Archive for the ‘Viruses’ Category

Pfizer Asks Court to Dismiss Whistleblower Lawsuit Because Government Was Aware of Fraud

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/pfizer-whistleblower-lawsuit-fraud/

Pfizer Asks Court to Dismiss Whistleblower Lawsuit Because Government Was Aware of Fraud

In an interview with The Defender, the lawyer representing whistleblower Brook Jackson said Pfizer is arguing the court should dismiss Jackson’s lawsuit alleging fraud in Pfizer’s COVID-19 clinical trials because the U.S. government knew about the wrongdoings but continued to do business with the vaccine maker.

Pfizer Asks Court to Dismiss Whistleblower Lawsuit

A lawsuit filed by whistleblower Brook Jackson alleging Pfizer and two of its contractors manipulated data and committed other acts of fraud during Pfizer’s COVID-19 clinical trials is paused following a motion by the defendants to dismiss the case.

In an interview with The Defender, Jackson’s lawyer said Pfizer argued the lawsuit, which was filed under the False Claims Act, should be dismissed because the U.S. government knew of the wrongdoings in the clinical trials but continued to do business with the vaccine maker.

Under the False Claims Act, whistleblowers can be rewarded for confidentially disclosing fraud that results in a financial loss to the federal government.

However, a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded the scope of a legal principle known as “materiality” resulted in a series of federal court decisions in which fraud cases brought under the False Claims Act were dismissed.

As interpreted by the Supreme Court, if the government continued paying a contractor despite the contractor’s fraudulent activity, the fraud was not considered “material” to the contract.

Pfizer is a federal contractor because it signed multiple contracts with the U.S. government to provide COVID-19 vaccines and Paxlovid, a pill used to treat the virus.

“Pfizer claims they can get away with fraud as long as the government would write them a check despite knowing about the fraud,” attorney Robert Barnes said.

The other two defendants in the case are Ventavia Research Group, which conducted vaccine trials on behalf of Pfizer, and ICON PLC, also a Pfizer contractor.

In an attempt to strengthen the False Claims Act’s anti-retaliation provisions and install new safeguards against industry-level blacklisting of whistleblowers seeking employment, Congress in July 2021 introduced the False Claims Amendments Act of 2021.

In December 2021, Pfizer hired a well-connected lobbyist, Hazen Marshall, and the law firm Williams & Jensen to lobby against the bill.

Pfizer previously was heavily fined in connection with the False Claims Act. As part of a 2009 settlement, the company paid $2.3 billion in fines — the largest healthcare fraud settlement in the history of the U.S. Department of Justice — stemming from allegations of illegal marketing of off-label products not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

“Pfizer, one of the most criminally fined drug companies in the world, wants to weaken the laws that hold them accountable,” Barnes told The Defender.

Congress has taken no action on the False Claims Amendments Act since November 2021, when the bill was added to the Senate’s legislative calendar.

Barnes said the outcome of Jackson’s case against Pfizer is significant not just for his client, but also for the American public.

“This case will determine if Big Pharma can rip off the American people using a dangerous drug that harms millions without any legal remedy because they claim the government was in on the scam.”

Jackson was a regional director for Ventavia for a brief period in 2020 but was fired after she notified the FDA about issues with Pfizer’s vaccine trials.

After she was fired, she gave The BMJ a cache of internal company documents, photos and recordings highlighting the alleged wrongdoing by Ventavia.

The documents she provided contained evidence of falsified data, blind trial failures and awareness on the part of at least one Ventavia executive that members of the company’s staff were “falsifying data.”

Jackson’s documents also provided evidence of administrators who had “no training” or medical certifications, or who provided “very little oversight” during the trials.

Jackson filed her complaint in August 2021, in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division, alleging Pfizer, Ventavia and ICON “deliberately withheld crucial information from the United States that calls the safety and efficacy of their vaccine into question.”

A district court judge in February unsealed Jackson’s complaint, which included 400 pages of exhibits.

According to the complaint, Jackson, who had more than 15 years of experience working with clinical trials, “repeatedly informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues” during the approximately two weeks she was employed by Ventavia.

“Brook [Jackson] brought a Qui Tam action and a retaliatory discharge case against Pfizer and others for fraud on the people concerning Pfizer’s false certifications to the U.S. Department of Defense about the safety and efficacy of their COVID-19 vaccine,” Barnes said.

A Qui Tam case refers to a provision under the False Claims Act that allows individuals and entities with evidence of fraud against federal programs or contracts to sue the wrongdoer on behalf of the U.S. government.

“She was part of the clinical trials, witnessed extraordinary malfeasance, blew the whistle, and was quickly fired after she blew the whistle.”

Barnes said his legal team will in August file its opposition brief to Pfizer’s motion to dismiss, and the judge may rule on the motion to dismiss by fall 2022.

__________________
For more:

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses

Call For An Independent Inquiry Into the Origin of the SARS-CoV-2 Virus

**UPDATE July 2022**

For two years the WHO & Tedros claimed COVID was from a natural origin.  He has now done an about face and  PUBLICLY declared it was premature to rule out a lab leak.

He is asking China for full information, which is akin to asking the moon for cheese, according to a law professor, expert in public health law, and director of a WHO Collaborating Center on Public Health Law and Human Rights.

__________________

According to a “senior European politician,” World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus confided to him in private that he believes COVID-19 was the result of a catastrophic accident at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China.

But that’s not what the highly compromised WHO scientific advisory group concluded in 2020.  After sharp criticism, the WHO set up another advisory group called SAGO, which released its preliminary report June 9, 2022 – which also found the lab leak theory to be unlikely despite the fact none of the three pieces of data that would support zoonotic origin have been identified.

SARS-CoV-2 has several mechanisms for targeting HERV-K102, a human replication-competent endogenous retrovirus that protects against viruses and is a crucial defense mechanism against severe COVID-19.  This fact strongly supports a lab-leak hypothesis as the virus appears to have been designed to bypass this defense mechanism as selection of this trait could not have occurred in animals as only humans have HERV-K102 and the only way to give a bat-related coronavirus the ability to inhibit this mechanism is by passaging the virus through humanized mice, which has been done.  Source

http://  Approx. 17 Min

June 11, 2022

Dr. John Campbell on the Latest Lab-Leak Report

“I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.” ~ Dr. Campbell

Me either.

____________________

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2202769119

A call for an independent inquiry into the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus

Neil L. Harrison nh2298@columbia.edu and Jeffrey D. Sachs sachs@ei.columbia.eduAuthors Info & Affiliations
May 19, 2022
119 (21) e2202769119
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2202769119
Since the identification of theSARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan, China, in January 2020 (1), the origin of the virus has been a topic of intense scientific debate and public speculation. The two main hypotheses are that the virus emerged from human exposure to an infected animal [“zoonosis” (2)] or that it emerged in a research-related incident (3). The investigation into the origin of the virus has been made difficult by the lack of key evidence from the earliest days of the outbreak—there’s no doubt that greater transparency on the part of Chinese authorities would be enormously helpful. Nevertheless, we argue here that there is much important information that can be gleaned from US-based research institutions, information not yet made available for independent, transparent, and scientific scrutiny.
When it comes to deciphering the origins of COVID-19, much important information can be gleaned from US-based research institutions—information that has yet to be made available for independent, transparent, and scientific scrutiny. Image credit: Dave Cutler (artist).
The data available within the United States would explicitly include, but are not limited to, viral sequences gathered and held as part of the PREDICT project and other funded programs, as well as sequencing data and laboratory notebooks from US laboratories. We call on US government scientific agencies, most notably the NIH, to support a full, independent, and transparent investigation of the origins of SARS-CoV-2. This should take place, for example, within a tightly focused science-based bipartisan Congressional inquiry with full investigative powers, which would be able to ask important questions—but avoid misguided witch-hunts governed more by politics than by science.

Essential US Investigations

The US intelligence community (IC) was tasked, in 2021 by President Joe Biden (4), with investigating the origin of the virus. In their summary public statement, the IC writes that “all agencies assess that two hypotheses are plausible: natural exposure to an infected animal and a laboratory-associated incident” (4). The IC further writes that “China’s cooperation most likely would be needed to reach a conclusive assessment of the origins of COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019].” Of course, such cooperation is highly warranted and should be pursued by the US Government and the US scientific community. Yet, as outlined below, much could be learned by investigating US-supported and US-based work that was underway in collaboration with Wuhan-based institutions, including the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), China. It is still not clear whether the IC investigated these US-supported and US-based activities. If it did, it has yet to make any of its findings available to the US scientific community for independent and transparent analysis and assessment. If, on the other hand, the IC did not investigate these US-supported and US-based activities, then it has fallen far short of conducting a comprehensive investigation.
This lack of an independent and transparent US-based scientific investigation has had four highly adverse consequences. First, public trust in the ability of US scientific institutions to govern the activities of US science in a responsible manner has been shaken. Second, the investigation of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 has become politicized within the US Congress (5); as a result, the inception of an independent and transparent investigation has been obstructed and delayed. Third, US researchers with deep knowledge of the possibilities of a laboratory-associated incident have not been enabled to share their expertise effectively. Fourth, the failure of NIH, one of the main funders of the US–China collaborative work, to facilitate the investigation into the origins of SARS-CoV-2 (4) has fostered distrust regarding US biodefense research activities.
Much of the work on SARS-like CoVs performed in Wuhan was part of an active and highly collaborative US–China scientific research program funded by the US Government (NIH, Defense Threat Reduction Agency [DTRA], and US Agency for International Development [USAID]), coordinated by researchers at EcoHealth Alliance (EHA), but involving researchers at several other US institutions. For this reason, it is important that US institutions be transparent about any knowledge of the detailed activities that were underway in Wuhan and in the United States. The evidence may also suggest that research institutions in other countries were involved, and those too should be asked to submit relevant information (e.g., with respect to unpublished sequences).
Participating US institutions include the EHA, the University of North Carolina (UNC), the University of California at Davis (UCD), the NIH, and the USAID. Under a series of NIH grants and USAID contracts, EHA coordinated the collection of SARS-like bat CoVs from the field in southwest China and southeast Asia, the sequencing of these viruses, the archiving of these sequences (involving UCD), and the analysis and manipulation of these viruses (notably at UNC). A broad spectrum of coronavirus research work was done not only in Wuhan (including groups at Wuhan University and the Wuhan CDC, as well as WIV) but also in the United States. The exact details of the fieldwork and laboratory work of the EHA-WIV-UNC partnership, and the engagement of other institutions in the United States and China, has not been disclosed for independent analysis. The precise nature of the experiments that were conducted, including the full array of viruses collected from the field and the subsequent sequencing and manipulation of those viruses, remains unknown.
EHA, UNC, NIH, USAID, and other research partners have failed to disclose their activities to the US scientific community and the US public, instead declaring that they were not involved in any experiments that could have resulted in the emergence of SARS-CoV-2. The NIH has specifically stated (6) that there is a significant evolutionary distance between the published viral sequences and that of SARS-CoV-2 and that the pandemic virus could not have resulted from the work sponsored by NIH. Of course, this statement is only as good as the limited data on which it is based, and verification of this claim is dependent on gaining access to any other unpublished viral sequences that are deposited in relevant US and Chinese databases (7,8). On May 11, 2022, Acting NIH Director Lawrence Tabak testified before Congress that several such sequences in a US database were removed from public view, and that this was done at the request of both Chinese and US investigators.
Blanket denials from the NIH are no longer good enough. Although the NIH and USAID have strenuously resisted full disclosure of the details of the EHA-WIV-UNC work program, several documents leaked to the public or released through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) have raised concerns. These research proposals make clear that the EHA-WIV-UNC collaboration was involved in the collection of a large number of so-far undocumented SARS-like viruses and was engaged in their manipulation within biological safety level (BSL)-2 and BSL-3 laboratory facilities, raising concerns that an airborne virus might have infected a laboratory worker (9). A variety of scenarios have been discussed by others, including an infection that involved a natural virus collected from the field or perhaps an engineered virus manipulated in one of the laboratories (3).

Overlooked Details

Special concerns surround the presence of an unusual furin cleavage site (FCS) in SARS-CoV-2 (10) that augments the pathogenicity and transmissibility of the virus relative to related viruses like SARS-CoV-1 (11, 12). SARS-CoV-2 is, to date, the only identified member of the subgenus sarbecovirus that contains an FCS, although these are present in other coronaviruses (13, 14). A portion of the sequence of the spike protein of some of these viruses is illustrated in the alignment shown in Fig. 1, illustrating the unusual nature of the FCS and its apparent insertion in SARS-CoV-2 (15). From the first weeks after the genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 became available, researchers have commented on the unexpected presence of the FCS within SARS-CoV-2—the implication being that SARS-CoV-2 might be a product of laboratory manipulation. In a review piece arguing against this possibility, it was asserted that the amino acid sequence of the FCS in SARS-CoV-2 is an unusual, nonstandard sequence for an FCS and that nobody in a laboratory would design such a novel FCS (13).
Fig. 1.
This alignment of the amino acid sequences of coronavirus spike proteins, in the region of the S1/S2 junction, illustrates the sequence of SARS-CoV-2 (Wuhan-Hu-1) and some of its closest relatives. The furin cleavage site (FCS) is indicated (PRRAR’SVAS), and furin cuts the spike protein between R and S, as indicated by the red arrowhead. Adapted from Chan & Zhan (15).
In fact, the assertion that the FCS in SARS-CoV-2 has an unusual, nonstandard amino acid sequence is false. The amino acid sequence of the FCS in SARS-CoV-2 also exists in the human ENaC α subunit (16), where it is known to be functional and has been extensively studied (17, 18). The FCS of human ENaC α has the amino acid sequence RRAR’SVAS (Fig. 2), an eight–amino-acid sequence that is perfectly identical with the FCS of SARS-CoV-2 (16). ENaC is an epithelial sodium channel, expressed on the apical surface of epithelial cells in the kidney, colon, and airways (19, 20), that plays a critical role in controlling fluid exchange. The ENaC α subunit has a functional FCS (17, 18) that is essential for ion channel function (19) and has been characterized in a variety of species. The FCS sequence of human ENaC α (20) is identical in chimpanzee, bonobo, orangutan, and gorilla (SI Appendix, Fig. 1), but diverges in all other species, even primates, except one. (The one non-human non-great ape species with the same sequence is Pipistrellus kuhlii, a bat species found in Europe and Western Asia; other bat species, including Rhinolophus ferrumequinem, have a different FCS sequence in ENaC α [RKAR‘SAAS]).
Fig. 2.
Amino acid alignment of the furin cleavage sites of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein with (Top) the spike proteins of other viruses that lack the furin cleavage site and (Bottom) the furin cleavage sites present in the α subunits of human and mouse ENaC. Adapted from Anand et al. (16).
One consequence of this “molecular mimicry” between the FCS of SARS CoV-2 spike and the FCS of human ENaC is competition for host furin in the lumen of the Golgi apparatus, where the SARS-CoV-2 spike is processed. This results in a decrease in human ENaC expression (21). A decrease in human ENaC expression compromises airway function and has been implicated as a contributing factor in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 (22). Another consequence of this astonishing molecular mimicry is evidenced by apparent cross-reactivity with human ENaC of antibodies from COVID-19 patients, with the highest levels of cross-reacting antibodies directed against this epitope being associated with most severe disease (23).
We do not know whether the insertion of the FCS was the result of natural evolution (2, 13)—perhaps via a recombination event in an intermediate mammal or a human (13, 24)—or was the result of a deliberate introduction of the FCS into a SARS-like virus as part of a laboratory experiment. We do know that the insertion of such FCS sequences into SARS-like viruses was a specific goal of work proposed by the EHA-WIV-UNC partnership within a 2018 grant proposal (“DEFUSE”) that was submitted to the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) (25). The 2018 proposal to DARPA was not funded, but we do not know whether some of the proposed work was subsequently carried out in 2018 or 2019, perhaps using another source of funding.
We also know that that this research team would be familiar with several previous experiments involving the successful insertion of an FCS sequence into SARS-CoV-1 (26) and other coronaviruses, and they had a lot of experience in construction of chimeric SARS-like viruses (27–29). In addition, the research team would also have some familiarity with the FCS sequence and the FCS-dependent activation mechanism of human ENaC α (19), which was extensively characterized at UNC (17, 18). For a research team assessing the pandemic potential of SARS-related coronaviruses, the FCS of human ENaC—an FCS known to be efficiently cleaved by host furin present in the target location (epithelial cells) of an important target organ (lung), of the target organism (human)—might be a rational, if not obvious, choice of FCS to introduce into a virus to alter its infectivity, in line with other work performed previously.
Of course, the molecular mimicry of ENaC within the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein might be a mere coincidence, although one with a very low probability. The exact FCS sequence present in SARS-CoV-2 has recently been introduced into the spike protein of SARS-CoV-1 in the laboratory, in an elegant series of experiments (12, 30), with predictable consequences in terms of enhanced viral transmissibility and pathogenicity. Obviously, the creation of such SARS-1/2 “chimeras” is an area of some concern for those responsible for present and future regulation of this area of biology. [Note that these experiments in ref. 30 were done in the context of a safe “pseudotyped” virus and thus posed no danger of producing or releasing a novel pathogen.] These simple experiments show that the introduction of the 12 nucleotides that constitute the FCS insertion in SARS-CoV-2 would not be difficult to achieve in a lab. It would therefore seem reasonable to ask that electronic communications and other relevant data from US groups should be made available for scrutiny.

Seeking Transparency

To date, the federal government, including the NIH, has not done enough to promote public trust and transparency in the science surrounding SARS-CoV-2. A steady trickle of disquieting information has cast a darkening cloud over the agency. The NIH could say more about the possible role of its grantees in the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, yet the agency has failed to reveal to the public the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a research-associated event, even though several researchers raised that concern on February 1, 2020, in a phone conversation that was documented by email (5). Those emails were released to the public only through FOIA, and they suggest that the NIH leadership took an early and active role in promoting the “zoonotic hypothesis” and the rejection of the laboratory-associated hypothesis (5). The NIH has resisted the release of important evidence, such as the grant proposals and project reports of EHA, and has continued to redact materials released under FOIA, including a remarkable 290-page redaction in a recent FOIA release.
Information now held by the research team headed by EHA (7), as well as the communications of that research team with US research funding agencies, including NIH, USAID, DARPA, DTRA, and the Department of Homeland Security, could shed considerable light on the experiments undertaken by the US-funded research team and on the possible relationship, if any, between those experiments and the emergence of SARS-CoV-2. We do not assert that laboratory manipulation was involved in the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, although it is apparent that it could have been. However, we do assert that there has been no independent and transparent scientific scrutiny to date of the full scope of the US-based evidence.
The relevant US-based evidence would include the following information: laboratory notebooks, virus databases, electronic media (emails, other communications), biological samples, viral sequences gathered and held as part of the PREDICT project (7) and other funded programs, and interviews of the EHA-led research team by independent researchers, together with a full record of US agency involvement in funding the research on SARS-like viruses, especially with regard to projects in collaboration with Wuhan-based institutions. We suggest that a bipartisan inquiry should also follow up on the tentative conclusion of the IC (4) that the initial outbreak in Wuhan may have occurred no later than November 2019 and that therefore the virus was circulating before the cluster of known clinical cases in December. The IC did not reveal the evidence for this statement, nor when parts of the US Government or US-based researchers first became aware of a potential new outbreak. Any available information and knowledge of the earliest days of the outbreak, including viral sequences (8), could shed considerable light on the origins question.
We continue to recognize the tremendous value of US–China cooperation in ongoing efforts to uncover the proximal origins of the pandemic. Much vital information still resides in China, in the laboratories, hospital samples, and early epidemiological information not yet available to the scientific community. Yet a US-based investigation need not wait—there is much to learn from the US institutions that were extensively involved in research that may have contributed to, or documented the emergence of, the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Only an independent and transparent investigation, perhaps as a bipartisan Congressional inquiry, will reveal the information that is needed to enable a thorough scientific process of scrutiny and evaluation.

Supporting Information

Appendix 01 (PDF)

References

(Go to top link for references)

For More:

Category:

research, Viruses

For Every 454 COVID Shots, An Adverse Event is Recorded in VAERS

https://healthimpactnews.com/2022/two-thirds-of-all-americans-fully-vaccinated-with-covid-19-experimental-shots-as-vaccine-injuries-and-deaths-increase-2000-56x-more-deaths/

Two Thirds of All Americans Fully Vaccinated with COVID-19 Experimental Shots as Vaccine Injuries and Deaths Increase 2000% – 56X More Death

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

According to statistics published by the CDC, 222,123,223 people in the U.S. are now fully vaccinated with COVID-19 shots, about two thirds of the population. (Source.)

78% of the population has had at least one COVID-19 shot, which means a significant number of people stopped getting the shots after receiving one, and that percentage continues to drop with the boosters.

593,739,529 COVID-19 shots have been administered during the past 18 months, producing 1,307,928 reports of deaths and injuries filed in the national Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). (Source

That means for every 454 COVID-19 experimental shots injected into people, an adverse event was recorded in VAERS

(it is probably much higher than that, but these are the ones the CDC decided to release to the public in the VAERS database).

By way of contrast, data collected by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program between the years 2006 and 2014 report that 2,532,428,541 doses of all FDA-approved vaccines were injected into people during that 9-year period (source), which produced 272,905 cases of injuries and deaths reported to VAERS. (Source.)

That means for every 9,280 vaccines administered during the years from 2006 through 2014, an adverse event was recorded in VAERS.

That is a tragic number for vaccine victims in an industry that cannot be sued for damages from their vaccine products, but it pales in comparison to how deadly the COVID-19 vaccines have been.

There has been a 2000% increase in adverse events recorded in VAERS following the COVID-19 shots.

Just looking at reported deaths in VAERS, a death was reported for every 20,452 COVID-19 vaccine administered, whereas between 2006 and 2014 a death was reported for every 1,146,414 FDA approved vaccine administered.

That is 56 times more deaths following COVID-19 vaccines.

And they keep on injecting people with them, including now infants as young as 6 months old.

These are government stats people. This is what they admit to. How much worse are the actual deaths and injuries following COVID-19 shots, and what does that mean for our country?

We are just beginning to find out as life and health insurance benefit payouts skyrocketed in 2021 when the “vaccines” rolled out, and birth rates declined.

We are now a year and half into the Population Reduction program the Globalists are implementing, and unless there is a massive uprising and resistance movement, it is all down hill from here, as they begin Phase II with the MonkeyPox fear campaign and millions of doses of untested vaccines ready to go.

As I have publicly stated in the past, I am PROUD to wear the “anti-vaccine” label, because the actual science has NEVER proven vaccines to be either safe, or effective.

__________________

**Comment**

Why stop when you are on a roll? 

The U.S. government’s deal with Pfizer/BioNTech will cost a mere $3.2 BILLION for 105 million doses, with an option to purchase up to 195 million additional doses to be delivered as early as late summer.

And it just gets better…..

U.S. orders 2.5 MILLION more Monkeypox vaccine doses as the CDC looks to expand them to children as well.

And this important video explains how one expert got COVID after FIVE injections and receiving antibodies:

http://  Approx. 2 Min

Infectious disease expert William Haseltine (President of ACCESS Health International)

Haseltine explains he got COVID after FIVE injections and receiving protective antibodies. He also discloses that this is NOT seasonal like the flu but appears to cause a wave every 4-6 months.  This, right here, is why treatments are imperative yet are still censored and banned.  These injections do NOT stop infection or transmission and have only pushed the virus to mutate.  The “vaccinated” are going to the hospital and dying now at an even greater rate than the unvaccinated. 

For more:

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses

Replay – Freedom is the Cure: Unpacking & Defeating the Medical Tactics of a World Takeover

https://doctors4covidethics.org/video-replays-d4ce-symposium-iv-session-i/

Video Replays: D4CE Symposium IV – Session I

D4CE presented the fourth symposium on June 11, 2022. Leading experts from the various field presented their studies and expressed their opinions freely and honestly.

Program Overview with Taylor Hudak

SESSION 1 : mRNA Vaccines – A Serious Threat to Mankind With Polly Tommey and Michael Palmer

Sucharit Bhakdi: The fundamental mechanism of damage is simple and universal

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, MD, professor emeritus of microbiology and immunology, explains the key mechanisms of vaccine damage to tissues and blood vessels. The mRNA vaccine is taken up into the cells, particularly those which line the blood vessels. The cells express the spike protein, causing them to be attacked and destroyed by the immune system. The resulting vascular damage triggers blot clots. Dr. Bhakdi makes it clear that this disease mechanism is not limited to COVID vaccines alone but must be expected with any and all future mRNA vaccines.

Michael Palmer: Summary of the evidence – irrefutable proof of causality

Dr. Michael Palmer, MD, summarizes the evidence from autopsies which was produced by pathologist Prof. Arne Burkhardt and colleagues, and which substantiates the damage mechanism outlined by Dr. Bhakdi in his preceding talk: the mRNA vaccine is taken up into our body cells, which express the spike protein and are then attacked and destroyed by our own immune system. The observed mechanism of immune attack appears to be completely general and must be expected to apply to future mRNA vaccines against infections other than COVID as well.

Alexandra Latypova: Pfizer’s and Moderna’s preclinical vaccine trials – evidence of scientific and regulatory fraud

Sasha Latypova, who is an expert in drug development, explains how the manufacturers of the COVID mRNA vaccines, Pfizer and Moderna, skipped essential preclinical safety studies, and how the FDA let them get away with it, failing in its duty to protect the public from these unsafe medicines. The FDA remains dysfunctional as of today, and it cannot be trusted with protecting the public from harm caused by any future vaccines or other medicines.

Her article on Pfizer and Moderna’s fraud is available here:

https://doctors4covidethics.org/did-pfizer-perform-adequate-safety-testing-for-its-covid-19-mrna-vaccine-in-preclinical-studies-evidence-of-scientific-and-regulatory-fraud/

Thomas Binder: A clinical perspective and synopsis

Dr. Thomas Binder discusses the toxicity of the mRNA vaccines from a clinical and epidemiological perspective. He presents the evidence to show that the “vaccines” are unnecessary, negatively effective, and unsafe. He emphasizes that not only the emergency use authorisation of the mRNA injections against SARS-CoV-2 must be suspended immediately, but also that no other mRNA injections may be approved, because even if a not toxic antigen is chosen, the toxicity of the Lipid Nano Particles, the modified RNA and the auto immune like reaction against the cells, who are coerced to produce and then present this foreign protein on their surface, will be the same. He also touches on the question of how to approach the clinical treatment of vaccine injury. He ends with another call to action to his fellow doctors.

Renate Holzeisen AND Mary Holland WITH Polly Tommey: legal actions against mRNA vaccine approvals

CHD’s Polly Tommey and lawyers Mary Holland (President of CHD) and Renate Holzeisen (European Human Rights Lawyer, Italy) discuss current legal actions against the COVID-19 vaccination approval procedures and planned action against mRNA technology itself at European courts. The increasing success rate of cases challenging COVID-related regulations and mandates across the globe indicate that judges – just as any human being – start experiencing and recognising the devastating impact of vaccinations unlawfully pushed through neglecting procedural evaluations and requirements.

Mary Holland and Brian Hooker with Polly Tommey: mRNA effects on fertility and sterility

Mary Holland (Lawyer and President of CHD) and Brian Hooker (biomedical scientist, Ph.D., CHD, U.S.) join Polly Tommey from CHD.TV to discuss historical precedents of vaccine-induced sterility. One example is the HPV vaccine. Another example is the covert sterilization campaign in Kenya, which is the subject of a recent CHD movie, Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda. In this experimental tetanus vaccination program, many Kenya women were injected with a tetanus vaccine containing the human pregnancy hormone beta-HCG. 

The discussion then turns to the high number of adverse event reports related to the menstrual cycle and pregnancy in VEARS, indicating the harmful effects of the COVID mRNA vaccines on fertility. While we do not yet know the exact magnitude of this problem, it must be taken seriously and addressed openly. However, the WHO and other health authorities continue to ignore the issues, proving that they are not trustworthy with our health and the future of Humanity.

Follow us on
Rumble Channel:

Doctors For Covid Ethics Rumble Channel

BitChute Channel:

D4CE BitChute Channel

PeerTube Channel:

Doctors For Covid Ethics PeerTube Channel

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses

New Pathogens Found in Oklahoma Ticks

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/vbz.2021.0057

Detection of Borrelia miyamotoi and Powassan Virus Lineage II (Deer Tick Virus) from Odocoileus virginianus Harvested Ixodes scapularis in Oklahoma

Published Online:19 Apr 2022https://doi.org/10.1089/vbz.2021.0057

Abstract

Odocoileus virginianus (white-tailed deer) is the primary host of adult Ixodes scapularis (deer tick). Most of the research into I. scapularis has been geographically restricted to the northeastern United States, with limited interest in Oklahoma until recently as the I. scapularis populations spread due to climate change. Ticks serve as a vector for pathogenic bacteria, protozoans, and viruses that pose a significant human health risk. To date, there has been limited research to determine what potential tick-borne pathogens are present in I. scapularis in central Oklahoma. Using a one-step multiplex real-time reverse transcription-PCR, I. scapularis collected from white-tailed deer was screened for Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia burgdorferi, Borrelia miyamotoi, Babesia microti, and deer tick virus (DTV). Ticks (n = 394) were pooled by gender and life stage into 117 samples. Three pooled samples were positive for B. miyamotoi and five pooled samples were positive for DTV. This represents a minimum infection rate of 0.8% and 1.2%, respectively. A. phagocytophilum, B. burgdorferi, and B. microti were not detected in any samples. This is the first report of B. miyamotoi and DTV detection in Oklahoma I. scapularis ticks. This demonstrates that I. scapularis pathogens are present in Oklahoma and that further surveillance of I. scapularis is warranted.

____________________

**Comment**

A few points:

  • This article is based upon the faulty premise that somehow “climate change” is causing tick and disease proliferation.  This has been proven to be false yet is continually regurgitated as truth.  This; however, does not mean “the powers that be” are not committing heinous acts of “climate engineering” which IS causing very real destruction of life.
    • This recent article proves Spain has admitted recently spraying deadly chemtrails as part of a secret UN program to fight COVID.
    • Four state meteorological agency whistleblowers announced in 2015 that planes were regularly spraying lead dioxide, silver iodide, and diatomite throughout Spain to ward off rain and allow temperatures to rise to create a summery climate for tourism as well as the agricultural sector – producing cold drops of great intensity.
  • We’ve also been told ad nauseum that Lyme doesn’t exist in Oklahoma and while this research also didn’t find it, it did discover B miyamotoi which symptoms are similar to Lyme. But again, just because they didn’t find it, doesn’t mean it isn’t there. The black legged tick is abundant in Oklahoma.
  • Oklahoma is Ehrlichiosis Central and has many other tick-borne diseases:
    • spotted fever rickettsiosis
    • Rocky Mountain spotted fever
    • STARI (which many experts tell me is simply Lyme)
    • Tularemia
    • Heartland Virus
    • Tick paralysis
    • Anaplasmosis

Category:

Anaplasmosis, Borrelia Miyamotoi (Relapsing Fever Group), Ehrlichiosis, Lyme, research, Rickettsia, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, Ticks, Tularemia, Viruses