As you can see, as of August 15, 2021, 58% of COVID patients admitted to hospital who were over the age of 50 had actually received two doses of COVID injections and 10% had received one dose. So, partially or fully “vaccinated” individuals made up 68% of hospitalizations.

Only in the 50 and younger category were a majority, 74%, of hospitalizations among the unvaccinated. Whitty, however, completely neglected to differentiate between the age groups. The same applies to deaths. Unvaccinated only make up the majority of COVID deaths in the under-50 age group. In the over-50 group, the clear majority, 70%, are either partially or fully “vaccinated.”

It’s also unclear whether hospitals in the U.K. (and elsewhere) are still designating anyone who is admitted and tests positive with a PCR test as a “COVID patient.” If so, people with broken bones or any number of other health problems who have no symptoms of COVID-19 at all might be unfairly lumped into the “unvaccinated COVID patient” total.

Israeli Data Show COVID Jab Is Failing in Over-50s

In Israel, where vaccine uptake has been very high due to restrictions on freedom for those who don’t comply,4 data show those who have received the COVID jab are 6.72 times more likely to get infected than people with natural immunity.5,6,7

The fully “vaccinated” also made up the bulk of serious cases and COVID-related deaths in July 2021, as illustrated in the graphs below.8 The red is unvaccinated, yellow refers to partially “vaccinated” and green fully “vaccinated” with two doses. By mid-August, 59% of serious cases were among those who had received two COVID injections,9 mirroring the data coming out of the U.K.

In an August 16, 2021, Science article,10 Israeli Minister of Health Nitzan Horowitz is quoted saying the nation has entered a “critical time” in the race against the pandemic. Horowitz allegedly was given a third booster shot August 13, 2021, the day they began offering a third dose to people over the age of 50.

From Public Health England’s data, it seems clear that the COVID shots are failing to protect people over the age of 50 in the U.K. as well, so it’s probably only a matter of time before booster shots are rolled out there too. And, provided the COVID injections are the same irrespective of country, there’s every reason to assume the same trends will emerge in other countries, including the U.S.

This is precisely what Ran Balicer, chief innovation officer at Clalit Health Services, Israel’s largest health maintenance organization (HMO), told Science: “If it can happen here, it can probably happen everywhere.”11

Israeli Data Considered the Best Around

The data coming out of Israel is considered by many to be the best we have, and can give us a glimpse of what to expect elsewhere. As explained by Science magazine:12

“Israel is being closely watched now because it was one of the first countries out of the gate with vaccinations in December 2020 and quickly achieved a degree of population coverage that was the envy of other nations — for a time.

The nation of 9.3 million also has a robust public health infrastructure and a population wholly enrolled in HMOs that track them closely, allowing it to produce high-quality, real-world data on how well vaccines are working.

‘I watch [Israeli data] very, very closely because it is some of the absolutely best data coming out anywhere in the world,’ says David O’Connor, a viral sequencing expert at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

‘Israel is the model,’ agrees Eric Topol, a physician-scientist at Scripps Research. ‘It’s pure mRNA vaccines. It’s out there early. It’s got a very high level population [uptake]. It’s a working experimental lab for us to learn from.’

Israel’s HMOs … track demographics, comorbidities, and a trove of coronavirus metrics on infections, illnesses, and deaths. ‘We have rich individual-level data that allows us to provide real-world evidence in near–real time,’ Balicer says …

Now, the effects of waning immunity may be beginning to show in Israelis vaccinated in early winter; a preprint13 published last month … found that protection from COVID-19 infection during June and July dropped in proportion to the length of time since an individual was vaccinated.People vaccinated in January had a 2.26 times greater risk for a breakthrough infection than those vaccinated in April.”

Where Will It End?

According to Science magazine, breakthrough cases are now multiplying at breakneck speed. “There are so many breakthrough infections that they dominate and most of the hospitalized patients are actually vaccinated,” Uri Shalit, a bioinformatician at the Israel Institute of Technology told Science.14

Nearly 1 million Israelis over the age of 50 have now received a third booster of Pfizer’s mRNA shot. Time will tell whether this will worsen the rate of breakthrough cases or tame it.

Dvir Aran, a biomedical data scientist at the Israel Institute of Technology doesn’t seem very hopeful, telling Science the surge is already so steep, “even if you get two-thirds of those 60-plus [boosted], it’s just gonna give us another week, maybe two weeks until our hospitals are flooded” again.15

The obvious question is, what then?! Will the answer be a fourth injection before the year is over? Will we be looking at quarterly injections? Monthly injections? Biweekly? Weekly? Where and when does it end? It is fairly easy to predict that this can only end very badly.

US Tracks Only Fraction of Breakthrough Infections

Unfortunately, we cannot rely on U.S. data to get a clear idea of how the COVID shots are working, as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has chosen not to track all breakthrough cases. As reported by ProPublica,16 May 1, 2021, the CDC stopped tracking and reporting all breakthrough cases, opting to log only those that result in hospitalization and/or death.

As noted in the article, this irrational decision has “left the nation with a muddled understanding of COVID-19’s impact on the vaccinated.” It also prevents us from understanding how variants are spreading and whether those who have received the jab can still develop so-called “long-haul syndrome.”

Individual states are also setting their own criteria for how they collect data on breakthrough cases, and this patchwork muddies the waters even further. Despite these limitations, what little data we do have is starting to mirror that of Israel and the U.K.

August 18, 2021, the CDC released three reports,17,18,19 which show the protection you get from the COVID shot is rapidly waning.

“Among nursing home residents, one of the studies showed vaccine effectiveness dropped from 74.7% in the spring to just 53.1% by midsummer,”ProPublica writes.20 “Similarly, another report found that the overall effectiveness among vaccinated New York adults dropped from 91.7% to just under 80% between May and July.

The new findings prompted the Biden administration to announce on Wednesday that people who got a Moderna or Pfizer vaccine will be offered a booster shot eight months after their second dose. The program is scheduled to begin the week of Sept. 20 but needs approval from the Food and Drug Administration and a CDC advisory committee.

This latest development is seen by some as another example of shifting public health messaging and backpedaling that has accompanied every phase of the pandemic for 19 months through two administrations. A little more than a month ago, the CDC and the FDA released a joint statement saying that those who have been fully vaccinated ‘do not need a booster shot at this time’ …

The CDC tracked all breakthrough cases until the end of April, then abruptly stopped without making a formal announcement. A reference to the policy switch appeared on the agency’s website in May about halfway down the homepage.

‘I was shocked,’ said Dr. Leana Wen, a physician and visiting professor of health policy and management at George Washington University. ‘I have yet to hear a coherent explanation of why they stopped tracking this information’ …

Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass., became alarmed after the Provincetown outbreak and wrote to CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky on July 22, questioning the decision to limit investigation of breakthrough cases. He asked what type of data was being compiled and how it would be shared publicly21 … Markey asked the agency to respond by Aug. 12. So far the senator has received no reply …”

Vaxxed Are Up to 13 Times More Likely to Get Delta Variant

While the U.S. is lax about recording breakthrough infections, researchers in Israel have some breaking news: They have been keeping track, and their studies22 show that vaccinated individuals are up to 13 times more likely to get the Delta variant of COVID-19 than those who were not vaccinated, but had recovered from a COVID infection.

As explained by ScienceMag:23 The study “found in two analyses that people who were vaccinated in January and February were, in June, July and the first half of August, six to 13 times more likely to get infected than unvaccinated people who were previously infected with the coronavirus. In one analysis, comparing more than 32,000 people in the health system, the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 was 27 times higher among the vaccinated, and the risk of hospitalization eight times higher.”

The study also said that, while vaccinated persons who also had natural infection did appear to have additional protection against the Delta variant, the vaccinated were still at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those without the vaccine, but who were previously infected. Vaccinees who hadn’t had a natural infection also had a 5.96-fold increased risk for breakthrough infection and a 7.13-fold increased risk for symptomatic disease.

One thing to note here is that the wording of this is important: The study does not say that getting a vaccine helps protect you if you’ve had a natural infection; rather, it says that natural protection helps boost the vaccine. Either way, even if you do have natural infection in combination with the vaccination, vaccinees are still at an increased risk for a breakthrough infection.

“This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity,” the study authors concluded.

Fully Vaxxed Speak Out

Back America, in an August 24, 2021, article,24 The Defender cites data from seven states (California, Colorado, Massachusetts, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Virginia) that keep more detailed records than most. In six of these states, breakthrough infections accounted for 18% to 28% of all new COVID diagnoses in the past several weeks, as well as 12% to 24% of all COVID-related hospitalizations.

In Los Angeles, breakthrough cases have risen from 5% in April and 13% in July to a current of 30%. Fully vaxxed celebrities and elected officials have now started speaking out after getting COVID. As reported by The Defender: 25

“Melissa Joan Hart, the former ‘Sabrina the Teenage Witch’ star is ‘really mad’ she has a breakthrough case. Hart shared on Instagram Aug. 19 … ‘I got COVID. I am vaccinated. And I got COVID. And it’s bad. It’s weighing on my chest, it’s hard to breathe’ …

Celebrity Hilary Duff, revealed she had COVID on Instagram Aug. 20. Duff said she was experiencing a bad headache, brain fog, sinus pressure and a loss of taste and smell despite being vaccinated …

Slipknot singer Corey Taylor, 47, was devastated after testing positive for COVID and was forced to call off his upcoming appearance at a Michigan pop culture convention this weekend, Rolling Stone reported. ‘I wish I had better news,’ said Taylor in a recorded video message last week on Facebook. ‘I woke up today and tested positive and I’m very, very sick’ …

Rev. Jesse Jackson, and his wife, Jacqueline, remained under doctors’ observation Monday[August 23, 2021] at a Chicago hospital after getting COVID … Jackson, a Chicago civil rights leader, was fully vaccinated and received his first dose in January during a publicized event where he urged others to receive the vaccine as soon as possible …

Three U.S. senators — John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Angus King (I-Maine) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) — announced Aug. 19 they tested positive for COVID despite being fully vaccinated, CBS News reported …

The news came days after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who also was fully vaccinated, tested positive for COVID. Illinois state Sen. Dan McConchie announced Aug. 21 he had a ‘breakthrough’ case of COVID.”

CDC Has Also Hidden Breakthrough Cases in Other Ways

The CDC also cooked the books on COVID breakthrough cases in other ways. Originally, the CDC recommended labs use a CT of 4026 when testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection. This, despite using a CT above 35 was known to create a false positive rate of 97%.27 By using an exaggerated CT, healthy people were deemed stricken with COVID-19.

In May 2021, the CDC lowered the CT from 40 to 28 or lower — but only when doing PCR testing on individuals who have received the COVID jab.28 Unvaccinated were still tested using a CT of 40. The end result is obvious: “Vaccinated” individuals became far less likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection while unvaccinated were still exceedingly getting false positives. As noted by Off-Guardian:29

“This is a policy designed to continuously inflate one number, and systematically minimize the other. What is that if not an obvious and deliberate act of deception?”

How the CDC Invented the ‘Pandemic of Unvaxxed’ Narrative

The CDC also played fast and loose with the data when it invented the “pandemic of the unvaccinated” narrative30 that we’re now being indoctrinated with. In a July 16, 2021, White House press briefing,31 CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky claimed “over 97% of people who are entering the hospital right now are unvaccinated.”

Based on this data it is all but a certainty that mass COVID-19 immunization is hurting the health of the population in general. Scientific principles dictate that the mass immunization with COVID-19 vaccines must be halted immediately because we face a looming vaccine induced public health catastrophe. ~ Dr. Bart Classen, Trends in Internal Medicine

As it turns out, that statistic is based on hospitalization data from January through June 2021, when the majority of Americans had not yet gotten the COVID jab. January 1, 2021, only 0.5% of the U.S. population had received a COVID shot. By mid-April, an estimated 31% had received one or more shots,32 and as of June 30, just 46.9% were “fully vaccinated.”33

COVID Shots ‘Proven to Cause More Harm Than Good’

While the official narrative is that the COVID shots may be “less than perfect” but are still better than the alternative (i.e., getting the infection when you’re unvaccinated), Dr. Bart Classen published a study34 in the August 2021 issue of Trends in Internal Medicine, disputing this claim.

The study,35 “U.S. COVID-19 Vaccines Proven to Cause More Harm than Good Based on Pivotal Clinical Trial Data Analyzed Using the Proper Scientific Endpoint, ‘All Cause Severe Morbidity,'” details a core problem with Pfizer’s, Moderna’s and Janssen’s (Johnson & Johnson) trials.

All three employ a surrogate primary endpoint for health, namely “severe infections with COVID-19.” This, Classen says, “has been proven dangerously misleading,” and many fields of medicine have stopped using disease-specific endpoints in clinical trials and have adopted “all-cause mortality and morbidity” instead.

The reason for this is because if a person dies from the treatment or is severely injured by it, even if the treatment helped block the progression of the disease they’re being treated for, the end result is still a negative one.

To offer an extreme example of what you can do with a disease-specific endpoint, you could make the claim that shooting people in the head is a cure for cancer, because no one who got the treatment — who got shot in the head — died from cancer.

When reanalyzing the clinical trial data from these COVID shots using “all-cause severe morbidity” as the primary endpoint, the data reveal they actually cause far more harm than good.

The proper endpoint was calculated by adding together all severe events reported in the trials, not just COVID-19 but also all other serious adverse events. By doing this, severe COVID-19 infection gets the same weight as other adverse events of equivalent severity. According to Classen:36

“Results prove that none of the vaccines provide a health benefit and all pivotal trials show a statistically significant increase in ‘all cause severe morbidity’ in the vaccinated group compared to the placebo group.

The Moderna immunized group suffered 3,042 more severe events than the control group. The Pfizer data was grossly incomplete but data provided showed the vaccination group suffered 90 more severe events than the control group, when only including ‘unsolicited’ adverse events.

The Janssen immunized group suffered 264 more severe events than the control group. These findings contrast the manufacturers’ inappropriate surrogate endpoints:

Janssen claims that their vaccine prevents 6 cases of severe COVID-19 requiring medical attention out of 19,630 immunized; Pfizer claims their vaccine prevents 8 cases of severe COVID-19 out of 21,720 immunized; Moderna claims its vaccine prevents 30 cases of severe COVID-19 out of 15,210 immunized.

Based on this data it is all but a certainty that mass COVID-19 immunization is hurting the health of the population in general. Scientific principles dictate that the mass immunization with COVID-19 vaccines must be halted immediately because we face a looming vaccine induced public health catastrophe.”

To make the above numbers more clear and obvious, here are the prevention stats in percentages:

  • Pfizer 0.00036%
  • Moderna 0.00125%
  • Janssen 0.00030%

Where Do We Go From Here?

If you’ve already gotten one or two shots, there’s nothing you can do about that. It seems pretty obvious, though, if you objectively analyze the data, that your best bet is to say no to any and all future boosters, as each additional shot can magnify the damage and increase your risk of serious side effects.

If you develop symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection, there are several treatment protocols available that have been shown to be effective. Options include the Zelenko protocol,37 the MATH+ protocols38 and nebulized hydrogen peroxide, as detailed in Dr. David Brownstein’s case paper39 and Dr. Thomas Levy’s free e-book, “Rapid Virus Recovery.”

Whichever treatment protocol you use, make sure you begin treatment as soon as possible, ideally at first onset of symptoms. Also, realize that if you’ve gotten one or more COVID shots, your risk of severe infection may actually be greater, not lesser, than had you not gotten the injections. This appears particularly true if you’re over the age of 50. So, do not delay treatment if you develop symptoms.

Sources and References

The post 60% of Those Older Than 50 Who Die From Covid Are Double Vaxxed appeared first on LewRockwell.


Where Are the Autopsies of People Dying Post COVID Vaccine?


Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, published a commentary July 7, 20211 asking an important question about the rising number of deaths being reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in conjunction with the COVID-19 injection program.

Her credentials2 are many: She's a clinical lecturer in medicine at the University of Arizona College of Medicine. She received her medical degree from Columbia University and is the author of several books. And, as president of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness and chairman of the Public Health Committee of the Pima County (Arizona) Medical Society, she asks: Why haven't there been autopsies of healthy people who are dying unexpectedly after receiving a COVID jab?

It's a reasonable and logical question since autopsies often reveal important information about diseases and illnesses — and it's information that can help guide future medical treatment to reduce the risk of long-term disability and death after the vaccine.3 After all, without autopsy results, the ability to treat cardiovascular diseases,4 cancers,5 hereditary diseases like hypertrophic cardiomyopathy6 and even catch murderers7 would be incompetent.

Dr. Dylan Miller chairs the autopsy resource committee for the College of American Pathologists. He spoke with a reporter from The Wall Street Journal, saying,8 "We think we always know what's going on inside our patients, but that's a fallacy. There's as much to be gained from an autopsy as ever."

The nature of an autopsy is diagnosis.9 It can help family members come to terms with what caused a loved one's death, identify unknown diseases and offer clinicians an opportunity for a greater understanding of what happened before a patient dies. It also can provide a valuable educational opportunity for health officials and even students, who study disease processes.

It's been over eight months since the first COVID-19 vaccine was administered in the U.S. in December 2020.10 Since then, VAERS reports show there have been over 12,000 people who have died after the shot.11 Since autopsies are so incredibly important in the identification of disease and pathological processes, why haven't healthy people who have died after the COVID jab been autopsied?

Lack of Autopsy Results May Mean Data Are Hidden

At the time of Orient's published commentary,12 she quoted a death toll after the COVID shot of nearly 7,000 people as reported in VAERS. This was in early July. By the end of July that number had risen to 12,366 people.13 That's a jump of over 5,000 people in less than 30 days who reportedly had died after the COVID injections.

Orient comments that while it's the best system available now for recording adverse events from vaccines, VAERS is likely missing 90% or more of the actual number of individuals who are hospitalized, have suffered anaphylactic reactions, have Bell's Palsy, had heart attacks or had life-threatening reactions. The lack of accurate recording also includes the actual number of people who have died after receiving an injection.

When it comes to death certificates, data from The Johns Hopkins Hospital were published in the Archives of Internal Medicine in 2001,14 demonstrating that the accuracy and reliability of the recorded cause of death, on death certificates, was a significant problem, indicating the continued need for autopsies to correctly identify the cause of death.

According to Orient, the death of a 45-year-old mother after receiving the COVID-19 shot that was required for her to start work at the same institution, Johns Hopkins University, will likely not be investigated by autopsy. Additionally, the hospital has not paused their demand for the injection program for mothers and potential mothers who want to work at the university.

In the past, when an individual died without significant medical illness, they were designated a case for the medical examiner, who would decide whether an autopsy was needed. Any evidence that was related to the death was gathered and considered along with the autopsy report.

The most important reason for requesting and performing an autopsy was to ensure quality health care and at one time was required for hospital accreditation.15 However, that requirement has been dropped, and dropped along with it the number of autopsies routinely performed on patients who have died inside or outside the hospital.

The average rate for autopsies in the 1940s was 50%. That dropped to 41% in 1970, just before the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals removed the requirement that 20% of deaths in the hospital were to be autopsied to maintain accreditation.16

By 2018, experts estimated only 4% of in-hospital deaths were autopsied and only approximately 8% of all deaths. Since an estimated 700,000 die each year in the hospital, this means only approximately 28,000 of those deaths are autopsied. Experts have proposed three explanations for the falling rates, including:17

  • Fear of finding mistakes leading to a malpractice lawsuit
  • Lack of reimbursement for an autopsy
  • The belief that medical technology has made autopsies obsolete

However, it's important to note that knowledge of why a person dies after vaccination will not help the family recover damages since the pharmaceutical industry is immune from liability.18,19 Even so, this information should be used to inform public health policy and help people decide how they want to proceed with the genetic therapy injection program.

Death Certificates Are Notoriously Inaccurate

Orient also notes that death certificates, which researchers use to gather statistics on the cause of death, "are known to be extremely unreliable."20 An evaluation of 494 death certificates at The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions21 in 2001 showed 41% had improperly completed forms and the reliability and accuracy of the death certificates listing cause of death was a significant problem.

A study published in the Southern Medical Journal22 also found "major discrepancies" between the death certificates issued in the hospital and the information gathered on autopsy.

In 25% of the cases, the death was erroneously attributed to acute myocardial infarction, while an autopsy showed the deaths were actually from sepsis, cerebral hemorrhage, pneumonia and cardiac tamponade. Autopsy showed there were 52 myocardial infarctions that caused death, but death certificates accurately documented only 27. The researchers concluded:

"1) Death certificates are often wrong. 2) The time-honored autopsy is more valuable than ever. 3) Physicians need to write better death certificates and correct them. 4) Death certificate-based vital statistics should be corrected with autopsy results. 5) Vital statistics should note deaths confirmed by autopsy. 6) More autopsies would improve vital statistics and the practice of medicine."

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's document on understanding death data quality, hospitals and health care providers should use the following criteria when filling out cause of death on a patient's death certificate:23

"When a person dies, the cause of death is determined by the certifier — the physician, medical examiner, or coroner who reports it on the death certificate.

Certifiers are asked to use their best medical judgment based on the available information and their expertise. When a definitive diagnosis cannot be made, but the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty, certifiers may include the terms "probable" or "presumed" in the cause-of-death statement."

In other words, data being reported about cause of death can be manipulated with a "probable" or "presumed" assumption if the certifier makes a subjective evaluation and believes the "circumstances are compelling." This poor degree of accuracy only adds to the already notoriously inaccurate information found on death certificates.

Treatment for COVID-19 Improved After Autopsy Results

As Orient points out, there were tens of thousands of patients who died from COVID disease after being placed on ventilators before a small series of 12 autopsies done in Germany showed that most of these patients had blood clots and using a ventilator may have caused more damage.24

The improvement and treatment modalities for COVID-19 came after patients had been autopsied. Mechanical ventilation can easily damage lung tissue because it forces air into the lungs. Patients with COVID-19 who were ventilated had at best a 50-50 chance of surviving.25

However, risk analysis being reported indicated this chance of survival was higher than what was being seen clinically. China reported26 of 22 patients on ventilators, 86% of them did not survive the treatment. A British study found two thirds of patients on mechanical ventilation died and a study of 320 mechanically ventilated patients in New York showed 88% of them died.

COVID-19 Jab: More Death Reports Than All Vaccines Combined

Imagine if you would, a vaccine so "safe" officials are threatening those who won't take it for a disease so deadly most people must be tested to know if they have it. Autopsies and accurate death certificates are part of an evaluation of safety for treatment protocols. If a reasonable safety standard had been in place, the campaign to inject the world would have stopped in early January 2021.

The voluntary reported death rate from the shots now exceeds that of more than 70 vaccines combined over 30 years and shows that it's 500 times deadlier than the flu vaccine,27 which historically has been the most hazardous.

Trial Site News28 reports that Pfizer documents submitted to the European Medicines Agency [EMA] reveal the company "did not follow industry-standard quality management practices during preclinical toxicology studies … as key studies did not meet good laboratory practice (GLP)."

Neither reproductive toxicity nor genotoxicity (DNA mutation) studies were performed, both of which are considered critical when developing a new drug or vaccine for human use. The problems now surfacing matter greatly, as they significantly alter the risk benefit analysis underlying the vaccines' emergency use authorization.

On the flip side of the risk-benefit analysis is the fact that effective treatment protocols have been developed by infectious disease specialists29 who have a high rate of success and therefore negate the need for emergency use authorization of a dangerous gene therapy injection program.

Unfortunately, people not only are dying from the shot itself, but data now show countries that have launched a massive vaccination campaign have more cases of COVID-19.30 In fact, data from the CDC show 74% of people who recently became sick with COVID-19 in Massachusetts were fully vaccinated.31

In a report from CNBC, the reporter announced that "public health experts" point out the majority of breakthrough cases in fully vaccinated people that lead to hospitalization and death are occurring in the elderly and those with comorbid conditions.32

In other words, the shot has increased the risk for severe disease in the very populations of people the shot is supposed to protect. In addition, the CDC changed how they count breakthrough cases in vaccinated individuals:

"As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance."

Autopsy on Vaccinated Man Raises Questions

The case33 of an 86-year-old man who died after his first dose of the mRNA COVID-19 injection, but before he received the second, is posing questions about the safety, side effects, immunogenicity and possibility of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) after receiving just one dose.

Writing in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, study authors said the man died from acute renal and respiratory failure. Although he tested positive for the virus two days before he died, his autopsy attributed his death to acute bronchopneumonia and tubular failure. “These results might suggest that the first vaccination induces immunogenicity but not sterile immunity,” study authors said.

In a Twitter feed, however, at least one doctor34 questioned the circumstances under which the patient died, and suggested that the vaccine may set the stage for antibody dependent enhancement (ADE). ADE occurs when antibodies help a virus infect cells, rather than prevent it.

“This is a very important case, as it highlights the difference in the body’s immune response to sarscov2 after vax but before fully neutralizing titers,” AMM MD tweeted. “It also makes me wonder if this isn’t what is happening in breakthrough covid cases (develop covid months after complete vaccination, when immunity is waning). This could all serve as evidence for antibody dependent enhancement.”

What Can You Do if Someone You Love Dies Unexpectedly?

If someone you love dies unexpectedly after receiving the COVID shot, you have the right to ask for an autopsy. The medical examiner for your county is charged with maintaining public health.

If your loved one had no previous underlying medical conditions, there's a higher likelihood you can convince the medical examiner to do an autopsy that may reveal how the genetic therapy affected the vascular and organ systems of your loved one.

If you or a loved one received the vaccine and you're looking for information on how to protect yourself, please watch the video above. If you don't have a chance to watch it in its entirety search for it or bookmark it on BitChute under "How Covid-19 Shots Might Reduce Lifespan — Drs. Vladimir Zelenko And Joseph Mercola" In the interview we talk about the acute, subacute and long-term risks associated with the shot.

As you may know, this article will no longer be available 48 hours after being published. I would encourage you to copy and paste the information so you can share it with friends and family. Although I've published several steps you can take to help protect your health, because the information is no longer freely available, I'll share a list here:

In the first three months after the shot there is a higher risk of blood clots. A natural anticoagulant with great promise is n-acetyl cysteine (NAC), as it has anticoagulant35 and antithrombotic effects.36 This means it prevents clots and breaks up those that have formed.

In the subacute phase it's important to avoid antibody dependent enhancement (ADE). The key is to implement a prophylactic protocol. Any symptoms of upper respiratory infection should be treated immediately. COVID is a multiphase disease. The first phase lasts five to seven days and is most easily treated. After Day 7, it typically progresses to the inflammatory phase, which requires different treatment.

A combination of a zinc ionophore such as quercetin, hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin, plus zinc is an important component of early treatment and prevention. If you want to use either hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin and live in a state that restricts their use, look for online telehealth options.

The American Frontline Doctors is one resource. Most only charge $90 for a consultation and you will be able to get the prescription that you need. Do not use Ivermectin from veterinary sources as it may be contaminated and is not designed for human use.

Optimize your vitamin D level in the range of 60 ng/mL to 80 ng/mL year-round. After a blood test to determine your current level, consider the Grassroots calculator to determine the necessary dose.

Vitamin C is another important component, especially if you're taking quercetin, as they have synergistic effects. To effectively act as a zinc ionophore, quercetin needs vitamin C. 

The take-home message here is that if you've gotten the jab, consider yourself high risk for COVID and implement a daily prophylaxis protocol. This means optimizing your vitamin D, and taking vitamin C, zinc and a zinc ionophore daily, at least throughout the cold and flu season.

It would also be useful to do a daily sauna, ideally one that can heat up to 170 degrees Fahrenheit. Additionally, nebulized hydrogen peroxide may help. If you would like to watch a video on this protocol, you can view all of them here on Substack. If you're having post-vaccination symptoms, you could consider:

  • Low-dose interferons such as Paximune, to stimulate your immune system
  • Peptide T (an HIV entry inhibitor derived from the HIV envelope protein gp120; it blocks binding and infection of viruses that use the CCR5 receptor to infect cells)
  • Cannabis, to strengthen Type I interferon pathways, which are part of your first line of defense against pathogens
  • Dimethylglycine or betaine (trimethylglycine) to enhance methylation, thereby suppressing latent viruses
  • Silymarin or milk thistle to help cleanse your liver


Pfizer’s COVID Shot Granted Full Approval


August 23, 2021, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted full approval1 to the COVID-19 mRNA injection developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, sold under the brand name Comirnaty, for use in people aged 16 and older.

It’s the fastest approval in history,2 granted less than four months after Pfizer filed for licensing May 7, 2021.3 It’s also based on just six months’ worth of data from 44,047 people aged 16 and older. Half of them got the shots and half initially received a placebo.

However, in the second week of December 2020, Pfizer unblinded the control group and 93% of controls opted to get the real injection4 rather than remain in the control group for the remainder of the trial, which is slated to continue for another two years.

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla commented on the FDA’s approval, saying it “affirms the efficacy and safety profile of our vaccine,” and that he’s “hopeful this approval will help increase confidence in our vaccine …”5

According to STAT News,6 public health officials hope the approval “will persuade some people who remain hesitant about the vaccine to get the shot,” and will “make it easier for some public and private organizations to require vaccination.”

FDA Ditches Public Hearing, Circumventing Established Norms

Normally, the FDA will hold a formal hearing and allow for public and expert input before a drug is moved from emergency use authorization to full approval, but nothing is normal when it comes to COVID.

In this instance, no such hearing was held, and an FDA spokesperson called it unnecessary, because the public had been allowed to comment on all three COVID-19 jabs — Pfizer’s, Moderna’s and Johnson & Johnson’s — during a December 20, 2020, Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) meeting. According to many, that isn’t good enough.7 As reported by The BMJ:8

“Kim Witczak, a drug safety advocate who serves as a consumer representative on the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee, said the decision removed an important mechanism for scrutinizing the data.

‘These public meetings are imperative in building trust and confidence especially when the vaccines came to market at lightning speed under emergency use authorization,’ she said.

‘The public deserves a transparent process, especially as the call for boosters and mandates are rapidly increasing. These meetings offer a platform where questions can be raised, problems tackled, and data scrutinized in advance of an approval.’

Witczak is one of the more than 30 signatories of a citizen petition calling on the FDA to refrain from fully approving any COVID-19 vaccine this year to gather more data. She warned that without a meeting ‘we have no idea what the data looks like.’

‘It is already concerning that full approval is being based on 6 months’ worth of data despite the clinical trials designed for two years,’ she said. ‘There is no control group after Pfizer offered the product to placebo participants before the trials were completed.

Full approval of covid-19 vaccines must be done in an open public forum for all to see. It could set a precedent of lowered standards for future vaccine approvals.’”

Media Are Lying About Pfizer’s FDA Approval

Before we go any further, let’s clear up what the FDA actually approved, because they did not approve the Pfizer shot currently given. In the interview above, Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA vaccine platform, explains how we are being misled, yet again.

The injection that got the FDA approval is a Pfizer/BioNTech collaboration, to be sold under the brand name Comirnaty, and this injection is not currently available. Malone explains:

“The little trick that they’ve done here, is they’ve issued two separate letters for two separate vaccines. The Pfizer vaccine, which is what is currently available, is still under emergency use authorization and it still has the liability shield. Once again, the mainstream media have lied to you …

The product that’s licensed is the BioNTech product, which is substantially similar but not necessarily identical, called Comirnaty, and it’s not yet available. They haven’t started manufacturing it or labeling it. And that’s the one the liability waiver will no longer apply to.

So, the one that’s actually licensed is not yet available, and when it does become available it will no longer have the liability shield. In the interim, the one that does have the liability shield is the Pfizer product and that is what is currently available and it’s still under emergency use authorization.”

What this means is, if you want to get the licensed COVID shot, you have to wait. This also means that if employers demand that employees get vaccinated because there’s now a licensed COVID injection, employees should then demand to actually receive the FDA licensed Comirnaty,9 not the emergency use only10 Pfizer product that is currently being given.

FDA ‘Tricking Us Into Giving Up Our Right to Refuse’

Now, while the two products are not necessarily identical, the FDA in its infinite wisdom has decreed that the two can be used interchangeably, but their legal statuses, however, are not interchangeable. As explained by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Dr. Meryl Nass in a recent article:11

“There is a huge real-world difference between products approved under EUA compared with those the FDA has fully licensed. EUA products are experimental under U.S. law. Both the Nuremberg Code and federal regulations provide that no one can force a human being to participate in this experiment.

Under 21 U.S. Code Sec.360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III), ‘authorization for medical products for use in emergencies,’ it is unlawful to deny someone a job or an education because they refuse to be an experimental subject. Instead, potential recipients have an absolute right to refuse EUA vaccines. U.S. laws, however, permit employers and schools to require students and workers to take licensed vaccines.

EUA-approved COVID vaccines have an extraordinary liability shield under the 2005 Public Readiness and Preparedness Act. Vaccine manufacturers, distributors, providers and government planners are immune from liability.

The only way an injured party can sue is if he or she can prove willful misconduct, and if the U.S. government has also brought an enforcement action against the party for willful misconduct. No such lawsuit has ever succeeded.

The government has created an extremely stingy compensation program, the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program, to redress injuries from all EUA products …

At least for the moment, the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine has no liability shield. Vials of the branded product, which say “Comirnaty” on the label, are subject to the same product liability laws as other U.S. products …

Just as with Ford’s exploding Pinto, or Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, people injured by the Comirnaty vaccine could potentially sue for damages. And because adults injured by the vaccine will be able to show that the manufacturer knew of the problems with the product, jury awards could be astronomical.

Pfizer is therefore unlikely to allow any American to take a Comirnaty vaccine until it can somehow arrange immunity for this product.

Given this background, the FDA’s acknowledgement in its approval letter that there are insufficient stocks of the licensed Comirnaty, but an abundant supply of the EUA Pfizer BioNTech jab, exposes the “approval” as a cynical scheme to encourage businesses and schools to impose illegal jab mandates.

The FDA’s clear motivation is to enable Pfizer to quickly unload inventories of a vaccine that science and the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System have exposed as unreasonably dangerous, and that the Delta variant has rendered obsolete.

Americans, told that the Pfizer COVID vaccine is now licensed, will understandably assume COVID vaccine mandates are lawful. But only EUA-authorized vaccines, for which no one has any real liability, will be available during the next few weeks when many school mandate deadlines occur.

The FDA appears to be purposefully tricking American citizens into giving up their right to refuse an experimental product … Here’s what you need to know when somebody orders you to get the vaccine: Ask to see the vial. If it says ‘Comirnaty,’ it’s a licensed product.

If it says ‘Pfizer-BioNTech,’ it’s an experimental product, and under 21 U.S. Code 360bbb, you have the right to refuse. If it comes from Moderna or Johnson & Johnson (marketed as Janssen), you have the right to refuse.

The FDA is playing bait and switch with the American public — but we don’t have to play along. If it doesn’t say Comirnaty, you have not been offered an approved vaccine.”

Approval by Captured Agency Hardly Affirms Safety

While the notion of full approval might sway some fence-sitters, especially if they don’t understand that the licensed product is not what you get if you get a Pfizer shot right now, it’s unlikely to influence those who have kept an eye on the skyrocketing number of adverse event reports logged into the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).

As of August 13, 2021, VAERS had logged 595,620 adverse events following COVID injection, including 54,142 hospitalizations and 13,608 deaths.12 While these numbers are completely unheard of — with reported deaths from COVID-19 shots exceeding the reported death rate of more than 70 vaccines combined over the past 30 years — they may still be just the tip of the iceberg.

Previous investigations have shown VAERS reports account for a mere 1%13,14 to 10%15 of all vaccine-related injuries, which means the death toll from these jabs may be in the six-digits already.

The notion that a “vaccine” that has killed more people in nine months than all other vaccines combined in three decades is considered safe really stretches the bounds of credulity. It’s simply not believable, and to many simply reaffirms the suspicion that the FDA is a captured agency working for the benefit of Big Pharma rather than safeguarding the public from dangerous drugs.

As noted by a commenter on BMJ associate editor Peter Doshi’s article “Does the FDA Think These Data Justify the First Full Approval of a COVID-19 Vaccine?” republished by The Defender:16

“The Fraud and Death Administration has really outdone itself this time. Owned by pharma, serving pharma, to the extreme detriment to humanity. They deserve to be shuttered permanently, they are an organization of criminals.”

Risk of Heart Inflammation Acknowledged

The FDA didn’t go so far as to give the Pfizer shot a completely clean bill of health, however. As reported by STAT News:17

“The FDA’s prescribing information for the vaccine includes its associated risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, two types of heart inflammation that have appeared rarely among people who’ve received the mRNA vaccines, mostly within seven days after the second shot, health officials said. Men under 40 appear to be at higher risk than women and older men, with the highest observed risk in boys age 12 to 17.”

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, As of August 18, 2021, VAERS had received 1,339 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis in people under the age of 30 following COVID injection, with a majority of these cases being associated with the Pfizer shot.18

Pfizer’s new Comirnaty package insert19 also clearly states at the top of its first page under “Warnings and Precautions” that “postmarketing data demonstrate increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, particularly within seven days of the second dose.”

Then, under Section 5.2 of the insert, Pfizer has added an entire section explaining the details of those adverse effects, and directing readers to a CDC webpage20 that addresses those effects in adolescents and young adults.

Heart Inflammation Study Won’t End Until 2025

In its approval letter for Comirnaty,21 the FDA orders Pfizer/BioNTech to conduct research to investigate the risk of inflammation in and around the heart, as voluntary reporting mechanisms are insufficient:

“We have determined that an analysis of spontaneous postmarketing adverse events reported under section 505(k)(1) of the FDCA will not be sufficient to assess known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis.

Furthermore, the pharmacovigilance system that FDA is required to maintain under section 505(k)(3) of the FDCA is not sufficient to assess these serious risks.

Therefore, based on appropriate scientific data, we have determined that you are required to conduct the following studies: 4. Study C4591009, entitled ‘A Non-Interventional Post-Approval Safety Study of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine in the United States,’ to evaluate the occurrence of myocarditis and pericarditis following administration of COMIRNATY.”

The FDA accepted Pfizer’s suggested timetable for the post-approval study to evaluate incidence of heart and heart sack inflammation, which includes the submission of an interim report at the end of October 2023, a study completion date of June 30, 2025, and submission of a final report October 31, 2025.

Modern-Day Child Sacrifice?

The notion that the current Pfizer shot or the BioNTech product, Comirnaty, are “safe” is rather ludicrous in light of all this, and the idea that the FDA is even considering approving the shot for children as young as 1222 — and are running trials on babies — is completely incomprehensible. Even worse, Fauci is pushing for infant approval by the end of the year.23

The myocarditis study for Comirnaty (which may or may not be as dangerous as the current Pfizer shot) won’t be completed until four years from now, yet they see it fit to give this experimental injection to every last child in the United States? What are they thinking? Is it really wise to trade the risk of flu-like illness for heart damage? From the start of this pandemic, children have proven very resistant to SARS-CoV-2 infection and rarely ever suffer any significantly ill effects.

As reported by NPR,24 Pfizer’s youth trial, which includes children between the ages of 6 months and 11 years, doesn’t even test “to see whether the vaccine actually prevents children from getting sick.” Instead of assessing actual symptoms, the trial “will look at their blood to see if they are making the kinds of antibodies that have been shown to prevent disease.”

In other words, all they’re looking for is the antibody against the synthetic spike protein your body produces. But that antibody is not the best way to assess protection, as the protection is very narrow. Actual viruses contain several different proteins against which your body produces both antibodies and memory T cells when you’re infected naturally.

This is why natural immunity is far more robust and long-lasting, and why the claim that vaccine-induced protection is superior to natural immunity is false. In my view, experimenting on children and not even doing a comprehensive job of it is simply unconscionable.

Do Data Justify Full Approval of Pfizer’s COVID Jab?

In the morning of August 23, 2021, mere hours before the FDA announced its approval of the Pfizer shot, Doshi published a BMJ blog questioning whether available data could really support full approval. He wrote:25

“On 28 July 2021, Pfizer and BioNTech posted updated results for their ongoing phase 3 covid-19 vaccine trial. The preprint came almost a year to the day after the historical trial commenced, and nearly four months since the companies announced vaccine efficacy estimates ‘up to six months.’

But you won’t find 10 month follow-up data here. While the preprint is new, the results it contains aren’t particularly up to date. In fact, the paper is based on the same data cut-off date (13 March 2021) as the 1 April press release, and its topline efficacy result is identical: 91.3% … vaccine efficacy against symptomatic covid-19 through ‘up to six months of follow-up.’

The 20 page preprint matters because it represents the most detailed public account of the pivotal trial data Pfizer submitted in pursuit of the world’s first ‘full approval’ of a coronavirus vaccine from the Food and Drug Administration. It deserves careful scrutiny.”

Doshi points out that while Pfizer has touted a 95% efficacy rate, and even higher against severe disease, this refers to relative risk reduction, not absolute risk reduction, which is actually an insignificant 0.7%26 to 0.84%.27 Moreover, “measuring vaccine efficacy two months after dosing says little about just how long vaccine-induced immunity will last,” Doshi says.

6-Month Preprint Showed Evidence of Waning Immunity

Rapidly waning immunity is the proverbial elephant in the room, according to Doshi, who points to Israeli data showing Pfizer’s shot went from a 95% effectiveness at the outset, to 64% in early July 2021 and 39% by late July, when the Delta strain became predominant. “This is very low,” Doshi says, pointing out that the FDA’s expectation for any vaccine is an efficacy rate of at least 50%.

Waning efficacy has the potential to be far more than a minor inconvenience; it can dramatically change the risk-benefit calculus. ~ Peter Doshi

The FDA cannot claim it doesn’t know the protection offered is pathetically short, as Pfizer’s preprint, which contained six months’ worth of data, showed evidence of rapidly waning immunity as early as March 13, 2021.

By the fourth month into the trial, efficacy had dropped from 96% to 90%, and one month after that, it was down to 84%. Curiously, while Pfizer had this data in April 2021, they didn’t publish it until the end of July 2021. Still, that’s what the FDA is basing its decision on.

What’s more, this rapid drop in effectiveness could hardly be due to the emergence of the Delta variant, Doshi adds, because 77% of trial participants were in the U.S., where the Delta variant didn’t become established until months after the data cut-off date.

“Waning efficacy has the potential to be far more than a minor inconvenience; it can dramatically change the risk-benefit calculus,” Doshi writes.28 “And whatever its cause — intrinsic properties of the vaccine, the circulation of new variants, some combination of the two, or something else — the bottom line is that vaccines need to be effective.

Until new clinical trials demonstrate that boosters increase efficacy above 50%, without increasing serious adverse events, it is unclear whether the 2-dose series would even meet the FDA’s approval standard at six or nine months.”

There’s NO Control Group in This Mass Experiment

Making matters even worse, Pfizer, like all other COVID jab developers, went ahead and eliminated their control groups at the end of 2020. So, we’re figuratively flying blind, having nothing to compare the vaccinated treatment group against.

This is a recipe for disaster, as it effectively hides side effects. If large numbers of people suddenly start developing a health problem, it can simply be written off as a new normal and/or can be blamed on some other environmental factor. Doshi comments on how this decision impacts our ability to evaluate any data coming out of these trials:29

“Despite the reference to ‘six month safety and efficacy’ in the preprint’s title, the paper only reports on vaccine efficacy ‘up to six months,’ but not from six months.

This is not semantics, as it turns out only 7% of trial participants actually reached six months of blinded follow-up (‘8% of BNT162b2 recipients and 6% of placebo recipients had ≥6 months follow-up post-dose 2.’) …

This all happened because starting last December, Pfizer allowed all trial participants to be formally unblinded, and placebo recipients to get vaccinated. By 13 March 2021 (data cut-off), 93% of trial participants (41,128 of 44,060 …) were unblinded, officially entering ‘open-label followup’ …

So despite this preprint appearing a year after the trial began, it provides no data on vaccine efficacy past six months, which is the period Israel says vaccine efficacy has dropped to 39%.

It is hard to imagine that the <10% of trial participants who remained blinded at six months (which presumably further dwindled after 13 March 2021) could constitute a reliable or valid sample to produce further findings.”

With the approval of Comirnaty, a formal package insert30 has been released, and in section 6.1, they clearly state they’ve not had placebo participants since December 2020, not even among teenagers:31

“Section 6.1 — Upon issuance of the Emergency Use Authorization (December 11, 2020) for COMIRNATY, participants were unblinded to offer placebo participants COMIRNATY. Participants were unblinded in a phased manner over a period of months to offer placebo participants COMIRNATY.”

While a formal package insert now exists for Pfizer’s mRNA shot, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will not issue Vaccine Information Statements (VIS) for it, but will continue to use online fact sheets. (The use of online fact sheets is why all package inserts for the COVID shots have been completely blank.)

If You’re ‘Vaccinated’ You May Be High-Risk for COVID

As discussed in yesterday’s lead article (August 30, 2021), data are now mounting showing people over the age of 50 who are “fully vaccinated” actually make up the bulk of COVID-19 related hospitalizations and deaths in that age group. One possible explanation for this is that antibody dependent enhancement is afoot, which makes people more prone to serious illness rather than less.

To be on the safe side, I recommend considering yourself “high-risk” for severe COVID if you’ve received one or more shots, and implement known effective treatment at the first sign of a respiratory infection.

Options include the Zelenko protocol,32 the MATH+ protocols33 and nebulized hydrogen peroxide, as detailed in Dr. David Brownstein’s case paper34 and Dr. Thomas Levy’s free e-book, “Rapid Virus Recovery.” Whichever treatment protocol you use, make sure you begin treatment as soon as possible, ideally at first onset of symptoms.



Feds probe states banning school mask mandates


(Image by Marcos Cola from Pixabay)

The Education Department has opened civil rights investigations into five states that banned school mask mandates, charging the bans discriminate against children with disabilities or medical issues.

However, not a single law or executive order in those states prevents people from wearing masks inside schools, points out the website Legal Insurrection.

The deparment's Office of Civil Rights will investigate the bans on mask mandates in Iowa, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and Utah.

All five states are led by Republican governors.

Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona explained in a press release that the department "heard from parents from across the country – particularly parents of students with disabilities and with underlying medical conditions – about how state bans on universal indoor masking are putting their children at risk and preventing them from accessing in-person learning equally."

"It's simply unacceptable that state leaders are putting politics over the health and education of the students they took an oath to serve," he said. "The Department will fight to protect every student's right to access in-person learning safely and the rights of local educators to put in place policies that allow all students to return to the classroom full-time in-person safely this fall."

But Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt pointed out the law in his state doesn't prevent parents from voluntarily having their children wear masks or get vaccinated, reported Legal Insurrection writer Mary Chastain.

"The difference is, we're not going to mandate that somebody else has to send their 4-year-old to school with a mask or someone else has to get their 4-year-old vaccinated," Stitt said.

Likewise, the Iowa law simply states school districts cannot implement a law mandating masks. It does not say a child can't wear a mask at school.

In Tennessee, Gov. Bill Lee signed an executive order that allows parents to opt their child out of any mask mandate passed by school districts.

South Carolina has taken the same approach, with Gov. Henry McMaster arguing, "Personal responsibility is the answer, common sense is the answer, and we have an abundance of both in South Carolina."

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@wndnewscenter.org.


The post Feds probe states banning school mask mandates appeared first on WND.


Harvard epidemiologist: Major study demolishes case for vaccine passports


A COVID-19 vaccination record card (Video screenshot)

Harvard Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff argues that new research cofirming that natural immunity offers exponentially more protection than vaccines means vaccine passports are both unscientific and discriminatory.

The latest is an Israeli study finding vaccinated individuals were 27 times more likely to get a symptomatic COVID infection than those with natural immunity.

Kuldorff concludes that's a death blow to the vaccine passports required by New York City, France, the Canadian provinces of Quebec and British Columbia, and others, reported the Foundation for Economic Education.

"Prior COVID disease (many working class) provides better immunity than vaccines (many professionals), so vaccine mandates are not only scientific nonsense, they are also discriminatory and unethical," Kulldorff, a biostatistician and epidemiologist, wrote on Twitter.

In April, Kulldorf joined with Stanford professor of medicine Jay Bhattacharya in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, arguing vaccine passports would harm rather than benefit public health.

April WSJ op-ed with @MartinKulldorff held up well:
Vaccine passports are unjust and discriminatory. Most endorsing belong to the laptop class. Millions did essential jobs at their usual workplaces and became immune the hard way. https://t.co/iITY3LihbM

— Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) August 31, 2021

"The idea that everybody needs to be vaccinated is as scientifically baseless as the idea that nobody does," they wrote. "Covid vaccines are essential for older, high-risk people and their caretakers and advisable for many others. But those who’ve been infected are already immune."

They pointed out that the data shows the "young are at low risk, and children — for whom no vaccine has been approved anyway — are at far less risk of death than from the flu."

"If authorities mandate vaccination of those who don’t need it, the public will start questioning vaccines in general," they warned.

Last fall, as WND reported, Kulldorff, Bhattacharya and Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford launched their Great Barrington Declaration arguing mitigation should be focused on the vulnerable -- older people with more than two comorbidities -- while allowing the healthy to go about their business. The declaration states that as "infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection."

They emphasized that herd immunity should be the objective, contending it could be achieved in a relatively short amount of time.

COVID is not a "death sentence," Bhattacharya argued, alluding to survival rates calculated by the Centers for Disease Control of nearly 100% for those under 70 and nearly 95% for those who are older.

Among world's most vaccinated nation

Significantly, the Israeli immunity study was conducted in one of the most highly COVID-19-vaccinated countries in the world. The researchers analyzed the medical records of tens of thousands of Israelis between June 1 and Aug. 14, when the delta variant was dominant, focusing on infections, symptoms and hospitalizations.

In Israel, vaccinated individuals had 27 times higher risk of symptomatic COVID infection compared to those with natural immunity from prior COVID disease [95%CI:13-57, adjusted for time of vaccine/disease]. No COVID deaths in either group.https://t.co/hopImCD1D0

— Martin Kulldorff (@MartinKulldorff) August 25, 2021

FEE noted that Australia has floated the idea of making higher vaccination rates a condition of lifting its lockdown in jurisdictions. In the U.S., President Joe Biden is considering making interstate travel unlawful for the unvaccinated.

But another 15 studies back the Israeli study.

Moreover, CDC research shows that vaccinated individuals are still being infected and are spreading COVID, with as much of the virus in their throat and nasal passage as unvaccinated people.

"High viral loads suggest an increased risk of transmission and raised concern that, unlike with other variants, vaccinated people infected with delta can transmit the virus," CDC Rochelle Director Walensky noted after an oubreak of mostly vaccinated people in Massachusetts.

This week, the CDC said vaccine effectiveness in preventing hospitalizations has fallen from a high of 95% to as low as 75%.

Israel now has the highest current case rate in the entire world.

Oddly, Israel was also the first country to vaccinate the majority of their population and the first country to vaccinate 80% of adults. pic.twitter.com/xjJPaicQ82

— PLC (@Humble_Analysis) August 31, 2021

Israel has now administered booster doses to 25% of the population; their vaccine passport will no longer consider as vaccinated anyone who has let six months pass since their last injection.

This is not the behavior of a nation which has confidence in continuing efficacy. pic.twitter.com/9qeuaTzc5h

— PLC (@Humble_Analysis) August 31, 2021

FEE concludes: "Vaccine passports would be immoral and a massive government overreach even in the absence of these findings. There is simply no historical parallel for governments attempting to restrict the movements of healthy people over a respiratory virus in this manner."


In April, YouTube censored a video featuring Kulldorf, Bhattacharya and other health experts in an exchange hosted by Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis.

YouTube didn't like an exchange in which Kulldorff, responding to a question by DeSantis, said "children should not wear face masks, no. "

"They don’t need it for their own protection and they don’t need it for protecting other people, either," he said.

Bhattacharya said it is "developmentally inappropriate" for children to wear masks and it "just doesn’t help on the disease spread."

"I think it’s absolutely not the right thing to do," he said.

Bhattacharya said that "if we went back a year, a lot of experts would say that wearing masks for the general public is not evidence-based."

Later, Stanford's Scott Atlas said "there’s no scientific rationale or logic to have children wear masks in schools."

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@wndnewscenter.org.


The post Harvard epidemiologist: Major study demolishes case for vaccine passports appeared first on WND.


Poll: Most nurses worry about COVID vaccine's negative long-term effects


Somehow it's not a surprise.

In the midst of panic over the delta strain of COVID-19, some nurses losing their jobs over mandatory vaccines will aggravate the ongoing nursing shortage. But is that not predictable?

According to an American Nurses Association survey, most (88 percent) of nurses are going along with the program to be vaccinated, while 7 percent of some 4,900 nurses in the study are refusing to be vaccinated and 4 percent are undecided.

Significantly, nearly a third of nurses surveyed oppose employer vaccination mandates. Also, the 11 percent of nurses choosing not to be vaccinated or who are undecided is a substantial amount.

And behind the statistics are human costs.

“I am willing to lose my job ... I’ve been at it for over 19 years. I love it but I will not give in on this and it’s something I really feel firmly about,” nurse Tana Coffee told KERO-TV in Bakersfield, California.

Nina McDonald, a certified nurse assistant at a memory and substance abuse care center in Joliet, Illinois, told the Joliet Herald-News that mandatory vaccination requirements have shattered her dream of becoming a nurse. "Maybe it's a sign I should step back from health care," she said.

"I do anything to make sure my patients are cared for. But I will have the right to say what goes in my body," McDonald said.

This is not the unified picture of the health establishment that scolds us through billboards, television announcements and social media to get the vaccine. Get the vaccine. Get. The. Vaccine. "Please get vaccinated," Dr. Anthony Fauci says.

In some parts of the nation, hospital administrators report only half the nurses are vaccinated, according to Bloomberg. Administrators see a dilemma: Lose nurses who quit for refusing to be vaccinated or have nurses be absent if their lack of vaccination results in them getting COVID.

Alan Levine, the CEO of Ballad Health, which runs 21 hospitals in four states, doesn't require staff vaccinations. But if he did, he predicted he'd lose 15 percent of his nurses, which would total about 900. That's a bigger hit than the 130 staff members his hospitals quarantined one day in August, he told Bloomberg. He estimated half the front-line nursing staff is vaccinated.

And what happens if nurses leave in the midst of COVID health care demands? Tina Gordon, who heads the North Carolina Association of Nurses, told WNCN-TV the system is already stressed because nurses are worn out from fighting the pandemic.

Burned out nurses, coupled with staff losses due to vaccine mandates -- it's not pretty.

In the ANA survey, 84 percent of nurses not intending to get vaccinated said there "was not enough information about long-term effects of the vaccine." Apparently allowed in the survey to cite more than one reason, 77 percent of the nurses said they would decline the vaccine because of "not enough information about safety" and 71 percent distrusted how the vaccine was developed and tested.

Forty-four percent would be declining the vaccine because they don't think it's necessary. While that might not be a startling statistic, consider that these nurses are trained health care workers desperately needed in the nation's health care system.

Significantly, nearly a third of the 4,900 surveyed have master's degrees in nursing.

Not surprisingly, since large associations often sidle up to the establishment, the ANA announced support of vaccine mandates, saying nurses have an ethical duty to be vaccinated for COVID and such vaccinations are in line with the ANA's "longstanding position on immunizations, which emphasizes that effective protection of the public health mandates that all individuals receive immunizations against vaccine-preventable diseases."

Of course, as in so many discussions about COVID, there are no mentions of natural immunity, which is increasingly being viewed as being more effective than vaccination.

And vaccine mandates largely ignore reports of serious vaccine side effects and of vaccinated individuals getting COVID.

Dissent, of course, is not tolerated. In fact, the arguments in favor of COVID vaccines are so heavy-handed as to be comical.

At this point, personal disclosure is appropriate: Eight years ago, my wife lost her cherished position as a hospice nurse because she refused to take a flu shot. As a result, she became part of a Facebook group Nurses Against Mandatory Vaccines.

Conduct a Facebook search for the NAMV now, and it's a circus of promotion from the establishment about the wonders of vaccination.

At what point does Soviet-style messaging from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and from others become overkill?

And speaking of dissent, some nurses and others are taking to the streets in protest. The Epoch Times reported on a demonstration in California the weekend of Aug. 21 and KAIT-TV reported a Saturday demonstration against mandates at health care facilities in Jonesboro, Arkansas.

Connecticut's WFSB reported on health care workers and supporters demonstrating Saturday at Hartford Hospital.  "Please don't take my job where I was working overtime in the thick of the COVID units," nurse Peter Koniezka said. "To go from being a hero to being disposable and expendable, I think, is really cutting at the core of a lot of our nurses."

Left out of the discussions regarding vaccine mandates is what used to be considered the sacred relationship between individuals and their doctors. One would think that would be especially true for those who are more than patients, as health care workers are colleagues and sometimes even advisers to their physicians.

It's important for individuals to study various health and wellness issues, using tried research methods and consulting with trusted researchers and doctors. Then individuals -- not employers and not government agencies -- can make the best decisions for their health, their families and those around them.

People repeatedly say follow the science. But it seems these days that the science being driven to the top is political science.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Poll: Most nurses worry about COVID vaccine's negative long-term effects appeared first on WND.