"In light of our re-examination of the test protocol to identify SARS-CoV-2 described in the
Corman-Drosten paper we have identified concerning errors and inherent fallacies which
render the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test useless.
The decision as to which test protocols are published and made widely available lies squarely
in the hands of Eurosurveillance. A decision to recognise the errors apparent in the Corman-
Drosten paper has the benefit to greatly minimise human cost and suffering going forward.
The Corman-Drosten paper contains the following specific errors:
1. There exists no specified reason to use these extremely high concentrations of primers in this protocol. The described concentrations lead to increased nonspecific bindings and PCR product amplifications, making the test unsuitable as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
2. Six unspecified wobbly positions will introduce an enormous variability in the real world laboratory implementations of this test; the confusing nonspecific description in the Corman-Drosten paper is not suitable as a Standard Operational Protocol making the test unsuitable as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
3. The test cannot discriminate between the whole virus and viral fragments. Therefore, the test cannot be used as a diagnostic for intact (infectious) viruses, making the test unsuitable as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus and make inferences about the presence of an infection.
4. A difference of 10° C with respect to the annealing temperature Tm for primer pair1 (RdRp_SARSr_F and RdRp_SARSr_R) also makes the test unsuitable as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
5. A severe error is the omission of a Ct value at which a sample is considered positive and negative. This Ct value is also not found in follow-up submissions making the test unsuitable as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
6. The PCR products have not been validated at the molecular level. This fact makes the protocol useless as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
7. The PCR test contains neither a unique positive control to evaluate its specificity for SARS-CoV-2 nor a negative control to exclude the presence of other coronaviruses, making the test unsuitable as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
8. The test design in the Corman-Drosten paper is so vague and flawed that one can go in dozens of different directions; nothing is standardized and there is no SOP. This highly questions the scientific validity of the test and makes it unsuitable as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
9. Most likely, the Corman-Drosten paper was not peer-reviewed making the test unsuitable as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
10. We find severe conflicts of interest for at least four authors, in addition to the fact that two of the authors of the Corman-Drosten paper (Christian Drosten and Chantal Reusken) are members of the editorial board of Eurosurveillance. A conflict of interest was added on July 29 2020 (Olfert Landt is CEO of TIB-Molbiol; Marco Kaiser is senior researcher at GenExpress and serves as scientific advisor for TIB-Molbiol), that was not declared in the original version (and still is missing in the PubMed version); TIB-Molbiol is the company which was “the first” to produce PCR kits (Light Mix) based on the protocol published in the Corman-Drosten manuscript, and according to their own words, they distributed these PCR-test kits before the publication was even submitted ; further, Victor Corman & Christian Drosten failed to mention their second affiliation: the commercial test laboratory “Labor Berlin”. Both are responsible for the virus diagnostics there  and the company operates in the realm of real time PCR-testing.
" RT-PCRA positive RT-PCR test  is not synonymous with COVID-19 disease.Today, as authorities test more people, there are bound to be more positive RT-PCR tests. This does not mean that COVID-19 is coming back, or that the epidemic is moving in waves. There are more people being tested, that’s all.Are these tests reliable? .Beware of false positives . This weakness of the PCR test in virus testing has been known for years . For Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR technique which enabled him to win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1993, this test was above all qualitative and intended to answer the question: is the element there, yes or no, not at all to be quantified? Moreover, these tests detect viral particles, genetic sequences, not the whole virus.In an attempt to quantify the viral load, these sequences are then amplified several times through numerous complex steps that are subject to errors, sterility errors and contamination [5-6].Positive RT-PCR is not synonymous with COVID-19 disease! PCR specialists make it clear that a test must always be compared with the clinical record of the patient being tested, with the patient’s state of health to confirm its value [reliability] .The media frighten everyone with new positive PCR tests, without any nuance or context, wrongly assimilating this information with a second wave of COVID-19. - Dr. Pascal Sacre
PCR Inventor: “It doesn’t tell you that you are sick” (Off-Guardian Oct 2020)
" PCR is just a process that allows you to make a whole lot of something out of something. It doesn’t tell you that you are sick, or that the thing that you ended up with was going to hurt you or anything like that.”
Though the whole world relies on RT-PCR to “diagnose” Sars-Cov-2 infection, the science is clear: they are not fit for purpose
The article appeals to many valuable scientific testimonies that show that…
- THERE IS A LACK OF A VALID GOLD STANDARD FOR THE PCR MEASUREMENTS (THUS PCR CAN BE USED ACCORDING TO PARTICULAR INTERESTS)
- THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE RNA DISCOVERED BY THE TEST IS OF VIRAL ORIGIN AS NO PURIFIED VIRUS HAS BEEN DISCOVERED. ALSO, HERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT THE RNA SEQUENCES IDENTIFIED BY THE TEST ARE THE CAUSATIVE AGENT OF WHAT IS CALLED COVID-19.
- THE TESTS HAVE LOW RELIABILITY AND MAY GIVE SUCCESIVE DIFFERENT RESULTS FOR SAME INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT REASONABLE JUSTIFICATION.
- PCR TESTS ARE QUALITATIVE AND NOT QUANTITATIVE, THUS CANNOT MEASURE HOW MUCH A PERSON IS “BURDENED” WITH A DISEASE-CAUSING VIRUS, - HIGH CQ VALUES (MORE THAN 40 CYCLES USED BY PCR) MAKE THE TEST RESULTS EVEN MORE MEANINGLESS
The lack of reliability of the PCR tests is to be found in the PCR MANUAL itself...
- CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel
Chapter 'Limitations', pag 37-38:
"Negative results do not preclude 2019-nCoV infection and should not be used as the sole basis for treatment or other patient management decisions. Optimum specimen types and timing for peak viral levels during infections caused by 2019-nCoV have not been determined. Collection of multiple specimens (types and time points) from the same patient may be necessary to detect the virus.
• A false-negative result may occur if a specimen is improperly collected, transported or handled. False-negative results may also occur if amplification inhibitors are present in the specimen or if inadequate numbers of organisms are present in the specimen.
• Positive and negative predictive values are highly dependent on prevalence. FALSE-NEGATIVE TEST RESULTS ARE MORE LIKELY WHEN PREVALENCE OF DISEASE IS HIGH. FALSE-POSITIVE TEST RESULTS ARE MORE LIKELY WHEN PREVALENCE IS MODERATE TO LOW.
• Do not use any reagent past the expiration date.
• If the virus mutates in the rRT-PCR target region, 2019-nCoV may not be detected or may be detected less predictably. Inhibitors or other types of interference may produce a false-negative result. An interference study evaluating the effect of common cold medications was not performed.
• TEST PERFORMANCE CAN BE AFFECTED BECAUSE THE EPIDEMIOLOGY AND CLINICAL SPECTRUM OF INFECTION CAUSED BY 2019-NCOV IS NOT FULLY KNOWN. For example, clinicians and laboratories may not know the optimum types of specimens to collect, and, during the course of infection, when these specimens are most likely to contain levels of viral RNA that can be readily detected.
• DETECTION OF VIRAL RNA MAY NOT INDICATE THE PRESENCE OF INFECTIOUS VIRUS OR THAT 2019-NCOV IS THE CAUSATIVE AGENT FOR CLINICAL SYMPTOMS.
• THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS TEST HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR MONITORING TREATMENT OF 2019-NCOV INFECTION.
• The performance of this test has not been established for screening of blood or blood products for the presence of 2019-ncov.
• THIS TEST CANNOT RULE OUT DISEASES CAUSED BY OTHER BACTERIAL OR VIRAL PATHOGENs."
In other words, a positive test doesn't necessarily mean that the cause of the symptoms (if there are any) is COVID-19, doesn't give relevant information about the possible covid-19 infection that are needed to monitor it and in fact, may point to OTHER disease causing pathogens than 2019-ncov. Three ways to say that this is not a reliable test to diagnose the infection with 2019-ncov, a fact that the inventor of the test, Nobel prize winner Karry Mullis has implicitly confirmed also, when claiming that this method is not to be used to diagnose viral infections.
More on the page: COVID TESTS - TRACING
THE PCR TEST (covid infection diagnosis tool used throughout 2020) is not able to identify and differentiate between various viral infections according to its own manual, to its inventor, Nobel prize laureate, Karry Mullis and to many other specialists?
There is a way of lying which is definitely the most dangerous of all. That's why it is also most common in the world of politics and media. With this, you deliver a verifiable truth and you draw some peculiar conclusions using a context from which other verifiable truths which would have made the previous conclusion impossible, are deliberately obscured. Let's have an example from a recent Scottish MSM article, meant as usual, to instill the covid-panic in the receptive reader. - Scotland records highest number of peacetime excess deaths since 1891 "SCOTLAND recorded the highest number of peacetime excess deaths in 129 years in 2020 as the pandemic led to 6,324 more deaths than the average previous five years. The stark figures statistics, from the National Records of Scotland , have been labelled "absolutely tragic". [...]. They show a provisional total of 64,084 people died last year – compared to an average of 57,760 in the previous five years – highlighting a staggering 6,324 excess deaths." What is obscured, however is that in 1993, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1996, 199, 1995, 1997 and 1998, Scotland had more deaths/ population (%) than in 2020 A few references: Deaths, by sex and single year of age, Scotland 1974 to 2019 (Excel CSV) (107 KB) https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/population-estimates/mid-19/mid-year-pop-est-19-time-series-1.xlsxMid-year population estimates: Scotland and its council areas, total population by sex: 1981 to 2019 (Excel CSV) (43 KB)https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/time-series/death-19/deaths-time-series-19-dt.3.xlsx (numbers seem to be rounded to thousands)
"What we’re seeing here is that is a negligible amount of “Covid” deaths in anyone under the age of 60. But we’re really not seeing very many “Covid” deaths in anybody aged between 60 and 80. What we are seeing is a much higher amount of “Covid” deaths in people aged over 85. But what’s so strange about that?
The average life expectancy in the UK is 81 years. Yet the UK has enforced dictatorial tyranny, destroyed the economy, decimated businesses and people’s livelihoods and created a flood of mental health issues because people who have lived longer than the average life expectancy of 81 are dying." ( Is it all a lie? – Stay at Home > Protect the NHS > 100K Deaths – An analysis of ONS and NHS data)
Age profile: The median age of covid deaths is over 80 years in most Western countries (but 78 in the US) and about 5% of the deceased had no serious preconditions. The age and risk profile of covid mortality is therefore comparable to normal mortality, but increases it proportionally.
Nursing homes: In many Western countries, up to two thirds of all covid deaths have occurred in nursing homes, which require targeted and humane protection. In some cases, care home residents died not from the coronavirus, but from weeks of stress and isolation.
Excess mortality: In most Western countries, the pandemic increased mortality by 5% to 15% in 2020. Up to 30% of the additional deaths were caused not by covid, but by indirect effects of the pandemic and lockdowns (e.g. fewer treatments of cancer and heart attack patients)." (https://swprs.org/covid19-facts/)
in 2020, the year of the pandemic, there were fewer DEATHS IN THE UK AND SCOTLAND than in several other years since 1990 on?
"Sweden: In Sweden, covid mortality in 2020, without a lockdown, was comparable to a strong influenza season and close to the EU average. About 60% of Swedish deaths occurred in nursing facilities and the median age of Swedish covid deaths was about 84 years.
In contrast to early border controls, lockdowns have had no significant effect on the pandemic. According to the UN, lockdowns may put the livelihood of 1.6 billion people at acute risk and may push an additional 150 million children into poverty. " (https://swprs.org/covid19-facts/)
"Contrary to the idea of a trade-off, we see that countries which suffered the most severe economic downturns – like Peru, Spain and the UK – are generally among the countries with the highest COVID-19 death rate.
And the reverse is also true: countries where the economic impact has been modest – like Taiwan, South Korea, and Lithuania – have also managed to keep the death rate low."
"Initial modeling predicted COVID-19 would have a fatality rate of 2% to 3%. In reality, it’s nowhere near that, except for the elderly. One research team puts the overall infection fatality rate for all age groups at 0.32%
Modelers were also incorrect when they predicted that 70% to 80% would get infected before herd immunity would naturally allow the spread of infection to taper off. More than a dozen scientists now claim the herd immunity threshold is below 50%, perhaps even as low as 10%
Since lockdowns are a public health intervention aimed at saving lives, both the benefits and the costs of this strategy must be calculated and taken into account
The cost for lockdowns in Canada, in terms of Quality Adjusted Life Years and Wellbeing Years, is at least 10 times greater than the benefit. In Australia, the minimum cost is 6.6 times higher, and in the U.S., the cost is estimated to be at least 5.2 times higher than the benefit of lockdowns.[...]
In the US, according to an October 2020 peer-reviewed study26,27 by the Public Health Policy Initiative of the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention inflated COVID-19 mortality statistics by 1,670%, yet we’re still nowhere near a fatality ratio of 7.8%.
As of August 23, 2020, the CDC reported a COVID-19 death toll of 161,392. Meanwhile, the more accurate fatality rate, using the standard reporting guidelines that had been in place since 2003, was a mere 9,684. " (Dr. Joseph Mercola) Ref: Science, Public Health Policy and the Law October 12, 2020; 2: 4-22 (PDF) WND.com February 10, 2021
.......SWEDEN who imposed no lockdown, no mask wearing and no social distancing measures had less deaths of covid than the UK who imposed all these measures?
Researchers in China found that the most common symptoms among people who were hospitalized with COVID-19 include:
Symptoms usually begin 2 to 14 days after you come into contact with the virus.Other symptoms may include:
Call a doctor or hospital right away if you have one or more of these COVID-19 symptoms:
Strokes have also been reported in some people who have COVID-19.And then look at these symptoms....
SYMPTOMS OF MICROWAVE/ RADIOWAVE RADIATION
Neurological: headaches, dizziness, nausea, difficulty concentrating, memory loss, irritability, depression, anxiety, insomnia, fatigue, weakness, tremors, muscle spasms, numbness, tingling, altered reflexes, muscle and joint pain, leg/foot pain, “flu-like” symptoms, fever.
More severe reactions can include seizures, paralysis, psychosis and stroke.
Cardiac: palpitations, arrhythmias, pain or pressure in the chest, low or high blood pressure, slow or fast heart rate, shortness of breath.
Respiratory: sinusitis, bronchitis, pneumonia, asthma.
Dermatological: skin rash, itching, burning, facial flushing.
Ophthalmologic: pain or burning in the eyes, pressure in/behind the eyes, deteriorating vision, floaters, cataracts.
Auditory: Chirping, buzzing, or ringing in the ears; hearing loss.
Others: digestive problems; abdominal pain; enlarged thyroid, testicular/ovarian pain; sexual dysfunction; dryness of lips, tongue, mouth, eyes; great thirst; dehydration; nosebleeds; internal bleeding; elevated blood sugar; immune system abnormalities; redistribution of metals within the body; hair loss; pain in the teeth; deteriorating fillings; impaired sense of smell; light sensitivity.
What Are the Symptoms of Stress?https://www.webmd.com/.../stress-symptoms-effects_of...
Physical symptoms of stress include:
Cold and Flu symptoms https://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/flu-cold-symptoms#2
So, what we have is a total of 18 symptoms recorded for Covid-19. ALL of them except the loss of appetite (which may be implicit) are reported among the symptoms of radiowave (microwave) sickness.
The microwave syndrome or electro-hypersensitivity: historical background (Dr. O. Carpenter)
MOST of the physical symptoms of stress are to be found on the list of covid-19 symptoms and ALL the symptoms of cold and flu are there also...
Now, we should just ask ourselves some very basic questions...
.......the various SYMPTOMS OF COVID all match the symptoms of microwave radiation sickness, and partially the symptoms of flu, which, coincidentally has seemingly almost disappeared in the UK, US, Scotland and many other countries since the start of this pandemic?
A summary of research showing the masks inefciency in matters of preventing viral transmisson and the serious health risks associated with face masks wearing based on the study “All-Cause Mortality During COVID-19: No Plague and a Likely Signature of Mass Homicide by Government Response.” by Dennis Rancourt PhD : Conclusive Proof — Masks Do Not Inhibit Viral Spread
Several meta analyses and studies (4 of them from 2020) concerning mask wearing against flu like diseases, particularly Covid -19, show no discernable benefit for the users....
" The use of face masks, whether cloth, surgical or N95, creates a poor obstacle to aerosolized pathogens as we can see from the meta-analyses and other studies in this paper, allowing both transmission of aerosolized pathogens to others in various directions, as well as self-contamination.
It must also be considered that masks impede the necessary volume of air intake required for adequate oxygen exchange, which results in observed physiological effects that may be undesirable. Even 6- minute walks, let alone more strenuous activity, resulted in dyspnea. The volume of unobstructed oxygen in a typical breath is about 100 ml, used for normal physiological processes. 100 ml O2 greatly exceeds the volume of a pathogen required for transmission.
The foregoing data show that masks serve more as instruments of obstruction of normal breathing, rather than as effective barriers to pathogens. Therefore, masks should not be used by the general public, either by adults or children, and their limitations as prophylaxis against pathogens should also be considered in medical settings."
A study on infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers. Ming Gao,a,1 Lihui Yang,b,1 Xuefu Chen,c Yiyu Deng,d Shifang Yang,e Hanyi Xu,e Zixing Chen,e and Xinglin Gao
“Coronavirus patients without symptoms aren’t driving the spread of the virus, World Health Organization officials said Monday: … Preliminary evidence from the earliest outbreaks indicated that the virus could spread from person-to-person contact, even if the carrier never develops symptoms. But WHO officials now say that while asymptomatic spread can occur, it is not the main way it’s being transmitted. ‘From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual,’ Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of WHO’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, said at a news briefing from the United Nations agency’s Geneva headquarters. ‘It’s very rare.’”
Studies show that headaches in medical professionals are commonly found as a result of mask-wearing, which is a sign of hypoxia: Just under 10% of the healthcare workers in one study experienced such severe symptoms that they were forced to take, on average, two full days of sick leave from their healthcare jobs, while 60% of these healthcare professionals “required use of abortive analgesics because of headache.” Headaches and the N95 Face-Mask Amongst Healthcare Providers. Lim EC1, Seet RC, Lee KH, Wilder-Smith EP, Chuah BY, Ong BK, Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 28 Feb 2006, 113(3):199-202.
A more recent study involving 159 healthcare workers aged 21 to 35 years of age found that 81% developed headaches from wearing a face mask – which is a sign of dangerously low levels of oxygenation – and ALL healthcare workers felt like the headaches affected their work performance. Ong JJY et al. Headaches associated with personal protective equipment- A cross-sectional study among frontline healthcare workers during COVID-19. Headache 2020;60(5):864-877.
In this study, researchers examined the blood oxygen levels in 53 surgeons. They measured blood oxygenation before surgery as well as at the end of surgeries. The researchers found that the mask reduced the blood oxygen levels significantly. The longer the duration of wearing the mask, the greater the fall in blood oxygen levels. Bader A et al. Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery. Neurocirugia 2008;19:12-126.
In a study of dentists and dental assistants who adopted new protocols since COVID, headaches jumped from 16% pre-COVID to 65%, with half of respondents (49%) noting it was hard to breathe “all the time” and 40% noting it was hard to breathe some of the time.
( Dr. Margareta Griesz-Brisson, MD, PhD, is one of Europes leading neurologists who is currently based in London, UK. "She is currently the Medical Director of The London Neurology & Pain Clinic ) "The much loved mouth and nose cover…the re-breathing of our exhaled air will without a doubt create oxygen deficiency and a flooding with carbon dioxide. But we know that the human brain is so sensitive to oxygen deprivation that our nerve cells for instance in the hippocampus who can’t be longer than 3 minutes without oxygen, they can’t survive. The acute warning symptoms air headaches, drowsiness, dizziness, concentration, slow down in concentration time…But chronic deprivation, all those symptoms disappear because people get used to it, but your efficiency will remain impaired. And oxygen undersupply in your brain continues to progress. We know that neurodegenerative diseases need years to decades. So if today you forget your phone number, the break-down in your brain already started 20 or 30 years ago.
While you’re thinking you have to get used to your mask and your own exhaled air, the degenerative processes in your brain are getting amplified through the oxygen deprivation…"
“The immunity of the mask wearer – and his or her subsequent ability to fight off COVID-19 or any other harmful infection – is actually harmed by wearing a mask. The drop in oxygen levels (hypoxia) noted in many studies is directly associated with an impairment in immunity. In terms of the biological effects, what the studies have shown is that the lowered rate of oxygen (hypoxia) in turn inhibits the production of the type of primary immune cells that our bodies use to fight viral infections (known as the CD4+ T-lymphocyte). Functionally speaking, what happens inside our bodies is that the decrease in oxygen causes a spike in the level of a compound called hypoxia-inducible-factor-1 (HIF-1). Once that compound spikes, it in turn inhibits the production of T-lymphocytes we need for our bodies to fight off invaders and infections. Yet worse, the lack of oxygen stimulates a powerful inhibitor of the immune system (a cell called the Tregs), which in turn makes one’s body ripe for contracting a COVID-19 infection and experiencing said illness more severely: “This sets the stage for contracting any infection, including COVID-19, and making the consequences of that infection much graver. In essence, your mask may very well put you at an increased risk of infections and if so, having a much worse outcome.” Russell Blaylock, Id. (quoting Shehade H et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-Inducible Factor-1 negatively regulates Th1 function. J Immunol 2015;195:1372-1376. See also: Westendorf AM et al. Hypoxia enhances immunosuppression by inhibiting CD4+ effector T cell function and promoting Treg activity. Cell Physiol Biochem 2017;41:1271-84. See further: Sceneay J et al. Hypoxia-driven immunosuppression contributes to the pre-metastatic niche. Oncoimmunology 2013;2:1 e22355.
People with cancer may be at a further risk from hypoxia – as cancer cells grow best in a bodily environment that is low in oxygen. Low oxygen also promotes systemic inflammation which, in turn, promotes “the growth, invasion and spread of cancers.” Aggarwal BB. Nucler factor-kappaB: The enemy within. Cancer Cell 2004;6:203-208, and Blaylock RL. Immunoexcitatory mechanisms in glioma proliferation, invasion and occasional metastasis. Surg Neurol Inter 2013;4:15.
Repeated episodes of low oxygen – known as intermittent hypoxia – also “causes atherosclerosis” and hence increases “all cardiovascular events” such as heart attacks – as well as adverse cerebral events like stroke. Blaylock, quoting Savransky V et al. Chronic intermittent hypoxia induces atherosclerosis. Am J Resp Crit Care Med 2007;175:1290-1297.
It appears the virus may be able to enter the brain. According to those who practice neurosurgery, in most instances where the virus enters the brain, it does so by way of the olfactory nerves (smell nerves) – and accordingly – by wearing a mask “the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape, and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain.’’ Blaylock, reviewing Baig AM et al. Evidence of the COVID-19 virus targeting the CNS: Tissue distribution, host-virus interaction, and proposed neurotropic mechanisms. ACS Chem Neurosci 2020;11:7:995-998. Wu Y et al. Nervous system involvement after infection with COVID-19 and other coronaviruses. Brain Behavior, and Immunity. Perlman S et al. Spread of a neurotropic murine coronavirus into the CNS via the trigeminal and olfactory nerves. Virology 1989;170:556-560.
Dr. Jenny Harries, England’s deputy chief medical officer, has warned that it was not a good idea for the public to wear facemasks as the virus can get trapped in the material and causes infection when the wearer breathes in. “For the average member of the public walking down a street, it is not a good idea,” Dr. Harries said.
A study found respiratory infection was much higher among healthcare workers wearing cloth masks, with the penetration of cloth masks by particles at almost 97% compared to medical masks with 44%. (However, medical masks could be treated with harmful chemicals)
The source of bacterial contamination in SMs (surgical masks) was the body surface of the surgeons rather than the OR environment. Moreover, we recommend that surgeons should change the mask after each operation, especially those beyond 2 hours.
“There’s no evidence that wearing masks on healthy people will protect them,” Perencevich said, the publication reported. “They wear them incorrectly, and they can increase the risk of infection because they’re touching their face more often,” says Dr. Eli Perencevich, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at the University of Iowa’s College of Medicine, according to Forbes.
What the World Health Organization and the CDC have reaffirmed in the last few days is that they do not recommend the general public wear masks," Adams told Fox News' "Fox and Friends." "There was a study in 2015 looking at medical students. And medical students wearing surgical masks touch their faces on average 23 times. We know a major way that you can get respiratory diseases like coronavirus is by touching a surface and then touching your face.""
There is another danger to wearing these masks on a daily basis, especially if worn for several hours. When a person is infected with a respiratory virus, they will expel some of the virus with each breath. If they are wearing a mask, especially an N95 mask or other tightly fitting mask, they will be constantly rebreathing the viruses, raising the concentration of the virus in the lungs and the nasal passages. We know that people who have the worst reactions to the coronavirus have the highest concentrations of the virus early on. And this leads to the deadly cytokine storm in a selected number.
It gets even more frightening. Newer evidence suggests that in some cases the virus can enter the brain.11,12 In most instances it enters the brain by way of the olfactory nerves (smell nerves), which connect directly with the area of the brain dealing with recent memory and memory consolidation. By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain(Russell Blaylock, MD) Blaylock, reviewing Baig AM et al. Evidence of the COVID-19 virus targeting the CNS: Tissue distribution, host-virus interaction, and proposed neurotropic mechanisms. ACS Chem Neurosci 2020;11:7:995-998. Wu Y et al. Nervous system involvement after infection with COVID-19 and other coronaviruses. Brain Behavior, and Immunity. Perlman S et al. Spread of a neurotropic murine coronavirus into the CNS via the trigeminal and olfactory nerves. Virology 1989;170:556-560.
MAINSTREAM MEDIA ADMISSIONS:
.......FACE MASK WEARING has not been definitely proven effective in preventing infection or transmission of viruses, nor safe, but on the contrary, very dangerous for health, especially in the case of children?
Medically and scientifically validated treatments with very cheap, effective and safe means such Ivermectin, HCQ+Azythromicine+Zinc, Chlorine Dioxide, Budenisode, Vit. C and Vit. Detc. have been totally dismissed, and the responsibility for the treatment of the sick that should belong to each doctor and each medical institution is politicized and confiscated by the government. What we have now, after more than a year since the first covid outbreak is an outstanding amount of medical research and practice showing that these treatments work, have already saved thousands of lives even among the most severe cases, and have also a major preventive effect. The responsibility for all the lives who could have been saved using such treatments, lies on the shoulders of the political and medical authorities. And same for all the harm caused by these experimental vaccines whose producers have been discharged of any legal and criminal liability.
Some references to some of the safe and efficient treatments against covid-19:
195 HCQ studies
130 peer reviewed
Early treatment shows high efficacy
100% of studies report positive effects. 64% is the median improvement for early intervention
Summary on HCQ (UK Column News) - September 2020
“Doctors in New York found that hydroxychloroquine treatment increased survival rates; Brazilian doctors discovered that treating patients with hydroxychloroquine reduced their chances of requiring hospital treatment by nearly 300%, with no notable adverse events; Chinese doctors reduced fever duration and improved the clinical outcomes for patients treated with chloroquine; doctors in Spain used hydroxychloroquine to increase patient survival rates; researchers in the U.S. found that the addition of zinc further improved outcomes; doctors treating Chinese patients with hydroxychloroquine found no increase in adverse events for their patients; and a systemic review of the available evidence by Indian researchers concluded:
“There is theoretical, experimental, preclinical and clinical evidence of the effectiveness of chloroquine in patients affected with COVID-19. There is adequate evidence of drug safety from the long-time clinical use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine.”
“This white paper is to draw the reader’s attention to the indisputable safety of HCQ, remarkable efficacy of HCQ against SARS-CoV-2, and the worldwide political storm that has resulted in its use being restricted. We speak in support of it being made available over the counter in the USA due to the inability of Americans to access it, whether they need it for treatment or to manage their fear.”
See more from dr. Simone Gold & Co: Press conference in D.C. held by the group America’s Frontline Doctors PRESIDED BY DR. SIMONE GOLD: www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com
Other early scientific studies pointing at the efficacy of HCQ in Covid-19 treatment: Another summary on HCQ use by doctors in curing Covid:19 – The Biggest Plunder Public Health Has Ever Made (November 2020)
Even at the beginning of April the treatment with Hydroxychloroquine was very well known and endorsed by some American doctors and by more than 2000 doctors worldwide... "of the 6,227 physicians surveyed in 30 countries, 37 percent rated hydroxychloroquine the “most effective therapy” for combating the potentially deadly illness, according to the results released Thursday"....
See also the testimony of scientist and epidemiologist, Yale University Professor, DR HARVEY RISCH: SENATE HEARING ON COVID-19 OUTPATIENT TREATMENT WITH HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE
Professor Harvey Risch says that “all studies which study the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine on high risk population groups show the drug is “uniformly beneficial” in treating COVID-19: Studies show hydroxychloroquine cuts 'virus mortality in half in high risk groups (this is also referred in dr. Mercola’s article: Journal of Medicine Says HCQ + Zinc Reduces COVID Deaths (1 Feb 2021) – together with NEBULAZID PEROXIDE)
· CHLORINE DIOXIDE / MSM
Dr. Alan Keys interviews the DR. MANUEL APARICIO pediatric orthopedic and spinal surgeon representing COMUSAV – World Health and Life Coalition (over 2400 doctors of 22 countries) about the almost 100% effective treatment of Covid-19 with Chlorine Dioxide. He affirms that HCQ is very effective in dealing with the mild cases of Covid-19, but not in the severe cases, while Chlorine Dioxide is efficient at any stage of the disease as also in prevention. Bolivia officially uses Chlorine Dioxide since August; when it was introduced they had 100 deaths per day and at the end of November there were less than 10 deaths per day. Chlorine Dioxide also has got a very good prophylactic effect and is extremely cheap: the treatment for a patient is below 5$. There are very many diseases that can be treated with this medicine, including flu, malaria etc because it lowers the ph in the body and increases the oxygen levels in the blood. Dr. Aparicio affirms that there are 20,000 patients treated with Chlorine Dioxide under his supervision and there were no reports of any side effects. All the doctors of COMUSAV who deal with Covid-19 patients treat themselves preventively with Chlorine Dioxide and none of them died or got a severe form of Covid-19.
According to Dr. Ernesto Lammoglia from COMUSAV, Chlorine Dioxide has been used for many years “to sanitize milk that is packaged or put in tetra pack packages, water from purifiers and even blood from vascular packages, which are used in hospitals, to administer a blood transfusion”, therefore despite recent rumours, it is definitely a safe substance.
Dr. Pierre Korry's website about Ivermectin and the Overmectin based protocol for covid-19 treatment: https://covid19criticalcare.com/
The common anti-parasite medication Ivermectin is definitely effective for COVID-19.
100% of studies report positive effects. The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 23 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 8 million (p = 0.00000012).
•Early treatment is most successful, with an estimated reduction of 87% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.13 [0.04-0.51].
•100% of the 10 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated reduction of 74% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.26 [0.12-0.56].
Early studies: 100% of studies report positive effects. 86% is the median improvement.
All: 100% of studies report positive effects.
34 ivermectin studies
13 peer reviewed
Early and prophylactic use show high efficacy
AN extraordinary testimony in support of IVERMECTIN: - "I CAN'T KEEP DOING THIS": Doctor pleads for review of data during COVID-19 Senate hearing
Antiparasitic drug Ivermectin kills coronavirus in 48 hours (April 2020) News Medical Life Sciences
“The drug, Ivermectin, an antiparasitic medicine, is an inhibitor of the virus SARS-CoV-2 in-vitro and can effectively cause a reduction in virus at 48 hours in cell cultures. The FDA-approved drug can be used for repurposing to treat patients affected by COVID-19, which has spread to 184 countries and territories.
The researchers at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, have published their study in the journal Antiviral Research, showing how this already widely-used drug may help combat the current global pandemic rippling across continents.”
· Can Ivermectin Help Prevent COVID-19 Deaths? (Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola) 25 Jan 2021
“While preliminary evidence seems to suggest Ivermectin can be useful at all stages of SARS-CoV-2 infection, its real strength appears to be as a preventive approach
· Of 58 health care workers who took ivermectin once a month for four months, only four (6.96%) came down with mild COVID-19 symptoms during the May through August 2020 trial period, compared to 44 of 60 health care workers (73.3%) who declined the medication
· In August 2020, India’s largest state, Uttar Pradesh, added ivermectin to its recommendations and distributed the drug for home care free of charge. The state of Bihar also started recommending ivermectin, and by the end of 2020, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh had the lowest and second-lowest COVID-19 fatality rates in all of India
· A WHO-sponsored review suggests ivermectin can reduce COVID-19 mortality by as much as 83%
· In the U.S., the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance is calling for widespread adoption of ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-192
· VITAMIN C
"OMNS Chinese edition editor DR. RICHARD CHENG is reporting from China about the first approved study of 12,000 to 24,000 mg/day of vitamin C by IV. The doctor also specifically calls for immediate use of vitamin C for prevention of coronavirus (COVID-19). - NCP(Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia) and Vitamin C
Dr. Cheng, who is a US board-certified specialist in anti-aging medicine, adds: "Vitamin C is very promising for prevention, and especially important to treat dying patients when there is no better treatment. Over 2,000 people have died of the COIV-19 outbreak and yet I have not seen or heard large dose intravenous vitamin C being used in any of the cases. The current sole focus on vaccine and specific antiviral drugs for epidemics is misplaced."
He adds that: "Early and sufficiently large doses of intravenous vitamin C are critical. Vitamin C is not only a prototypical antioxidant, but also involved in virus killing and prevention of viral replication. The significance of large dose intravenous vitamin C is not just at antiviral level. It is acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) that kills most people from coronaviral pandemics (SARS, MERS and now NCP). ARDS is a common final pathway leading to death.
"We therefore call for a worldwide discussion and debate on this topic."
Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, Feb 21, 2020: Three INTRAVENOUS VITAMIN C Research Studies Approved for Treating COVID-19[
- Much more on vitamin C and its use against this virus and essential importance for health on DR. ANDREW SAUL's page: http://www.doctoryourself.com/
PRESS RELEASE: Placebo-controlled clinical study documents that Vitamin C greatly reduces mortality in patients at life-threatening stage of COVID-19: Effective, safe, and readily available way to help control the global pandemic (Rath Foundation, 19 Oct 2020)
ScienceDirect June 2020 Study:Intravenous vitamin C for reduction of cytokines storm in acute respiratory distress syndrome
- Confirmed by testimonies of healthcare staff as seen in several videos
· VITAMIN D
Treatment: 89% of studies report positive effects. 80% is the median improvement.
Levels: 95% of studies report positive effects. 58% is the median improvement.
37 Vitamin D studies
27 peer reviewed
Levels studies analyze outcomes for D levels. Confounding factors may be significant.
In December 2020, Gospa News Italia published an article referring to “a document signed by 61 distinguished doctors from various Italian cities and published on the official website of the Academy of Medicine of Turin, a body of the University of Turin (Piedmont, Italy)” and stating that “COVID-19 can be Treated with Vitamin D”. Vital Study by Turin’s Medicine Academy & 61 Physicians Appeal The article also mentions that “In Great Britain, on the other hand, and even earlier in Scotland, with governmental provision, vitamin D supplementation was recently ordered to 2.7 million subjects at risk of COVID-19 (the elderly, the black population and residents of the RSA ) with an operation that the House of Commons defined as “low-cost, zero-risk, potentially highly effective action”: a lively scientific debate followed, with some reservations expressed by NICE but with the support of the Royal Society of London who defines it as “… seems nothing to lose and potentially much to gain”
......there are cheap, very effective, medically and scientifically proven TREATMENTS for the disease identified as covid-19, that have been totally SUPPRESSEDin the UK, while the doctors, scientists, professionals and members of the public who spoke out against the official narrative or in support of these treatments have been heavily CENSORED throughout the social and mainstream media?
Official admissions from the US FDA concerning the need to continue its clinical trials in order to assess long term safety and efficacy show also that this vaccine is, in fact, in its experimental phase: “FDA does not consider availability of a COVID-19 vaccine under EUA, in and of itself, as grounds for immediately stopping blinded follow-up in an ongoing clinical trial or grounds for offering vaccine to all placebo recipients. To minimize the risk that use of an unapproved vaccine under EUA will interfere with long-term assessment of safety and efficacy in ongoing trials, it is critical to continue to gather data about the vaccine even after it is made available under EUA. An EUA request should therefore include strategies that will be implemented to ensure that ongoing clinical trials of the vaccine are able to assess long-term safety and efficacy (including evaluating for vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease and decreased effectiveness as immunity wanes over time) in sufficient numbers of participants to support vaccine licensure”
The design of Pfizer’s main trial shows clearly the Serious Adverse Events (SAE) for all the subjects will begin to be investigated in February 2021, and the data on Death & Related SAE only in August 2023 (2 years post dose 2). With this they also admit DEATH to be one of the possible SAE and of course, clarify the fact that the vaccine is still in its experimental phase
The grounds for these vaccines to be considered as experimental are also explained in America’s Frontline Doctors White Paper On Experimental Vaccines For COVID-19 , page 2:
“All the vaccine candidates are categorized as experimental for the following four reasons:
• the pharmaceutical companies have applied for investigational use status
• adverse events will be settled under the legal standard for experimental medications
• recipients are enrolled as subjects in a medical trial to gather data on side effects.
• persons are enrolled in a pharmaco-vigilance tracking system for at least two years
• many groups of persons have not been studied at all, including: prior COVID-19 patients, pregnant women, youths, elderly
• no published animal studies data”
According to THE NUREMBERG CODE, in all experiments using human subjects VOLUNTARY CONSENT is essential, they should be based on previous animal experimentation, they should not be conducted if it is believed that they may cause death or disability, they must be conducted by qualified scientists etc…. Let’s try to observe how the use of this still experimental vaccine answers to the previous criteria.
First, voluntary consent involves providing the possible participants with the necessary critical information that they are able to understand in order to make a choice about participating or not in the experiment. Voluntary consent is a free and informed consent.
The rollout of these experimental vaccines on the population, goes against the Nuremberg Code, the duty of care of the medical profession and the patient's right to an informed consent as expressed in the Patients Charter England, The NHS Constitution England, The Charter Of Patient Rights And Responsibilities From NHS Scotland, the Montgomery Judgment(UK Supreme Court, 2015) and numerous other parallel international regulations.
More in: Notice of Critical Information and Liability concerning Covid-19 mRNA vaccines - Chap. 3 PROOFS THAT THE VACCINE IS STILL IN ITS EXPERIMENTAL PHASE
Moreover, these vaccines are not assess as offering lasting immunity or preventing infection and spreading the disease and they are seen as a temporary means that prevents only the complications of the disease . The idea is to keep vaccinating the population against covid as against any seasonal flu.
" Sky News has noted that the technology that Vaccitech owns “could drive the second generation of COVID-19 vaccines” and that it “has [already] received £2.3 million of public funding to develop it.”
US government officials such as Anthony Fauci have also signaled that the COVID-19 vaccine will require annual shots. Notably, the government, through Health and Human Service’s BARDA, has poured over $1 billion into the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine development. In addition to government officials, several recently published mainstream media reports have claimed that the “expert” consensus “seem[s] to be leaning toward an annual shot like the flu vaccine” with regard to the COVID-19 vaccine. For instance, Charles Chiu, a professor of infectious diseases at the University of California–San Francisco, recently told Salon, “This may end up being a vaccine that’s not a one-time thing or even a two-time thing . . . it may end up being what we call either a seasonal vaccine, or vaccine that needs to be administered every couple of years.”
Such hints about an annual COVID-19 vaccine from 2021 onward have recently become commonplace from the leading COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers themselves. For instance, on December 13, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla was quoted by the Telegraph as saying, “How long this [vaccine] protection lasts is something we don’t know . . . I think it is a likely scenario that you will need periodical vaccinations.” Pfizer also recently issued a statement that noted that “we don’t know how the virus will change, and we also don’t know how durable the protective effect of any vaccination will be,” adding that its vaccine would be suitable “for repeated administration as booster shots” in the event that the vaccine only induces an immune response for a few months.
Then, this past Tuesday, Moderna released information that suggested immunity from its COVID-19 vaccine would only last several months, with Forbes writing that “the duration of neutralizing antibodies from the Moderna vaccine will be relatively short, potentially less than a year,” an outcome that would favor the push for an annual COVID-19 shot. The developer of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, Ugur Sahin of BioNTech, also stated on Tuesday that “the virus will stay with us for the next 10 years. . . . We need to get used to the fact there’ll be more outbreaks.” He later added that “if the virus becomes more efficient . . . we might need a higher uptake of the vaccine for life to return to normal,” implying that these regular outbreaks he foresees occurring over the next ten years would be correlated with increased vaccine administration.
Quotes from the developers of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine themselves also point to a pandemic-dominated future and a desire for the crisis to be prolonged so that the vaccine can be widely distributed. Gilbert told the UK Independent in August that she believes COVID-19 is just the beginning and that COVID-like pandemics will become more frequent in the near future. The Jenner Institute vaccine team seems so determined to create the COVID vaccine that, in June, Hill was quoted by the Washington Post as stating that he wanted the pandemic to stick around, saying, “We’re in the bizarre position of wanting COVID to stay, at least for a little while. But cases are declining.” He also stated that his team was in “a race against the virus disappearing.
Notably, no interaction studies have yet been conducted on the interactions between the COVID-19 vaccines and other medications as well as other vaccines. ” ( Developers of Oxford-AstraZeneca Vaccine Tied to UK Eugenics Death Cult, Feb 28, 2021)
......the covid vaccines that have been released for the public are UNLICENSED and still in their EXPERIMENTAL phase and, that these typed of genetically engineered vaccines have never been used before?
· On August 18, 2020, The British Medical Journal warns that “The rush to create a covid-19 vaccine may do more harm than good” pointing at the their potential lack of efficacy
Countless warnings against these rushed experimental vaccines coming from doctors, scientists and even mainstream media.
Googling "rushed covid vaccines"... we get first 11 answers coming from mainstream media and scientific area dating March to October 2020 that all warned about potential dangers of these vaccines...
With all that’s riding on the success of a vaccine, it’s worth waiting for a full set of trial results. And there are risks in not doing so. (Oct 12 - Bloomberg)
- Rushing a COVID-19 Vaccine Could Lead to 'Perpetual Limbo' (Sept. 14 - Medscape)
- Here’s why we can’t rush a COVID-19 vaccine (March 31 - AAMC)
- The Risks of Rushing a COVID-19 Vaccine: Telescoping testing time lines and approvals may expose all of us to unnecessary dangers (June 22, Scientific American)
- Rushing a Covid-19 Vaccine Is a Terrible Idea (Oct 12 - Bloomberg)
- Why Rushing a COVID-19 Vaccine by November Could Be Dangerous (Sept 3 - Healthline)
- Commentary: Why rushing a COVID-19 vaccine could spell disaster (29 Oct - CNA)
And finally, even Dr. Fauci..
Much more science has added up since then and also the records of side effects including death for the last 2 months and a half are more than worrying.
· On September 1, 2020, in “Past vaccine disasters show why rushing a coronavirus vaccine now would be 'colossally stupid'” CNN conveys the message that “Vaccine experts are warning the federal government against rushing out a coronavirus vaccine before testing has shown it's both safe and effective. Decades of history show why they're right.”
On December1, 2020, “Switzerland’s medical regulator, SWISSMEDIC says it lacks the necessary information to sign off on three different coronavirus vaccines ordered by the government. (Pfizer/BioNTech, AstraZeneca, and Moderna) - Incomplete data stalls Swiss authorisation of Covid-19 vaccines
· On December 2, 2020, EU (European Medical Agency) criticises 'hasty' UK approval of COVID-19 vaccine
· Dr. Fauci and the WHO show that there is no proof the the new covid-19 vaccines will be able to prevent the infection with the virus. This converges with previous observations of Dr. Joseph Mercola regarding the trials of vaccines not having infection prevention as a criterion for success and with a Forbes article on the same theme
Dr Fauci warns that early COVID-19 vaccines will only prevent symptoms from arising - not block infection (Daily Mail 27th October 2020)
WHO's chief scientist, Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, noted on Monday that the agency had not established whether the COVID-19 vaccines being administered across the US and in Europe prevented people from getting the virus and passing it to others.
"At the moment I don't believe we have the evidence of any of the vaccines to be confident that it's going to prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on," (Top WHO scientist says vaccinated travelers should still quarantine, citing lack of evidence that COVID-19 vaccines prevent transmission - Dec 2020)
.....there have been plenty of OFFICIAL WARNINGS towards UK using these rushed vaccines without a clear assessment of their safety and efficacy?
These new, never used before mRNA vaccines have not been investigated for long term safety and efficacy, for interaction with other vaccines and medications, and even their short term safety in the case of immunocompromise people or people who already had covid is unknown. The effect on female and male fertility, pregnancy and breastfeeding has not been investigated through clinical trials.
They are contraindicated to the persons who are sensitive/ allergic to any of their components, but not even people's sensitivity to PEG, which is a known allergen, is assessed, not to mention that to the mRNA (active substance), which is a synthetic product that the human body has never experienced before. Numerous doctors and scientists have spoken out, despite severe censorship, pointing to the severe dangers of these vaccines, showing the mechanisms through which they can cause severe disability, neurological damage, infertility and miscarriages, autoimmune diseases, cancer and death
" All vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 virus are by definition novel. If any such vaccine is approved for use under any circumstances that are not EXPLICITLY experimental, I believe that recipients are being misled to a criminal extent.” ( Dr Michael Yeadon, former Vice-President of Pfizer )
"People who promote these gene therapies, falsely called ′′ vaccines ′′ are wizard apprentices and take the French and more generally the world citizens, for guinea pigs.” (Prof. CHRISTIAN PERRONNE, Professor of Infectious and Tropical Diseases at the Faculty of Medicine of Paris-Ile de France-Ouest)
" Legally all those people giving “vaccinations” are war criminals…There is no doubt in my mind, this is global genocide.” ( Dr Vernon Coleman )
“I think it (the covid vaccine) is downright dangerous. And I warn you, if you go along these lines, you are going to go to your doom. And it’s so, so unnecessary.” (DR. SUCHARIT BHAKDI, award-winning doctor and scientist, former head of the Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene)
" We now call for an immediate and urgent audit of deaths that have occurred since the beginning of the Covid-19 vaccine rollout, to ascertain if Covid-19 vaccines (in general or any one brand in particular) are leading to an increased number of deaths (Covid-19 and non-Covid-19 related), Covid19 cases or increased risk of death in certain age groups or cohorts.” ( UK Medical Freedom Alliance letter to Boris Johnson )
A very good SUMMARY OF THE MAIN PROBLEMS RELATED TO THE PFIZER AND MODERNA NEW COVID VACCINES can be found in a letter of Robert F. KENNEDY JR addressed to PETER MARKS, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, in which ‘RFK, Jr. Urges FDA to Slow Down COVID Vaccine Approval Process’ (August 2020). The concerns expressed in the letter concerning the composition of vaccines and their trials have definitely not been addressed up to now.
Let's add to this:
With a “vaccine” based on untested technology, and safety trials still ongoing, is it safe to take the shot? And does it even work? And does a disease with an IFR of 0.2% even justify that risk? (Feb 22, 2021 - OffGuardian) - a summary on the warnings coming from independent science
A very comprehensive article based on critical science is published by the Bioregulatory Medicien Institute: - Covid-19 mRNA Vaccines –by James Odell, OMD, ND, L.Ac.“With the recent licensing and roll out of COVID-19 vaccines in the U.K., Canada, the U.S. (Pfizer/ BioNTech and Moderna), and Russia (Sputnik) there are several serious safety concerns that have not been addressed or even mentioned in the medical media. In short, it is beyond reckless and totally unnecessary to administer these experimental vaccines to millions of people when there is only limited short term safety data.”
Some of the independent scientists and doctors' public warnings concerning the covid-vaccines:
DR. MIKE YEADON, ex-Pfizer head of respiratory research and DR. WOLFGANG WODARD, lung specialist and former head of the Public Health Department recently requested A STOP OF ALL CORONA VACCINATION and called for co-signing an associated petition In their official address, they reveal very critical facts pertaining to the potential risk of death induced by the vaccines due to ADE (a hyper immune reaction), PEG (polyethylene glycol), as also the risk of infertility. Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg explains this last issue in the interview with Del Bigtree “Fertility Concerns Regarding the Covid-19 mRNA Vaccine”
DR PETER HOTEZ, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, who worked in the development of a SARS vaccine, warns about the possibility of a more severe reaction to the wild virus after vaccination
PROF. JAMES LYONS-WEILER PHD, founder of the "Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge" and author of 57 peer-reviewed publications, expert in microbiology and genetics has got similar arguments. He cites three important studies proving immunization with SARS Coronavirus vaccines before an infection with a SARS – Coronavirus causes hypersensitivity to this virus or, in other words, increases the effects of the infection and causes severe pneumonia in experiment animals.
This is confirmed by immunologist PROF. DOLORES CAHILL and from physician and surgeon DR. LEE MERRITT.
DR. JOSEPH MERCOLA, renown osteopathic physician and medical author, presents a review of major research warning about the same issue presented by the previous scientists: the antibody-dependent-enhancement (ADE) and the Th2 immunopathology, which may be triggered by the new vaccine as it happened, in fact, with all previous vaccines devised for coronaviruses in earlier experiments with animals and even with children. The article also documents the fact that the elderly are the most vulnerable to ADE – How Covid-19 Vaccine can destroy your immunity (Nov 2020)
In an Open Letter From: UK MEDICAL FREEDOM ALLIANCE To: The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization… for COVID-19 in the UK.” [...] we find the testimony of dr. ARVIND JOSHI, a scientist that describes the severe side effects that may follow in case of immunisation with a covid vaccine and warns that the actual trials give no indication about the possibility of such not occurring months or years after vaccination
PROFESSOR BEATE KAMPMANN, director of the Vaccine Centre at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and DR. STUART BLUME, an expert in the history of vaccines at the University of Amsterdam warn about the great risk of rushed vaccines and unpredictable side effects, as related in in a September Telegraph article. In the same, ELEANOR RILEY, Professor of immunology and infectious disease at the University of Edinburgh shows that the actual low risk of dying from Covid-19 doesn’t justify vaccination.
DR. DOUG CORRIGAN, Ph.D. in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, founder of a biotech company, shows that indeed, genetic modifications in our DNA are possible after the administration of an RNA material
DR. CLEMENS ARVAY, biologist, confirms the possibility of genetic interference in the case of DNA vaccines, a fact that can lead to the development of tumours; he also mentions the studies on animals vaccinated with RNA vaccines against SARS, leading to severe pulmonary inflamation
PROF. CHRISTIAN PERRONNE, Professor of Infectious and Tropical Diseases at the Faculty of Medicine of Paris-Ile de France-Ouest, chief of a Department of Infectious Diseases at the Raymond Poincaré University Hospital, past vice-president of the European Advisory Group of Experts on Immunisation (WHO related) wrotean open letter discussing the entire course of the pandemic and claiming that there are no scientific grounds for mass vaccination since the risks appear to be much greater than the possible benefits. He confirmed the possibility of genetic interference in a similar manner to the previous two quoted scientists and called these new vaccines ‘gene therapy’. Following text is a translated excerpt from his recent public letter
DR. SUCHARIT BHAKDI, award-winning doctor and scientist, former head of the Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, the author of the best-seller “Corona, False Alarm” and pro-vaccine professional warns in a recent interview with FOXNEWS that the covid-19 vaccines are unnecessary and so dangerous as to represent the doom of anybody receiving them (video). An important intervention of Dr. Bhakdi can be seen in ‘THE BIGGEST EXPERIMENT EVER DONE'
Many other notable doctors and specialists spoke out publicly against the use of any Covid-19 DNA or RNA vaccines on the same line as dr. Bhakdi; a compilation containing some short testimonies can be found in “DOCTORS SPEAK OUT AGAINST THE COVID VACCINE[*]” - but each one of these professionals had many such interventions that can be found on Bitchute, YTube, Brighteon and various natural health websites. The expert who first spoke out publicly against these new vaccines is DR. CARRIE MADEJ, an internal medical specialist, who researched the potential DNA damage of these vaccines
EXTRAORDINARY IMPORTANT REVELATION COMING FROM VACCINE DEVELOPPER:
Excerpt: ". In contrast to acquired immunity, innate immune responses protect against a large spectrum of pathogens (so don’t compromise or sacrifice your innate immune defense!). Because natural Abs and
innate immune cells recognize a diversified spectrum of foreign (i.e., non-self) agents (only some of
which have pathogenic potential), it’s important, indeed, to keep it sufficiently exposed to environmental
challenges. By keeping the innate immune system (which, unfortunately, has no memory!) TRAINED, we
can much more easily resist germs which have real pathogenic potential. It has, for example, been
reported and scientifically proven that exposure to other, quite harmless Coronaviruses causing a
‘common cold ’ can provide protection, although short-lived, against Covid-19 and its loyal henchmen
(i.e., the more infectious variants).
Suppression of innate immunity, especially in the younger age groups, can, therefore, become very
problematic. There can be no doubt that lack of exposure due to stringent containment measures
implemented as of the beginning of the pandemic has not been beneficial to keeping people’s innate
immune system well trained. As if this was not already heavily compromising innate immune defense in
this population segment, there comes yet another force into play that will dramatically enhance
morbidity and mortality rates in the younger age groups: MASS VACCINATION of the ELDERLY. The more extensively the later age group will be vaccinated and hence, protected, the more the virus is forced to continue causing disease in younger age groups. This is only going to be possible provided it escapes to the S-specifc Abs that are momentarily raised in previously asymptomatically infected subjects. If the virus manages to do so, it can benefit from the (momentarily) suppressed innate immunity, thereby causing disease in an increasing number of these subjects and ensuring its own propagation. Selecting targeted mutaitons in the S protein is, therefore, the way to go in order for the virus to enhance its infectiousness in candidates that are prone to getting the disease because of a transient weakness of their innate immune defense.
But in the meantime, we’re also facing a huge problem in vaccinated people as they’re now more and
more confronted with infectious variants displaying a type of S protein that is increasingly different from
the S edition comprised with the vaccine (the later edition originates from the original, much less
infectious strain at the beginning of the pandemic). The more variants become infectious (i.e., as a result
of blocking access of the virus to the vaccinated segment of the population), the less vaccinal Abs will
protect. Already now, lack of protection is leading to viral shedding and transmission in vaccine
recipients who are exposed to these more infectious strains (which, by the way, increasingly dominate
the Field). This is how we are currently turning vaccinees into asymptomatic carriers shedding infectious
variants. [...] Basically, we’ll very soon be confronted with a super-infectious virus that completely resists our most precious defense mechanism:
The human immune system. "
Author: Geert Vanden Bossche, DVM, PhD (March 6, 2021) –
......there are doctors and scientists who spoke out pointing towards actual scientific literature showing the mechanisms through which they can and will cause SEVERE DISABILITY, NEUROLOGICAL DAMAGE, INFERTILITY AND MISCARRIAGES, AUTO-IMMUNE DISEASES, CANCER AND DEATH?
Users of the social media platform have pointed to posts from people who received the vaccine and then perished.
"As of February 12, 929 deaths, 616 life-threatening adverse events, 316 cases of permanent disability, and more than 5,000 hospitalizations and emergency room visits after COVID vaccinations were reported to VAERS, which is updated weekly.
“VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness,” according to the CDC VAERS website. Rather, it is considered to be a tool for detecting “signals” or patterns of significant problems with vaccines. Any healthcare worker, vaccine manufacturer or member of the public can submit a report to VAERS, so interpretation is limited.
Still, many VAERS reports give detailed pictures of adverse events that have occurred. For example, the 929 COVID-19 vaccination-associated reported deaths include information about the patient’s age, state and how long after vaccination their symptoms began as in the following samples:...."
Children’s Health Defense Team
According to new data released today, as of Feb. 12, 15,923 adverse reactions to COVID vaccines, including 929 deaths, have been reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) since Dec. 14, 2020.
"Data from vaccine adverse event reporting systems in the US (VAERS), the EU (EUDRA) and the UK (MHRA) indicates that covid RNA vaccinations have already been associated with about 3000 deaths and several thousand non-trivial ‘adverse events’, including anaphylactic (allergic) shocks, temporary facial paralysis, and, in some cases, miscarriages. These figures may be an underestimate, as vaccine reporting systems typically cover only a fraction of adverse events.
Post-vaccination deaths may be unrelated to the vaccination. However, in the US, 47% of post-vaccination deaths occurred in people who became ill within 48 hours of being vaccinated, 31% of deaths occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, and 20% of deaths were related to cardiac disorder.
In the US, the average age of those who died after covid vaccination was 77.8 years. The youngest death confirmed was a 23-year-old. Some young and healthy doctors were affected, too." (https://swprs.org/covid-rna-vaccines-deaths/)
….VAERS, an American public database presenting Vaccines Adverse Reactions, which has been previously assessed as reporting no more than 1% of the real-life cases, shows in February 2021 more than 1000 PEOPLE DEAD AFTER THE VACCINATION, ONE THIRD OF THEM IN THE FIRST 48 HOURS?
A Newer and independent alternative to VAERS - VAXXTRACKER
"Here’s the Government’s advice on the Oxford / Astrazeneca jab –
‘The vaccine should only be considered for use in pregnancy when the potential benefits outweigh any potential risks for the mother and baby. Women should discuss the benefits and risks of having the vaccine with their healthcare professional and reach a joint decision based on individual circumstances.’
The reason for this line is that the Oxford jab has done absolutely no research into whether their experimental vaccine is safe for use in pregnant women."
Note: None of the healthcare professionals dealing with the public has got any expertise in these new mRNA vaccines.
In the first edition of REg 174 (later modified we found, as noted in the article:
There are no or limited amount of data from the use of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2.
Animal reproductive toxicity studies have not been completed. COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine
BNT162b2 is not recommended during pregnancy‘
The advice on the Pfizer jab doesn’t end there though –
‘For women of childbearing age, pregnancy should be excluded before vaccination. In addition, women
of childbearing age should be advised to avoid pregnancy for at least 2 months after their second dose.
It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is excreted in human milk. A risk to
the newborns/infants cannot be excluded. COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 should not be used
It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 has an impact on fertility.’"
"The Government’s own summary (which you can read here) states that ‘usage of the Astrazeneca (Oxford) vaccine has increased rapidly and as such, so has reporting of fatal events.’
They’re not wrong as the data now shows a total of 197 reports of adverse reactions to the Pfizer jab resulting in death and 205 reports of adverse reactions to the Oxford jab resulting in death.
Still, a small part of the real number, as care homes deaths and isolated elderly's deaths that happened in similar circumstances have most probably not reported)
The issue that the deaths and injuries following shortly after vaccination would be purely coincidental, having nothing to do with the vaccine, in principle, is contradicted by the history of vaccine damages payments in the UK and the US - If vaccines are so safe why does the UK Gov. have a ‘Vaccine Damage Payments Unit’? (March 2, 2021)
Much more than the shock of numbers... the shock of silence... - 460 Dead 243,612 Reported Injuries from COVID19 Vaccines Reported in the U.K.
The highest number of injuries are for PFIZER:
26,394 General disorders including 111 deaths
16,107 Nervous system disorders including 14 deaths
9360 Gastrointestinal disorders including 11 deaths
3575 Respiratory disorders including 12 deaths
6042 Skin disorders including 1 death
Total reactions for the COVID-19 mRNA Pfizer- BioNTech vaccine: 212 deaths and 85,179 injuries
56,377 General disorders including 146 deaths
34,656 Nervous system disorders including 14 deaths
17,597 Gastrointestinal disorders including 5 deaths
4059 Respiratory disorders including 10 deaths
7872 Skin disorders including 1 death for Astrazeneca
Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine Oxford University/AstraZenec vaccine: 244 deaths and 157,637 injuries
And, incredibly, that's what MHRA has to say about all this, in summary...
"The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine was evaluated in clinical trials involving more than 44,000 participants. The most frequent adverse reactions in trials were pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, myalgia (muscle pains), chills, arthralgia (joint pains), and fever; these were each reported in more than 1 in 10 people. These reactions were usually mild or moderate in intensity and resolved within a few days after vaccination. Adverse reactions were reported less frequently in older adults (over 55 years) than in younger people.
The Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccine was evaluated in clinical trials involving more than 23,000 participants. The most frequently reported adverse reactions in these trials were injection-site tenderness, injection-site pain, headache, fatigue, myalgia, malaise, pyrexia (fever), chills, arthralgia, and nausea; these were each reported in more than 1 in 10 people. The majority of adverse reactions were mild to moderate in severity and usually resolved within a few days of vaccination. Adverse reactions reported after the second dose were milder and reported less frequently than after the first dose. Adverse reactions were generally milder and reported less frequently in older adults (65 years and older) than in younger people.
It is important to note that Yellow Card data cannot be used to derive side effect rates or compare the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccinations as many factors can influence ADR reporting. For both vaccines, the overwhelming majority of reports relate to injection-site reactions (sore arm for example) and generalised symptoms such as ‘flu-like’ illness, headache, chills, fatigue (tiredness), nausea (feeling sick), fever, dizziness, weakness, aching muscles, and rapid heartbeat. Generally, these happen shortly after the vaccination and are not associated with more serious or lasting illness. These types of reactions reflect the normal immune response triggered by the body to the vaccines. They are typically seen with most types of vaccine and tend to resolve within a day or two. The nature of reported suspected side effects is broadly similar across age groups, although, as was seen in clinical trials and as is usually seen with other vaccines, they may be reported more frequently in younger adults."
The word 'death' does not appear in their comments.
…..MHRA published in February 2021 a summary of the reports of adverse reactions until Jan 31, that include 173 DEATHS and more thand 70,000 serious adverse reactions?
There have been many clusters of deaths in UK care homes (in just 2 months since the vaccination campaign started: weekly Covid deaths in care homes nearly TRIPLED in a fortnight with 1,705 residents dying in England and Wales (Jan 22), the rate of covid deaths with the over 60 has quadrupled in London (Jan 8), the Covid related deaths in English care homes jumped by 46% (Jan 19) etc); the reality is that these sudden outbreaks coinciding with vaccination are a convenient way to dismiss the possibility of vaccine damage that has been openly admitted by the FDA and is always a known possibility . Note that, in general, these deaths are not medically investigated and therefore, the claim that the vaccines have no role in them is not scientifically supported.
"Forty-six nursing home residents who had received their first dose of Pfizer-BioNTech’s fast-tracked vaccination against COVID-19 at the beginning of January had died by the end of the month, Spanish media have reported. "
From the same article, a summary of similar deaths occuring after vaccination in many other parts of the world:
Let's add to the previous:
….there have been CLUSTERS OF DEATHS IN CARE HOMES OCCURRING SOON AFTER VACCINATION WORLDWIDE, which were generally attributed to coincidentally sudden outbreaks of covid (these deaths, of course, not being recorded in VAERS or MHRA files)?
The doctors and scientists who spoke out against these vaccines issued the most dire warnings against their use on elderly people;
and in February we already had Spain, Germany, Italy and other countries ban used of the COVID-19 vaccine for those over 55, also Belgium (Feb 9).
So yes, it is not only believed, but more and more clear that these vaccines can cause disability and death.
The fact that these vaccines are a very risky choice is also confirmed by the numerous health care staff who, at the price of their jobs and careers, still refuse to take them: 70% of Nursing Houses in Piedmont, 90% in Brescia, 80% in Pavia, 89% of doctors In Friuli Venezia Giulia Region(Dec 30), 60% of the US doctors (Jan 1), half of the staff in New York (Jan 18), 87,000 Healthcare workers in Netherlands (Dec 30) etc
"Since then, 11 out of 27 EU member states have departed from official advice from the bloc’s medicines regulator and issued restrictions on the Astrazeneca vaccine.
Those countries are Italy, Spain, France, Germany, Belgium, Greece, Denmark, The Netherlands, Sweden, Poland and Austria. Norway, which is not in the EU, has blocked its use in over-65s, while Switzerland, which is also not an EU member state, has declined to approve the jab altogether.
Most have restricted use of the Astrazeneca vaccine in patients under the age of 65, but Italy, Belgium and Spain have limited it to under-55s."
" Switzerland has refused to approve the AstraZeneca Covid, vaccine with regulators raising concerns over insufficient test data and arguing 'new studies' are needed. "
. ….several European nations (Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Belgium, Switzerland) STOPPED THE USE OF ASTRAZENECA COVID VACCINES FOR THE OVER 55 OR ALL ?
In the UK, the risks associated with this new vaccinesbecame evident second day after they introduce them to the public:
“People with significant allergies told not to get vaccine after two NHS workers suffer reaction” (December 9, 2020) “People who have a history of “significant” allergic reactions should not currently get the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine, the UK regulator has warned.It comes as two NHS staff members who had the jab on Tuesday had allergic reactions. Both are understood to be recovering.[…]The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) gave precautionary advice to the NHS that anyone with a history of “significant” allergic reactions to medicines, food or vaccines should not get it.
”Portuguese health worker, 41, dies two days after getting the Pfizer covid vaccine as her father says he “wants answers” “Sonia Acevedo suffered a 'sudden death' on New Year's Day 48 hours after jab; UPDATE: In a press release sent out on January 5th the Portuguese Ministry of Justice advised that the preliminary results of the autopsy 'did not establish a direct relationship with the vaccine against Covid-19'”
“The doctor, whose name has not been released, was admitted to the intensive care unit of a public hospital in the northern state of Nuevo Leon after she experienced seizures, difficulty breathing and a skin rash.“The initial diagnosis is encephalomyelitis,” the Health Ministry said in a statement released on Friday night. Encephalomyelitis is an inflammation of the brain and spinal cord.”
88-year-old collapses and dies several hours after being vaccinated (29 Dec 2020) (Jerusalem) “Hospital confirms man was indeed vaccinated this afternoon, stressed 'he suffered from prolonged, complex, and severe background illnesses.'”
Miami doctor dies after taking Pfizer's coronavirus vaccine; CDC launches investigation (9 Jan 2020)“A 56-year-old doctor from Florida died two weeks after he received the first dose of the coronavirus vaccine manufactured by Pfizer-BioNTech. The cause of his death was ruled to be a rare blood disorder. Dr. Gregory Michael, an obstetrician-gynaecologist, lost his life 16 days after getting the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNtech coronavirus vaccine, which was the first to be approved in the United States.”
Hospital worker with no prior allergies in intensive care with severe reaction after Pfizer Covid vaccine(16 Dec 2020)“A hospital worker with no history of allergies was admitted to intensive care over a severe reaction she suffered 10 minutes after having Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine. The unidentified female worker suffered an anaphylactic reaction shortly after receiving the injection at a hospital in Juneau, Alaska, on Tuesday. She had no prior history of allergies, and was not allergic to other vaccine.”
“South Dakota’s state epidemiologist has confirmed that two people died in the state within 24 hours of getting their first doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. State epidemiologist Joshua Clayton, MD, MPH reported that one of the deceased was a middle-aged man in his 50s from Pennington County and the other was an elderly woman in her 90s from Hutchinson County”
The wife of Tim Zook, a 60-year-old x-ray technician who became seriously ill hours after getting his second Pfizer vaccine and died four days later, says “we need to know the cause.“Tim Zook was “quite healthy” his wife said, though he took medication for high blood pressure and was slightly overweight. “He had never been hospitalized. He’d get a cold and be over it two days later. The flu, and be over it three days later.”
39-year-old nurse aide dies ‘within 48 hours’ of receiving mandated COVID-19 shot (27 Jan 2021)‘She was coming home from work and as soon as she drove into her parking lot she passed away,’ Janet L. Moore’s brother Jacob Gregory told LifeSiteNews. “HURON, Ohio, January 27, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A 39-year-old woman with no known comorbidities died unexpectedly in northern Ohio within 48 hours of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, which was reportedly required by her employer.” 
….numerous REPORTS OF UNEXPECTED DEATHS AND SEVERE INJURIES AFTER VACCINATION have surfaced in the social media, some of them referring to doctors, nurses or young people with no previous health issues?
"What is a Do Not Resuscitate order?
A DNR order is a legal order which tells a medical team not to perform CPR on a patient. However, this does not affect other medical treatments.
Who can invoke a DNR?
The British Medical Association and the Royal College of Nursing say that DNR orders should only be issued after discussions have been held with patients or their family.
A patient may decline resuscitation if they have capacity as defined under the Mental Health Act 2005.
If patients want to record this in a legally binding document they should plan to make an 'advance decision to refuse treatment' (ADRT), but it is often best to have it recorded on a CPR decision form as well, so that healthcare professionals will recognise it easily. Or they can simply ask your healthcare professionals to record your decision on a CPR decision form.
When would it not be appropriate to attempt resuscitation?
Not everyone wants to receive attempted CPR, so it is important to respect people's wishes and to make sure that they are offered a chance to make choices that are right for them.
When someone's heart and breathing stop because they are dying from an advanced and irreversible condition, CPR will subject them to a vigorous physical intervention that deprives them of a dignified death. For some people this may prolong the process of dying and, in doing so, prolong or increase suffering.
When there is a chance CPR may bring someone back from cardiac arrest to a length and quality of life that they would want, they should be offered:
The chance to be given clear and accurate information about their condition and the likely risks and benefits from CPR if they should suffer cardiac arrest;
The chance to express their beliefs and wishes and to make a shared decision with their health professionals on whether or not they should receive attempted CPR if they should suffer cardiac arrest."
"Unlawful 'do not resuscitate' orders are being placed on patients with a learning disability during the coronavirus pandemic without families being consulted.
National charities have successfully challenged more than a dozen unlawful do not resuscitate orders (DNRs) that were put in place because of the patient’s disability rather than due to any serious underlying health risk.
Turning Point said it had learned of 19 inappropriate DNRs from families while Learning Disability England said almost one-fifth of its members had reported DNRs placed in people’s medical records without consultation during March and April
" A total of 61 per cent of Covid-19 patients had treatment limitations placed on them on admission to King’s College Hospital in London at the peak of the crisis.
This meant they were denied access to potentially life-saving care. The study raises new fears about care rationing for elderly and vulnerable patients amid concerns that they were rushed into agreeing do not resuscitate (DNR) orders. The orders mean doctors will not attempt to restart a patient’s heart with defibrillators or cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR).
The other NHS method of limiting life-saving treatments for the most elderly, frail or sick – including those with cancer and stroke – was to use treatment escalation plans (TEPs). These meant patients agreed not to go into intensive care or be put on a ventilator or any kind of life support, including kidney dialysis, if their organs failed.
The study found such TEPs were used for eight out of ten patients on Covid-19 wards, effectively keeping them out of intensive care, and typically went hand-in-hand with DNR orders, which were also agreed by 86 per cent of patients on the wards. "
Jonathan Ashworth said: 'It's scandalous that blanket do not resuscitate orders were used.
'Ministers should have done everything to protect care home residents.
'To have left care home residents and staff not just unprotected and exposed to Covid-19 but to have put in place procedures that actively allowed Covid-19 to spread in care homes is an atrocious failure of Boris Johnson.
'Instead families are left with the tragic consequences of heartbreaking loss of life.'
" Arguably most troubling of all is the direct link of the vaccine’s lead developers to the Wellcome Trust and, in the case of Adrian Hill, the Galton Institute, two groups with longstanding ties to the UK eugenics movement. The latter organization, named for the “father of eugenics” Francis Galton, is the renamed UK Eugenics Society, a group notorious for over a century for its promotion of racist pseudoscience and efforts to “improve racial stock” by reducing the population of those deemed inferior.
The ties of Adrian Hill to the Galton Institute should raise obvious concerns given the push to make the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine he developed with Gilbert the vaccine of choice for the developing world, particularly countries in Latin America, South and Southeast Asia, and Africa, the very areas where the Galton Institute’s past members have called for reducing population growth"
[...] The Wellcome Centre regularly cofunds the research and development of vaccines and birth control methods with the Gates Foundation, a foundation that actively and admittedly engages in population and reproductive control in Africa and South Asia by, among other things, prioritizing the widespread distribution of injectable long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs). The Wellcome Trust has also directly funded studies that sought to develop methods to “improve uptake” of LARCs in places such as rural Rwanda. [...]
While the Galton Institute has attempted to distance itself from its past of promoting racial eugenics with surface-level public relations efforts, it has not stopped family members of the infamous racist from achieving leadership positions at the institute. Emeritus professor of molecular genetics at the Galton Institute and one of its officers is none other than David J. Galton, whose work includes Eugenics: The Future of Human Life in the 21st Century. David Galton has written that the Human Genome Mapping Project, originally dreamt up by Galton’s former president Walter Bodmer, had “enormously increased . . . the scope for eugenics . . . because of the development of a very powerful technology for the manipulation of DNA.”
This new “wider definition of eugenics,” Galton has said, “would cover methods of regulating population numbers as well as improving genome quality by selective artificial insemination by donor, gene therapy or gene manipulation of germ-line cells.” In expanding on this new definition, Galton is neutral as to “whether some methods should be made compulsory by the state, or left entirely to the personal choice of the individual.”
….the first people that have been prioritized for vaccination – the residents of the care homes have also received shameful DNR (DO NOT REUSCITATE) ORDERS in 2020 and have also been highly exposed to infection, as hospitals have discharged untested patients in care homes?
JCVI -Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation is the driving force behind the covid-19 vaccination rollout in the UK. The members of JCVI are:
ANDREW J POLLARD, BSc MA MBBS MRCP(UK) FRCPCH PhD DIC FHEA FIDSA FMedSci, is Professor of Paediatric Infection and Immunity at the University of Oxford, Honorary Consultant Paediatrician at Oxford Children’s Hospital and Vice Master of St Cross College, Oxford.
"Andrew Pollard, director of the Oxford Vaccine Group, where Hill’s Jenner Institute resides, is enmeshed with the Gates Foundation. His employer, the University of Oxford, has received $11 million for vaccine development research from the foundation over the past three years and $208 million in grants over the past decade. In 2016, the Gates Foundation gave $36 million to a team of researchers that was headed by Pollard for vaccine development. In addition, Pollard’s private laboratory is funded by the Gates Foundation. Given this, it should come as no surprise that the Global Alliance for Vaccine Initiative (GAVI), a public-private partnership founded and currently funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, plans to distribute the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine to low-income, predominantly African and Asian, countries once it’s approved." ( Developers of Oxford-AstraZeneca Vaccine Tied to UK Eugenics Death Cult, Feb 28, 2021 )
....none of the professionals advising the government on the rollout of these vaccines has any EXPERTISE IN SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY/ GENETIC ENGINEERING OR MRNA/DNA VACCINES, and similarly, none of the healthcare professionals (GP’s, nurses) that the government deems able to advise you in matters of covid vaccination and obtain from you an informed consent.
However they may have vested interests and ties to Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
PFIZER, the company government trusts to deliver “SAFE AND EFFICIENT VACCINES”, is amongst all world’s corporations, THE WORST LEGAL OFFENDER, having to pay penalties (violations) valuing almost 5 BILLION dollars [*] and one of the biggest criminal fine in US history, 2.3 BILLION dollars “for mispromoting medicines and for paying kickbacks to compliant doctors”
Parent Company Name: AstraZeneca
Parent Company Name: Sanofi
....the producers of these experimental vaccines have BEEN DISCHARGED OF ANY LIABILITY FOR THE EVENTUAL INJURIES AND DEATHS PRODUCED BY THEM, although Pfizer has a record track of violations of 4 billion USD, Astrazeneca of and Moderna has never produced any other medicine before?
“one of the world’s oldest and most respected medical journals has published a damning attack on the UK Government, -- BMJ lashes out at 'state corruption' and 'suppression of science' in UK (Nov 2020)
Written by executive editor Kamran Abbasi the article concludes that “politicisation of science was enthusiastically deployed by some of history’s worst autocrats and dictators, and it is now regrettably commonplace in democracies. “The medical-political complex tends towards suppression of science to aggrandise and enrich those in power. And, as the powerful become more successful, richer, and further intoxicated with power, the inconvenient truths of science are suppressed.“When good science is suppressed, people die.”
"So here goes (and these approximations in fact embrace virtually THE ENTIRE PANEL:
In April, the government announced7 that it was placing Vallance in charge of a new Vaccine Taskforce to expedite research to produce a coronavirus vaccine. Among the named members were AstraZeneca, the Wellcome Trust, and John Bell of Oxford University. The following month, the government announced that Kate Bingham would chair the taskforce, while taking temporary leave from her job as managing partner at SV Health Investors, a life sciences venture capital firm. Bingham is married to the Conservative minister Jesse Norman.
By July the UK government had signed a coronavirus vaccine deal for an undisclosed sum with GlaxoSmithKline, securing 60 million doses of an untested treatment that was still being developed. In September, media outlets reported that Vallance had £600 000 (€661 000; $800 000) worth of shares in the company. The government responded to say that,8 while he heads the government’s Vaccine Taskforce, Vallance “has no input into contractual and commercial decisions on vaccine procurement, which are taken by ministers following a robust cross government approvals regime.”
Days later, the Daily Mail broke another story, this time focusing on Bell. On top of his role with the Vaccine Taskforce, Bell also headed the National Covid Testing Scientific Advisory Panel and chaired the government’s new test approvals group. But the Mail discovered something The BMJ had first reported in 20129—that Bell had substantial financial interests, now amounting to £773 000 worth of shares, in pharma company Roche, which had sold the government £13.5m of antibody tests in May. Following the deal, Bell appeared on Channel 4 News and Radio 4’s Today, calling the tests a major step forward. Yet Public Health England found the tests unreliable.
"Tory MP Steve Baker, who has refused to support the Prime Minister’s second lockdown, told MailOnline: ‘Some of those claiming to be “following the science” seem not to understand the meaning of the word. SAGE has been put on a pedestal as if they are able to produce a single version of the truth. It’s not possible.
‘We were given terrifying 500,000 death figures predicted by modelling that was completely flawed and scientists will no longer defend them. It was the same with NHS overcrowding – and yet that hasn’t happened.
‘We cannot go on like this any longer. The public deserve better than this. We cannot go on with public policy based on models that clearly didn’t reflect reality’.
One prominent Oxford University scientist told MailOnline using Wikipedia to guide Britain through the crisis was 'absolutely unacceptable', describing it as a 'damning reflection of our lack of preparedness'. "
...Government advisors like Sir Patrick Vallance and Chris Witty have VESTED INTERESTED IN THE VACCINE INDUSTRY?
"The new research has discovered that a hitherto unknown biological warfare field trial was carried out in the capital’s tube system in May 1964. At the time, the government thought that Bacillus globigii bacteria were harmless – but they are today regarded as a cause of food poisoning, eye infections, and even septicaemia. [...]
One particular test – involving live plague bacteria – was carried out off the west coast of Scotland in 1952. It’s long been known that a fishing vessel inadvertently passed through the cloud of bacteria and that the authorities were very worried that the fishermen might contract the disease ." ( How the British Government subjected thousands of people to chemical and biological warfare trials during Cold War)
On July 26, 1963, passengers boarded a Northern Line tube train at Morden in South London heading for the City. Their short journey to work, perhaps to London Bridge or Bank, seemed the same as any other day. But it was far from ordinary.
What those passengers did not know – could not know – was they were an unwitting cast of extras in a secret experiment conducted by government scientists from Porton Down, headquarters for the country’s military research since 1916.
As the train wound northwards through the dark tunnels between Colliers Wood and Tooting Broadway, a window was opened and a scented powder puff was thrown out on to the tracks below.
This particular powder puff contained not cosmetics but freeze-dried spores from the anthrax family, B globigii bacteria, which can cause eye infections, food poisoning and, more serious still, septicaemia, the cause of deadly sepsis. [...]
At first, the British authorities confined their tests to service personnel. In 1951, Porton Down (properly known as the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory) began testing nerve gas on soldiers, including those unwillingly enlisted as part of mandatory National Service. Volunteers were offered a small payment of £2 and three days’ extra leave.
The victims were given no meaningful information about the tests. As one Porton Down scientist observed at the time: ‘If you advertised for people to suffer agony, you would not get them [volunteers].’
Many were told the experiments were about finding a cure for the common cold, assured by the medical officer present they were at ‘no risk’. A total of 21,752 soldiers would eventually be exposed to dangerous substances, including LSD .
Some 1,500 were exposed to nerve agents, 400 of them to sarin, a substance that is potentially lethal even in minute quantities.[...]
In one case, a machine was towed along a road near Frome in Somerset to throw it into the air. In 1961, a Land Rover spewed out cadmium sulphide on the roads between Ilchester and Bristol. The scientists in the Land Rover wore full protective clothing and were told to be careful. The general public was left in ignorance.
Cadmium is an impurity found in zinc and those working with it in, for example, battery manufacturing wear protective clothing to prevent it being inhaled. It was identified as carcinogenic more than a century ago.
Yet cadmium was also showered over Cardington in Bedfordshire, Chippenham, Dorchester, and villages around Salisbury. And planes dropped tons of the stuff over a 40- mile stretch of East Anglia, including Norwich in the 1960s.
The aim of this cynical Porton Down exercise? To see what would happen." ( The day anthrax was released in a tunnel on the Northern Line - by scientists from Porton Down... and as ex-MP NORMAN BAKER reveals, it's far from the only time they've used Britons as guinea pigs for experiments - Feb 6, 2021)
...UK SCIENTISTS HAVE REPEATEDLY BREACHED THE PUBLIC TRUST during the post-war period by experimenting with airborne pathogens on the unaware British population and the MATHEMATICAL MODELS used by the government for the pandemic as also for other previous epidemics have been proved utterly wrong?
Besides Boris Johnson, we heard very notable voices, such as the big philanthropist who for the sake of saving the planet from too much CO2 once said '"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."...'
We also heard Hillary Clinton's campaign chief John Podesta affirming that 'reducing the world’s population is not only desirable, but absolutely necessary in order to “reduce carbon emissions by 2050.”' (of course is the same Podesta that Wikipedia taught us that was a victim of Piz za gate Conspiracy - an example of that could be found here... https://www.bloomberg.com/.../2019-global-fertility.../...)
In case you want more such examples... you may find them even as a first result on Google for 'depopulation quotes':
But something else is even more astonishing... Don't know if it's magic or not but surely these men's words do tend to become reality... https://www.bloomberg.com/.../2019-global-fertility.../... Also look for 'empty planet' - it's a term already used in academic circles; they present this obvious demographic trend of fertility decline 'as a result of individual choice'... Of course we, the small and too numerous people, are also responsible for the climate change....
But is it really overpopulation a problem. There are credible counter-arguments:
"Many believe that overpopulation is a question of lack of space. It isn’t.
Today, there is approximately 7,268,730,000 people on earth. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 square miles (7,494,271,488,000 square feet). If we divide 7,494,271,488,000 square feet by 7,268,730,000 people, we get 1031 square feet per person. This is enough space for everyone on earth to live in a townhouse while altogether fitting on a landmass the size of Texas. And we’re not even accounting for the average four-person family who would most likely share a home!" In regards to the most pervasive idea of the direct relationship between the number of people and the carbon footprint, that lead master Bill to openly advocate the necessity of reducing the population in order to save the planet, please check out the following...- Debunking the Myth of Overpopulation
Consider this, it takes about 300 sq. meters to feed one person for a year.
Since a kilometer is 1,000 meters, we could feed 3,333 people per sq. kilometer, but let’s use 3,000 people per sq. kilometer to make math easy. Meaning it would take 2,333,333 sq. kilometers (or 3000 ÷ 7,000,000,000) to feed the entire population for a year.
The total farmland in the US is about 922,000,000 acres of land. There are 247.1 acres per sq. kilometer, meaning there is a total of 3,731,282 sq. kilometers (or 922,000,000 ÷ 247.1) of farm land. That’s more than the 2,333,333 sq. kilometers needed to feed the entire population. In other words, the farmland in the US can feed us all!"
...Boris Johnson, Bill Gates and Henry Kissinger, who are all greatly supporting this global vaccination campaign, have all publicly stated that OVERPOPULATION is the greatest problem of our times and that DEMOCIDE (death by government) and not war was the greatest cause of death at a global level in the XXth century?