**UPDATE April, 2023**

This article also points out how medical doctors were bribed by insurance companies to push the experimental, fast-tracked, gene-therapy injections.  The deck has been perfectly stacked from the beginning against an unsuspecting public.  


If Public Health Cared About Public Health and Research Ethics…

You would not have seen these during the push for mass vaccination.


It only takes a little searching on Pubmed or Google to find factors associated with severe COVID-19.

Remember when the master wizards of Public Health decided to appeal to Americans to vaccinate for the “reward” of


That’s former Mayor de Blasio, who evidently will now be teaching “Public Health” at Harvard University.

Or, remember when they tried to incentivize Americans to vaccinate with doughnuts?

And beer?

Michigan, California and few other states encouraged gambling as an incentive to vaccinate:

How about some participation in a nice, healthy sex trade practice (hey, they’re masked at least!)?

No, seriously, Toronto actually did this.

Even Larry Flynt got into the craze… want to get a vaccine at his joint?

These incentives were the brainchild of Public Health and the Biden Administration:

Here at Popular Rationalism, we prefer to stick with the Science:

“Several hundred studies provide powerful evidence that body mass index (BMI) is a strong linear risk factor for severe COVID-19 outcomes, with recent studies suggesting ~5-10% higher risk for COVID-19 hospitalisation per every kg/m2 higher BMI.”

The review says nothing about the effects of lap dances or gambling on the risk of severe COVID-19.

However, it’s worth pointing out that incentives for research are unethical.

See HHS’s

Attachment A – Addressing Ethical Concerns Offers of Payment to Research Participants

“OHRP FAQs  currently define undue influence as potentially occurring ‘through an offer of an excessive or inappropriate reward or other overture in order to obtain compliance.’”

The vaccines only had Emergency Use Authorization. Everyone who gave such incentives is guilty of “offering an excessive or inappropriate reward or other overture” to get people to comply with participation in human subjects research.

And never, ever forget the cruelty that took place under the guise of ‘public health’.



I must also add the nonstop ads pushed by celebrities, politicians, film/cartoons, etc. as well as the fact our own government (HHS) coughed up $1 BILLION to promote the shots.


Is Paul Offit a Sitting Duck for ADE?

Read his position on why he won’t be taking the bivalent “booster”. CDC’s data suggests he might be in a group of people who could be in trouble. Let’s hope not.

According to MedPage Today, Dr. Paul Offit of Children’s Hospital in Philadelphia, a well-known vaccine zealot and well-known apologist for aluminum toxicity against evidence, has decided that he’s had enough of COVID-19 vaccines. He won’t be getting another booster or the updated, bivalent vaccine. Yes, you read that right.

Medpage Today quotes him thusly:

“I have received three doses of the ancestral strain vaccine and contracted a mild case of COVID in May. As a result, all the evidence suggests that I have high frequencies of virus-specific memory B and T cells, which should protect me against severe disease this winter.”

Offit continues:

“I do not plan to get another dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines until it is clear that people who have been primed, boosted, and naturally infected are nonetheless at high risk of serious illness when encountering the virus.

Here’s the question:

How do you tell the difference between vaccine failure and disease enhancement, as in antibody-dependent enhancement? Answer: with vaccine failure, you get asymptomatic disease.

With ADE, you get severe illness.

When Offit sees the data from CDC, he is going to find that people who have been primed and boosted may be susceptible to increased risk of hospitalization if they are infected with newer variants, due to ADE.

According to CDC, as of Sep. 07, 108,953,688 Americans had received a booster, or 48.6 percent of the country’s fully vaccinated population.

Also according to CDC, 75.5% of adult Americans have been “fully vaccinated”.

According to math, 48.6%  of 75.5% = 36.69% are, at this time, boosted

The reports that 44% of those hospitalized were boosted (e.g., WebMd citing CDC data) does not bode well for the booster program, and here’s why:

At COVID-19 vaccine program effectiveness = 0, the rate would be 36.7% of the hospitalized were boosted. But instead, it’s 44%. HIGHER than expected.

This implies negative effectiveness.

This is the full report with the concerning results that support negative effectiveness of boosting.

I’m not sure yet how those who also, like Offit, had a SARS-CoV-2 infection will fare, and will of course I hope everyone, injected or not, does well this winter, I suspect many will not. Perhaps (and I hope) Offit’s immunity from the SARS-CoV-2 infection will have provided him with diverse B- and T-cells to antigens other than the spike protein.

It seems likely given Omicron’s R0 (ease of spread) that nearly everyone who has been vaccinated likely by now has also had an infection. This “silent boosting” in the vaccinated via natural infection was reported years ago by Japanese medical researchers in Japan.

Here’s Dr. Vinay Prasad discussing some of the problem. He does a good job calling out a doctor (Robert Califf, Commissioner of Food and Drugs of the FDA) for claiming on Twitter that the bivalent vaccine will protect people with zero data from humans in the second sentence of Califf’s tweet.

But Prasad does not seem to recognize the implications of CDC’s data showing negative effectiveness; he thinks Califf’s first sentence is a-ok. And he reports Offit’s refusal of the bivalent booster near the end, too, providing 11 reasons why an annual COVID-19 “booster” is not like an annual flu shot.

NB: I need everyone on Twitter to Tweet this with #BringBackJack. Let Califf and Twitter know that by shutting down my account, they have activated the masses.

NB2: The artwork used in this Substack article involves a doctor duck image. In no way is this meant to imply anything about Dr. Offit other than the potential self-imposed risk of ADE implied by the title of this article.




Prasad states that the first reason the COVID shot is not like the flu vaccine is due to the COVID shot being more reactogenic or causes more reactions/adverse effects. While this statement isn’t false, it by omission makes you believe the flu vaccine doesn’t cause negative reactions. That would be a false belief.

I have sat across the table from twenty year old Lyme/MSIDS patients who were doing fine, had their infections under control, got the flu vaccine and then everything went to hell in a hand basket.

Vaccines can serve as triggers to reactivate latent infections. Patients NEED to know this and contemplate the risk. But, due to politics, few doctors are honest enough to truly give informed consent.

But, you are now duly warned.

%d bloggers like this: