Archive for the ‘Activism’ Category

Get Ready For a Big Marburg Scare, PSYOP 23

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/get-ready-for-a-big-marburg-scare

Get Ready For a Big Marburg Scare

Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex propagandists activated following reports from Equatorial Guinea & Tanzania.

MAY 2, 2023

By JOHN LEAKE

On April 6, 2023, the CDC issued a report “to increase awareness of the risk of imported cases in the United States” following Marburg Virus Disease Outbreaks in Equatorial Guinea and Tanzania.

“This is a problem – this unprecedented outbreak of the Marburg virus in two different countries,” said Paul Hunter, an epidemiologist at the University of East Anglia.

“There has been an acceleration in the number of Marburg virus outbreaks over recent years,” added Cesar Munoz-Fontela, a specialist in tropical infectious diseases at the Bernhard Nocht Institute for Tropical Medicine in Hamburg.

(See link for article)

_________________

https://www.2ndsmartestguyintheworld.com/p/psyop-23-seeding-marburg-virus

PSYOP-23: Seeding Marburg Virus As The Next Global “Pandemic”

2ND SMARTEST GUY IN THE WORLD
FEB 15, 2023

The Mockingbird MSM outlets have just been tapped on their proverbial shoulders to ramp up the “pandemic” outbreak fear mongering.

This substack has previously covered potential virus outbreak narratives ranging from Monkeypox to Ebola to Marburg:  https://www.2ndsmartestguyintheworld.com/p/lawyer-todd-callender-believes-that

With all of the various other psyops currently in play, and the growing backlash to all things DEATHVAX™ and the burgeoning rallying call of #DiedSuddenly, the usual One World Government nodes like the WHO, WEF, UN, et al. had placed the “pandemic” narrative on the back burner on simmer; that is, until fairly recently.

Marburg was originally detected in Equatorial Guinea after health authorities were notified of a patient with hemorrhagic symptoms back on Feb 7th.

Since that time, Marburg has been confirmed in the country where 9 have died, 27 are in ICU with hemorrhagic fever symptoms and 274 others are in quarantine and being tested.

The virus has “officially” spread to Cameroon where two cases have so far been confirmed by lab results from Feb 13th.  The two had no travel history to or from neighboring Equatorial Guinea.  42 people who came in contact with the two individuals are undergoing contact tracing.

Now it has “possibly” spread to Gabon as well where 5 possible cases are being investigated as lab results are still pending.  And 3 individuals in the Republic of Congo who recently visited Equatorial Guinea have expressed symptoms and are being investigated as lab tests are pending.

Marburg is HIGHLY CONTAGIOUS and death rates range from 24 to 88 percent depending on the care and treatment options available.   (See link for article)

________________

SUMMARY:

  • According to the WHO, at least nine have died.
  • According to the CDC, Marburg is a viral hemorrhagic fever.
  • It is from an animal-borne RNA virus believed to have been transmitted from African fruit bats.
  • It is highly contagious with a high mortality rate (24-88%) according to the WHO.
  • It is spread by direct contact with bodily fluids or infected surfaces.  It is NOT airborne and has been mostly confined to Africa.
  • Symptoms include: high fever, severe headache, chills, malaise, muscle aches/cramps, jaundice, nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea. A rash can appear on the chest, back or stomach 5 days after symptoms start.
  • While highly contagious, it is very rare.
  • With COVID waning, MSM may be about to go full fear-mode.
  • Do NOT comply.

Lyme/MSIDS patients live daily with a litany of similar and even worse symptoms but nobody cares.  Funny how the Eye of Mordor only sees what it wants to see.  Nobody lifted an eyebrow over the following:

Category:

Activism, Viruses

Patients Can’t Force Hospitals to Administer Ivermectin for COVID, Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/wisconsin-supreme-court-hospitals-ivermectin-covid

Patients Can’t Force Hospitals to Administer Ivermectin for COVID, Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules

The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Tuesday decision upheld a 2022 appeals court decision against Allen Gahl, who sued Aurora Health Care in October 2021, when doctors refused to use ivermectin to treat his uncle, John Zingsheim, for COVID-19.

wisconsin supreme court ivermectin feature

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled in a 6-1 decision that a hospital cannot be compelled by the courts to administer ivermectin to patients to treat COVID-19.

The decision upheld a 2022 appeals court decision against Allen Gahl, who sued Aurora Health Care in October 2021, when doctors refused to use ivermectin to treat his uncle, John Zingsheim, for COVID-19.

The appeals court ruled there was no legal basis by which a patient could compel a healthcare provider to administer a particular treatment or to credential an outside provider to do so.

Kim Mack Rosenberg, acting chief counsel for Children’s Health Defense told The Defender the narrow ruling has no bearing on the broader issues around ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.

“The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision is concerning but ultimately should be treated as the narrow ruling it is,” she said, adding:

“While replete with criticisms of ivermectin, the Supreme Court’s opinion did not ultimately rule on the efficacy or appropriateness of administering ivermectin to this patient.”

Ivermectin is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and is typically used to treat parasitic diseases. It is “extremely safe for use in humans,” and has general antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties.

Ivermectin has for decades been administered to hundreds of millions of people across the world, with very few side effects.

During the pandemic, doctors working on the front lines and 93 controlled trials — 73 of them peer-reviewed and 43 of them randomized controlled trials — showed the safe and effective use of ivermectin in treating COVID-19, according to internist and critical care physician Dr. Pierre Kory.

But the press, public health officials and regulatory agencies consistently denigrated the low-cost, generic ivermectin as a “horse dewormer” — even in reports about this ruling, stoking fear around its use. They also prevented people from accessing the drug.

Kory told The Defender he thought the details of this particular case are not the major issue in the Gahl v. Aurora ruling. Instead, he pointed to the broader problem of “the underlying systemic corruption around repurposed drugs” like ivermectin.

He said:

“I see it in a much broader picture, which is that ivermectin was attacked by a global disinformation campaign executed by the pharmaceutical industry.

“They’ve been doing this for years to other drugs, and this drug threatened a worldwide market for vaccines and other antivirals in a market that’s worth over $100 billion.

“So it [ivermectin] was a grave threat and they pulled out every disinformation tactic possible.”

The industry and the press instead favored treatment with drugs such as Gilead’s remdesivir (brand name Trodelvy), which failed to demonstrate efficacy in clinical trials and has been shown to cause organ damage, and Paxlovid, which is associated with rebound infections.

Gilead made $5.6 billion in revenue in 2021, and $6.9 billion in 2022 from remdesivir. Paxlovid, launched in December 2021, produced $18.9 billion in profits for Pfizer in 2022.

The “disinformation campaign” against ivermectin creates cases like Zingsheim’s, Kory said. “Everything is unfortunate because none of it is based in fact.”

Kory added:

“So these doctors that refuse to give it, it’s because they’ve been misled to think that ivermectin is not effective.

“The judges who don’t want to mandate a dying patient to get it, it’s because they’re not aware that it’s effective …

“This is a direct result of the corruption of science.”

Dr. Paul E. Marik, founding member of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) and former chief of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School, told The Defender that the battle for access to effective treatment needs to be waged at the legislative level.

He said:

“The court’s decision this week is greatly disappointing. It is unfortunate that the case was needed in the first place, as there was no medical reason for the hospital to deny Mr. Zingsheim access to ivermectin.

“The law needs to change. Denying access to treatment should not be protected by the law.

“I am not sure the laws will change through suing hospitals. More states should follow the example of the Ohio State Legislature that is considering a bill that will protect patients’ access to repurposed medications like ivermectin.”

Patients in critical condition ‘should have access to all possible treatments’

In October 2021, Zingsheim was admitted to a hospital in the Aurora Health Care system in Wisconsin due to complications from COVID-19. He was placed on a treatment protocol that included a steroid, baricitinib and Solu-Medrol.

He declined remdesivir, according to appeals court documents.

He was eventually intubated and placed on a ventilator.

Gahl, who had power of attorney on behalf of his uncle, demanded Zingsheim be taken off the hospital’s medication protocol and requested he be treated with ivermectin.

The hospital refused.

Gahl obtained a prescription for ivermectin for his uncle from a Wisconsin physician not associated with the Aurora Health Care system.

Aurora doctors refused to administer the ivermectin, saying that it would be “below the standard of care” for COVID-19 patients, the appeals court opinion states.

Gahl sued the hospital in the Waukesha County Circuit Courts, which ultimately ordered the hospital to grant emergency privileges to an outside physician to administer the ivermectin treatment.

The hospital appealed the court’s decision to the Wisconsin Court of Appeals District II, which reversed the lower court’s ruling, ruling the lower court did not have the authority to compel the hospital to allow the use of ivermectin.

Gahl’s attorneys then submitted an emergency petition to bypass the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court denied the petition on October 25, 2021.

Zingsheim later was secretly administered ivermectin. He eventually recovered.

The Amos Center for Justice & Liberty, which represented Gahl, filed a petition for a review of the Supreme Court decision, which the Wisconsin Supreme Court granted in September.

Rosenberg told The Defender the lower court’s order didn’t actually compel the hospital to administer ivermectin. She said:

“The lower court’s [Circuit Court’s] order merely created a process by which a doctor could come into the facility to administer the potentially life-saving treatment to an extremely ill patient.

“In finding that the lower court’s injunction was not properly supported, the Supreme Court narrowly held that the lower court did not adequately analyze whether the plaintiff (the nephew of the patient) had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of his claims, which is one of the required elements to support injunctive relief.”

The FLCCC and the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons submitted amicus briefs to the Supreme Court in support of the plaintiff’s arguments.

Commenting on the case and their amicus brief on the FLCCC website, Marik said:

“The FLCCC filed this brief to support Mr. Gahl’s case as we believe that patients, especially those in critical condition, should have access to all possible treatments.

“There was no medical reason for the hospital to deny Mr. Zingsheim access to ivermectin.”

The AAPS similarly told the court:

“AAPS has a strong interest in ensuring that patients have timely access to the medications they need, as prescribed by physicians, without interference by hospitals or any other corporate entity.”

The American Medical Association filed a brief asking the court to uphold the hospital’s ability to obstruct a patient’s access to such care, claiming that there is “no credible evidence that ivermectin effectively treats COVID-19, and ample evidence it does not.”

Kory said a major part of the problem is that doctors are misinformed by such institutions. “They [doctors] really believe what they’re told and what they read,” he said. “They trust in those journals and they trust in their agencies.”

He added:

“The physicians were, I would say, manipulated, by manipulating the evidence based around ivermectin, which leaves these doctors thinking it doesn’t work.

“And they believe the media, they believe the propaganda and they believe the journals.

“A well-known fact said by other experts that have studied science, is that the average doctor has no idea how captured those journals are. They have a little idea of how corrupted the science is in high-impact medical journals.

“And to me, that’s kind of the big thought in this case: in a sea of censorship and propaganda people are gonna do strange things and people are gonna get hurt.”

Kory said there were six trials published in high-impact medical journals that found ivermectin didn’t work. They were done, he said by “heavily pharmaceutical industry-conflicted investigators,” yet they are the only ones that get media attention, while the rest of the nearly 90 trials that found it worked are ignored.

He also pointed out that every media article makes the same false claims — that all the evidence supporting ivermectin is from low-quality, small trials or fraudulent trials and that the National Institutes of Health and FDA have not approved it for COVID-19.

“You see the control that the journals and the agencies have over what we use. And when they capture the journals and capture the agencies, you’re gonna get guidance that serves the pharmaceutical industry.”

Wisconsin one of dozens of similar cases

The Wisconsin lawsuit is one of dozens that have been filed across the country seeking to compel hospitals to administer ivermectin for COVID-19, many in 2021.

In one lawsuit filed in June of last year, Drs. Robert L. Apter, Mary Talley Bowden and Marik sued the FDA for launching what they alleged was a “crusade” against ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19 that “unlawfully interfered” with the doctors’ ability to practice medicine.

They argued the FDA acted outside of its authority by directing the public, including health professionals and patients, to not use ivermectin — even though the drug is fully approved by the FDA for human use, The Defender reported.

In December, a federal judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas dismissed the case, ruling that the government had “sovereign immunity” and can only be sued with its consent.

The doctors plan to appeal.

In many of the cases, the families obtained prescriptions for ivermectin, but hospitals refused to administer it to their loved ones, who were often on ventilators and facing death.

Kory made a final point:

“When someone is dying on a ventilator, the risk-benefits of medicines changes because they’re dying on a ventilator.

“So to try something that potentially might help — and almost all the studies, even the corrupted studies all showed benefits, they just weren’t statistically significant — it was just a shame they weren’t willing to try a medicine that had benefits, even if maybe not proven to the extent that they wanted.

“But none of the studies showed any adverse outcomes with ivermectin.”

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

For more:

Category:

Activism, Treatment, Viruses

How Lyme, Mast Cell, and MCS Are Related

https://rawlsmd.com/health-articles/how-are-lyme-mast-cell-and-multiple-chemical-sensitivities-related

How Are Lyme, Mast Cell, and Multiple Chemical Sensitivities Related? | RawlsMD

How Are Lyme, Mast Cell, and Multiple Chemical Sensitivities Related?

by Dr. Bill Rawls
Posted 3/15/23

Cellular stress and disruptions of immune system functions are chief instigators of overlapping conditions like mast cell activation syndrome and chemical sensitivities. Here’s how they’re all related to Lyme disease. Read more about cellular stress and immune system dysfunction here.

Video Transcript

Question: How are Lyme, mast cell, and multiple chemical sensitivities related?

Jenny Buttaccio: Anna asks, what are your thoughts about Lyme accompanied with severe multiple chemical sensitivities and mast cell activation?

Dr. Rawls: Yeah, you know, that’s what we do in conventional medicine is we divide it up into diagnoses and compartmentalize everything. And to me, chronic illness is just all a variation on the same thing.

It’s all related to distressed cells in the body. It all has an underlying microbe component. What chronic illness is, is reactivation of microbes. We have different illnesses because we get different microbes, and they affect different cells in the body. So that causes a variety of different illnesses because there are thousands of microbes and hundreds of different cell types, different combinations, different diseases.

So when you look at how these reactivated, or ongoing infections with microbes, affect the immune system, you know, it’s a battle, it’s a tug-of-war. So the immune system is trying to do its best to eradicate this really out of control situation. So it’s suppressing the microbes, but the microbes are actually infecting white blood cells and manipulating the cytokines, the chemical messengers coming from those cells to manipulate the immune system.

And they do it in different ways. So it depends on what type of white blood cell they’ve infected, what type of microbe is active. Viruses do this, bacteria do this, protozoa do this. So we know this is happening. So what they’re doing is manipulating the immune system to reduce the sensitivity or the ability of the immune system to take out microbes in cells that have been infected with microbes to shift it toward doing other things, like being hypoallergenic, like mast cell activation syndrome or other kinds of things.

So it’s this total disruption of immune system functions that causes it to be under-activated in some ways and over-activated in other ways. So it’s part and parcel. Now, because everybody gets different microbes. We have different genes, different cells are affected and different parts of the immune system are affected. It can happen in different ways, in different people. Fundamentally, it’s all the same stuff, though.

Dr. Rawls is a physician who overcame Lyme disease through natural herbal therapy. You can learn more about Lyme disease in Dr. Rawls’ new best selling book, Unlocking Lyme.
You can also learn about Dr. Rawls’ personal journey in overcoming Lyme disease and fibromyalgia in his popular blog post, My Chronic Lyme Journey.  Learn About Dr. Rawls’ Holistic Herbal Protocol »

For more:

Category:

Activism, Lyme, Mast Cell Activation Syndrome (MCAS)

Study: Bait Boxes and Met52 Not Effective in Controlling Tick Populations

https://danielcameronmd.com/tick-control-methods-not-effective-residential-neighborhoods/

TICK CONTROL METHODS NOT EFFECTIVE IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS

Mouse with tick embedded on shrub branch.

Controlling tick populations can help reduce the likelihood of individuals being bitten by an infected tick and developing a tick-borne illness, such as Lyme disease. Multiple types of tick control methods have been employed but with varying degrees of success. This study explores the effectiveness of bait boxes and the biopesticide spray Met52 in reducing tick abundance and tick encounters with humans.

By 

In their study, “Impacts Over Time of Neighborhood-Scale Interventions to Control Ticks and Tick-Borne Disease Incidence,” Ostfeld and colleagues examined the effectiveness of tick control methods in 24 residential neighborhoods endemic for Lyme disease in New York.¹

The study, conducted over several years, assessed the impact of tick control system (TCS) bait boxes and Met52 spray on reducing tick abundance and tick encounters with people and outdoor pets. And whether these interventions led to a decrease in reported cases of tick-borne diseases.

“Rapid increases in incidence rates and geographic ranges of tick-borne diseases have stimulated efforts to reduce human exposure.”

The authors examined two interventions:

TCS Bait Boxes

TCS bait boxes attract small animals to a food source inside an enclosed device and apply the tick-killing chemical, fipronil. (Fipronil is lethal to ticks but harmless to mammals.)

Met52 Spray

Met52 spray is a biopesticide, which consists of spores of the F52 strain of the fungus Metarhizium brunneum. The solution, mixed with water, is sprayed on the ground and low-lying vegetation.

Impact varies with type of tick control intervention

“By killing ticks attached to small mammals, TCS bait boxes are expected to affect the abundance of host-seeking (questing) ticks the following year,” the authors explain.

Whereas, “Met52 targets host-seeking ticks, with impacts expected within days to weeks after deployment.”

Unfortunately, interventions were unable to control tick populations in 24 residential neighborhoods in New York over a 4-to-5-year period.

“… the lack of association between reduced abundance of host-seeking nymphal blacklegged ticks in residential areas receiving acaricidal treatments and the incidence of tick-borne diseases in those areas … suggests that tick control for disease reduction needs new approaches.”

STUDY FINDINGS:

  • The study found that in neighborhoods with active bait boxes, questing blacklegged ticks and ticks attached to small mammals were reduced by approximately 50%.
  • These interventions “significantly reduced owner-reported cases of tick-borne diseases in outdoor pets,” the authors point out.
  • However, “neither intervention (nor both combined) was associated with reductions in either human encounters with ticks or self-reported cases of tick-borne disease.”
  • “In neighborhoods with active TCS bait boxes, populations of blacklegged ticks (Ixodes scapularis) were not reduced over time in any of the three habitat types tested (forest, lawn, shrub/garden).”
  • “There was no significant effect of Met52 on tick abundance overall…”
Related Articles:

Tick prevention for humans vary between socio-economic levels

How to protect yourself from ticks with permethrin-treated clothing

Preventing tick bites on a child proves challenging

References:
  1. Ostfeld RS, Mowry S, Bremer W, et al. Impacts Over Time of Neighborhood-Scale Interventions to Control Ticks and Tick-Borne Disease Incidence. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. Mar 2023;23(3):89-105. doi:10.1089/vbz.2022.0094

For more:

Category:

Activism, Prevention, research, Ticks

U.S. and UK Secretly Agreed to Hide Vaccine Reactions

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/us-uk-secretly-hide-vaccine-reactions

U.S. and UK Secretly Agreed to Hide Vaccine Reactions

In the days leading up to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccin, U.S. and U.K. health officials entered into a “mutual confidentiality agreement” to keep vaccine adverse events under wraps.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website.

pfizer us uk covid vaccine secret feature

Story at a glance:

  • U.S. and U.K. health officials discussed “anaphylactoid reactions” due to COVID-19 shots and emphasized their “mutual confidentiality agreement” regarding the topic.
  • The news was revealed in 57 pages of heavily redacted U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) records via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.
  • A government email exchange from May 14, 2021, also discusses concerns about administering COVID-19 shots along with other vaccines during pregnancy
  • Regulatory filings show Pfizer knew of its shots’ waning effectiveness in April 2021 but didn’t publicly acknowledge it until late July 2021.
  • Preclinical studies for Pfizer’s COVID-19 shots also warned of rhabdomyolysis, which is the breakdown of skeletal muscles, but the trial reported it was “completed with no safety concerns.”

In the days leading up to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval of Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 shot, an agreement was made to keep serious adverse reactions under wraps.

U.S. and U.K. health officials discussed “anaphylactoid reactions” due to COVID-19 shots and emphasized their “mutual confidentiality agreement” regarding the topic.

The news was revealed by Judicial Watch, which obtained 57 pages of heavily redacted HHS records via a FOIA lawsuit.

Initially, Judicial Watch submitted a FOIA request in August 2021 that specifically asked for:

“All emails sent to and from members of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee regarding adverse events, deaths and/or injuries caused by investigatory vaccines for the prevention or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 and/or COVID-19 currently produced by Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and/or Johnson & Johnson.”

The request was ignored, prompting the lawsuit that ultimately revealed the confidentiality agreement between U.S. and U.K. regulators.

“Why are we engaged in a secret deal to keep secret information about adverse events related to the vaccines?” Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton asked. “I just think it’s troubling. The documents speak for themselves.”

U.S. and UK officials make pact to keep safety issues quiet

The pact was revealed in a series of email exchanges from December 2020. Initiated by Jonathan Mogford, policy director of the U.K.’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, and sent to FDA commissioner Janet Woodcock and Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research.

Judicial Watch reported:

“As background, Mogford includes information on ‘two cases of anaphylactoid reactions in individuals with a strong past history of allergic reactions.’

“Marks replies to Mogford: ‘It would be very helpful if our Office of Vaccines could receive additional details [redacted] from MHRA [UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency] under the terms of our mutual confidentiality agreement.’

“Mogford later replies: ‘Attached are [redacted] hope that’s helpful in the meantime. If I can just remind — information shared under our confidentiality agreement.’”

An email exchange from May 14, 2021, also discusses concerns about administering COVID-19 shots along with other vaccines during pregnancy.

According to Judicial Watch:

“The CDC’s [U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] Dr. Amanda Cohn emailed Office of Vaccines Research and Review Director Marion Gruber and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks with the subject line ‘Coadministration of COVID-19 Vaccines with Other Vaccines During Pregnancy.’

“Gruber writes: ‘I am fine with this language.’

“Marks then responds to Cohn and her CDC colleague, Sarah Mbaeyi: ‘I can live with this too. Please let me know if you want to connect about the adverse event issue later today. Seems like work is still ongoing, but let me know. Thanks.’

“Cohn replies: ‘We have a meeting with Rochelle [presumably CDC Director Rochelle Walensky] at 3:30 about if we should say anything or wait until we have more definitive information. I will let you know where we land. I’m not sure there is a right answer.’”

“It again took a lawsuit for the Biden administration to hand over, albeit heavily redacted, information regarding the safety of the COVID vaccines that the public has every right to know,” Fitton said in a news release.

“This disturbing batch of new documents have uncovered a secret confidentiality agreement tied to COVID vaccine safety issues and emails that raise new questions about the vaccines and pregnancy.”

Pfizer hid data on lack of effectiveness

After initially claiming in late 2020 that its COVID-19 shots were 95% effective, Pfizer’s COVID-19 shots turned out to have rapidly waning protection of just 39%.

That figure was reported in July 2021 by the Israeli Ministry of Health. Pfizer echoed the “declining trend in vaccine efficacy” in late July 2021, but regulatory filings from April 2021 show Pfizer knew of the shots’ failures months earlier.

“It’s clear from the documents that these analyses were almost 4 months old by the time they became public,” Peter Doshi, associate professor at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, told Maryanne Demasi, Ph.D., a former medical scientist with the University of Adelaide and former reporter for ABC News in Australia.

“It’s disappointing that neither Pfizer nor regulators, disclosed these data until it was too obvious to ignore new outbreaks in Israel and Massachusetts, which made it clear that vaccine performance was not holding up,” he said.

Even Pfizer’s six-month phase III trial data, released April 1, 2021, stayed silent on the shots’ waning efficacy.

And, at that time, health officials were still claiming that the shot would stop COVID-19 transmission. In May 2021, Dr. Anthony Fauci stated “When you get vaccinated, you not only protect your own health … you become a dead end to the virus.”

As Doshi explained:

“Publicly disclosing that efficacy waned so soon after authorization might have undermined the credibility of authorities, who’d been projecting great confidence about the vaccines’ ability to end the pandemic.”

But instead of transparency and supporting informed consent so Americans could make their own choice about the shots with all the data, Demasi reported:

“Within weeks of Pfizer publishing its data on waning efficacy, President Biden ordered all federal workers (and employees of contractors) to get vaccinated within 75 days, otherwise they’d face punishment or have their employment terminated.”

Shots’ effects on brain known since 2020

mRNA COVID-19 shots teach your cells to produce a protein, or piece of protein, that triggers an immune response, including the production of antibodies.

However, because natural mRNA is easily broken down, this means the experimental gene therapy needs a special delivery system to make it to the body’s cells.

The shots use lipid nanoparticles that contain polyethylene glycol (PEG) for this purpose. The mRNA is wrapped in lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) that carry it to your cells, and the LNPs are “PEGylated” — that is, chemically attached to PEG molecules to increase stability.

Usually, if you were to inject RNA into your body, enzymes would immediately break it apart, but the COVID-19 shots are specifically designed so that doesn’t happen. While it was originally advertised that COVID-19 shots “stay in the arm,” Pfizer knew since at least November 2020 that the shots may influence the brain.

Pfizer contracted Acuitas Therapeutics to conduct animal studies, which found LNPs from COVID-19 shots rapidly traveled to other areas, including the brain, eyes, heart, ovaries and other organs.

Naturopath Colleen Huber explained:

“Now that we have LNPs with their mRNA payload delivered past the BBB and into the brain, what do they do once they arrive to the fluid surrounding neurons? The rest is an easy journey for LNPs. Neurons take up LNPs — and they do so very efficiently, at 100 percent uptake, by means of apolipoprotein E, and usually without immune reaction at that point.

“Apolipoprotein E is abundant in the brain — it is produced by astrocytes. The mechanism of uptake is endocytosis, in which the membrane of the neuron engulfs or swallows the approaching LNP. That has been observed since at least 2013. In this way, the Trojan Horse content of the LNP is delivered, because it was contained in a benign-seeming — to the neuronal membrane — package.”

A number of neurological injuries have been reported following COVID-19 shots, including ischemic stroke, Bell’s palsy, tinnitus and Guillain-Barré syndrome.

As for one mechanism of brain injury, Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, believes genetic modifications introduced by COVID-19 shots may induce immune cells to release large quantities of exosomes into circulation.

Exosomes are extracellular vesicles that contain protein, DNA, RNA and other constituents, and may contain mRNA along with spike protein.

According to Seneff and colleagues:

“We present the evidence that vaccination, unlike natural infection, induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signaling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health.

“We explain the mechanism by which immune cells release into the circulation large quantities of exosomes containing spike protein along with critical microRNAs that induce a signaling response in recipient cells at distant sites.

“We also identify potential profound disturbances in regulatory control of protein synthesis and cancer surveillance. These disturbances are shown to have a potentially direct causal link to neurodegenerative disease, myocarditis, immune thrombocytopenia, Bell’s palsy, liver disease, impaired adaptive immunity, increased tumorigenesis, and DNA damage.”

COVID shots melting muscles

Preclinical studies for Pfizer’s COVID-19 shots also warned of rhabdomyolysis, which is the breakdown of skeletal muscles. Writing in DailyClout, Dr. Robert Chandler reported:

“The Pfizer documents contain results from a 17-day study of repeat dose injections of BNT162b2 [Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot] in Wistar Han rats. Myonecrosis and inflammation were identified histopathologically. The appearance was described as ‘Jellied’ (Table 3), which is what rhabdomyolysis might look like after 17 days.”

Despite this and other concerning findings, including fibrosis, inflammation and myofiber degeneration present at the injection site, Chandler explains:

“How was this data presented at the December 10, 2020, Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) meeting regarding the Emergency Use Authorization for BNT162b2? … Completed with no safety concerns.”

A review of data from the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) also revealed a dramatic increase in reports of rhabdomyolysis following the rollout of COVID-19 shots.

In fact, Chandler reveals:

“79% of all reported rhabdomyolysis cases occurred in the two complete years (2021 and 2022) after the EUA [Emergency Use Authorization] was approved in December of 2020 …

“A dramatic, 37-fold increase in the annual rate of cases of rhabdomyolysis occurred after mass inoculation with Spike Producing Genetic Therapy Products began in December 2020.

“COVID-19 (2020) did not cause an increase in rhabdomyolysis reporting in VAERS compared with years 2001-2020.”

A number of case reports have since been published of “COVID-19 mRNA vaccination-induced rhabdomyolysis,” including in a 16-year-old male two days after his first dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot and a 21-year-old male one day after his first COVID-19 shot.

The findings that Pfizer and government officials were aware of serious adverse events and waning effectiveness of COVID-19 shots but neglected to share this with the public will only further undermine trust in public health authorities.

As Martin Kulldorff — co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, which scientifically critiqued the effects of prolonged lockdowns in response to COVID-19 — told Demasi:

“In public health, it is important to be honest with the public. Pfizer should have reported the declining vaccine efficacy in its April 1, 2021, press release, which they clearly knew about at the time.”

Likewise with the numerous reports of adverse events linked to the shots, which have now been linked to an explosion of excess deaths.

Originally published by Mercola.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses