January 3 – A Danish study has found the Omicron variant is 2.7-3.7 times more infectious than the Delta variant among “vaccinated” people. After reading several articles on the study that didn’t include a link to it, I was able to find the link in an Austin American-Statesman “Fact Check” piece complaining about people misrepresenting what the study actually says. The study is short and the language used is tantamount to gobbledygook, but the table in the middle of the study tells you all you need to know… the shots are worthless garbage. But hey, nevermind all that and get your booster jab today!
January 4 – Researchers at Columbia University publish a study in JAMA which found babies born between March and December of 2020 – regardless of whether or not the mother was exposed to COVID – “had significantly lower scores on gross motor, fine motor, and personal-social subdomains compared with a historical cohort of infants born before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic” and that “these findings suggest the potential for a significant public health crisis for the generation born during the COVID-19 pandemic, necessitating further investigation.” After analyzing the results, researchers believe “the lack of neurodevelopmental differences between infants with and without in-utero SARS-CoV-2 exposure and the observed group differences between the historical and pandemic cohorts suggest COVID-19–related stress should be considered as a potential underlying mechanism. Reported stressors have included job loss, food insecurity, and loss of housing, and the pandemic has resulted in significant increases in symptoms of anxiety and depression.” Click here for press release. Update (2/17/22): A Twitter user with the handle BowTiedRanger points out the CDC has quietly lowered the standards for speech in early childhood development. Children are now expected to know 50 words at 30 months, not 24 months. If you haven’t been keeping score when it comes to who’s been pushing all the crazy COVID measures on children – even though we know children don’t get severe cases of the disease and don’t really spread it – you should probably get started with that.
January 15 – The results of a massive Brazilian ivermectin study are published at the NCBI website. Verdict: “The regular use of ivermectin led to a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality… When adjusted for residual variables, reduction in mortality rate was 70%… There was a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate… After adjustment for residual variables, reduction in hospitalization rate was 67%.” The study’s conclusion reads, “In this large PSM study, regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates.” Nearly 160K people were included in the study’s analysis.
January 25 – JAMA publishes a study analyzing the rates of myocarditis and pericarditis following Pfizer and Moderna’s clot shots. The study found that young men between the ages of 12 and 24 were most susceptible to developing the conditions. Ironically, those age groups are the least susceptible to COVID. The study used VAERS data and concluded that there were over 1600 confirmed cases in this age group. The problem is, a 2011 study concluded that only about 1% of actual vaccine damages and deaths are reported to VAERS, so a case number between 20,000 and 200,000 is much more likely.
February 1 – The results of a devastating Johns Hopkins study begin to make noise on the internet. The study found COVID lockdown policies only reduced mortality by 0.2%, and while they “had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument… They have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence and undermining liberal democracy… These costs to society must be compared to the benefits of lockdowns, which our meta-analysis has shown are marginal at best. Such a standard benefit-cost calculation leads to a strong conclusion: lockdowns should be rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy instrument.” While lockdown policies were endorsed by the WHO, the WEF, current CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, The Twerp and many others, the lying weasels in the media are silent on this report despite giving these charlatans a platform and promoting lockdown policies themselves.
February 18 – The CDC publishes a study showing emergency room visits related to eating disorders among adolescent females (12-17 years old) doubled during the pandemic. There was also a significant increase in tic disorders amongst girls aged 5-11. The study points out how “the pandemic disrupted social and physical activities: many adolescents have experienced substantial disruption to daily and academic routines, faced uncertainty and loneliness, and increased social media use… These factors could have created or exacerbated risk for [mental health conditions] among children and adolescents.” This is just another example of how our “leaders” and supposed “experts” did more harm than good during a time when we all needed them to be at their best, especially kids. Also see this.
February 21 – A group of scientists publish a study in Frontiers of Virology claiming they found a DNA sequence in SARS-CoV-2 that matches a DNA sequence patented by Moderna three years ago. This is more evidence COVID was created in a lab. “The correlation between this SARS-CoV-2 sequence and the reverse complement of a proprietary mRNA sequence is of uncertain origin. Conventional biostatistical analysis indicates that the probability of this sequence randomly being present in a 30,000-nucleotide viral genome is 3.21 ×10−11.” That’s 1 in 3 trillion in case you were wondering… “The absence of CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG from any eukaryotic or viral genome in the BLAST database makes recombination in an intermediate host an unlikely explanation for its presence in SARS-CoV-2.” This is an interesting discovery to say the least.
February 25 – A study is published in the Current Issues In Molecular Biology journal showing “BNT162b2 mRNA is reverse transcribed intracellularly into DNA in as fast as 6 h upon BNT162b2 exposure.” While this occurred in an in vitro experiment (outside of a living organism), the study points out another possible disaster that can ensue after taking these experimental injections. Reverse transcription is when DNA is made from RNA, not the other way around which is what is supposed to occur. We were told by the CDC the mRNA in these injections would not convert into DNA and enter the nucleus of a cell, but now this is exactly what has occurred during a lab experiment. The study also points out “There has been case reports on individuals who developed autoimmune hepatitis… after BNT162b2 vaccination” due to the “vaccine-derived SARS-CoV-2 spike protein” making “the liver cells targets for previously primed spike protein reactive cytotoxic T cells.” Any way you slice it, these shots are a total disaster.
February 28 – CNBC reports on a study out of NYC showing the Pfizer vaccine was just 12% effective in kids ages 5-11. The article says in-part, “The New York State Department of Health found that the effectiveness of Pfizer’s vaccine against Covid infection plummeted from 68% to 12% for kids in that age group during the omicron surge from Dec. 13 through Jan 24. Protection against hospitalization dropped from 100% to 48% during the same period.” While experts believe this is due to the low dose children are receiving, there is nothing in the article about putting a stop to childhood vaccination even though they are useless and kids were never susceptible to COVID in the first place. And despite the data showing two doses were completely ineffective for that age group, “The FDA is now waiting to see clinical trial data on a third dose for the youngest kids, which is expected in April.” Prediction: The FDA will determine a third dose is necessary and it will offer robust and long-lasting protection…
February 28 – Scientists working at the Wuhan Institute of Virology publish a study in the medical journal Virologica Sinica explaining how they assembled part of a monkeypox genome. The purpose of the experiment and “assembling a fragment of the MPXV genome is to provide a nucleotide template for MPXV detection” using the infamous PCR test. So just a couple of months before a worldwide monkeypox outbreak begins, scientists from the same lab that brought us the Wuhan Red Death figure out a way to detect monkeypox using fraudulent PCR testing. As I’ve written about before in this report, PCR tests allow for the controlling of case counts based on how sensitive, or how many cycles, the test is run at. As the inventor of the PCR test Kary Mullis has said, because this type of test can literally detect anything in anyone, it is therefore an unreliable indicator of infection. Are the social controllers preparing to pivot to monkeypox?
April 5 – A large study out of Israel (1.3 million people aged 60 and older) published in the New England Journal of Medicine found those who received a second booster shot had dwindling protection from COVID after just four weeks. The discussion section of the study reads in part, “Comparing the rate ratio over time since the fourth dose suggests that the protection against confirmed infection with the omicron variant reaches a maximum in the fourth week after vaccination, after which the rate ratio decreases to approximately 1.1 by the eighth week; these findings suggest that protection against confirmed infection wanes quickly.” The plan is to wreck the natural immune system of every man, woman and child on Earth so they have to take one of these shots every month. It looks like Pfizer is starting to fine-tune their concoction to fit that bill. Also see this.
April 15 – Another large study out of Israel (involving nearly 197K unvaccinated adults) finds “no increase in the incidence of myocarditis or pericarditis from day 10 after positive SARS-CoV-2… Our data suggest that there is no increase in the incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis in COVID-19 recovered patients compared to uninfected matched controls.” This is just another lie we are being told to cover for all of the damage these “vaccines” are doing.
April 15 – I take the time to read a 22-page report by the National Bureau of Economic Research titled “A Final Report Card On The States’ Response To COVID-19.” The study “is an expanded and updated version of an October 2020 report card of how pandemic health, economy, and policy varied across the 50 states and the District of Columbia… It examines three variables: health outcomes, economic performance throughout the pandemic, and impact on education.” Unsurprisingly, the study concluded “Three states stand out as having combined scores well above the others: Utah, Nebraska, and Vermont. They were substantially above average in all three categories. Six more states followed, including Montana and South Dakota… New Hampshire and Maine were about 1.5 standard deviations above average on mortality while also somewhat above average economically. Although sometimes criticized as having policies that were ‘too open,’ Florida proved to have average mortality while maintaining a high level of economic activity and 96 percent open schools.” The states that performed the worst? That would be liberal hellpits like New York, California, Illinois and Washington D.C. In fact, just about every state in the top 15 are red states while just about every state in the bottom 15 are blue states.
April 17 – The Journal of Clinical Epidemiology publishes the findings of an Oxford study titled “Most healthcare interventions tested in Cochrane Reviews are not effective according to high quality evidence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” The study found “More than 9 in 10 healthcare interventions studied within recent Cochrane Reviews are not supported by high-quality evidence, and harms are under-reported.” In other words, when the drugs being produced by Big Pharma are ineffective the data is manipulated in a way that allows them to still receive approval, and if the drugs are harmful the data is suppressed so they can still come to market. For more details about this process and the role Dr. Fauci has played in creating this horribly corrupt system, take the time to read The Real Anthony Fauci by Robert Kennedy Jr.
April 19 – A study is published showing unvaccinated people develop significantly more robust antibody protection than those who have taken the experimental mRNA injections. The authors write in part “Among participants with PCR-confirmed Covid-19 illness, seroconversion to anti-N Abs at a median follow up of 53 days post diagnosis occurred in 21/52 (40%) of the mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients vs. 605/648 (93%) of the placebo recipients (p < 0.001).” The main problem – and there are many – with these mRNA “vaccines” is they only offer some slight protection against the COVID spike protein, and not its RNA. Alex Berenson puts it succinctly in his breakdown of the study writing in part “Unvaccinated people nearly always gain antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein, which covers the virus’s core of RNA, as well as its spike protein, which allows the virus to attack our cells. Vaccinated people often lack those anti-nucleocapsid antibodies and only have spike protein antibodies.” This could explain why we’re seeing so many cases of “vaccinated” people being reinfected, sometimes multiple times. Berenson also points out how the researchers “went a step further” and measured the viral load of those confirmed to have COVID and compared vaxxed and unvaxxed participants who had the same amount of virus in their blood. He does great work and I would highly recommend reading his breakdown in full. Bottom line: the shots don’t work as advertised, if at all.
April 27 – A study is published in the Royal Society Open Science Journal that “provides evidence for increased adolescent depressive symptoms and decreased life satisfaction as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.” The authors found “if the COVID-19 pandemic had not occurred, we would observe 6% fewer adolescents with high depressive symptoms which is a difference of 1.6% in prevalence. Given that the prevalence of high depressive symptoms in the data was 27.1%, it can be estimated that in a scenario where the COVID-19 pandemic did not happen, the prevalence would be 25.5%.” According to an article in The Telegraph, this equates to an additional 60,000 children that have suffered from depression brought on by the pandemic, lockdowns, and school closures.
April 28 – Nature publishes a study titled “Increased emergency cardiovascular events among under-40 population in Israel during vaccine rollout and third COVID-19 wave.” The study directly addresses the false claim that “adverse conditions… caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections” are mistakenly being “reported as side-effects of the COVID-19 vaccines.” The “discussion” section of the study reads in part, “The main finding of this study concerns with increases of over 25% in both the number of CA [cardiac arrest] calls and ACS [acute coronary syndrome] calls of people in the 16-39 age group during the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in Israel (January-May, 2021), compared with the same period of time in prior years (2019 and 2020)… Moreover, there is a robust and statistically significant association between the weekly CA and ACS call counts, and the rates of 1st and 2nd vaccine doses administered to this age group. At the same time there is no observed statistically significant association between COVID-19 infection rates and the CA and ACS call counts. This result is aligned with previous findings which show increases in overall CA incidence were not always associated with higher COVID-19 infections rates at a population level, as well as the stability of hospitalization rates related to myocardial infarction throughout the initial COVID-19 wave compared to pre-pandemic baselines in Israel. These results also are mirrored by a report of increased emergency department visits with cardiovascular complaints during the vaccination rollout in Germany as well as increased EMS calls for cardiac incidents in Scotland… The increase in CA and ACS calls starting early January 2021 seems to track closely the administration of 2nd dose vaccines. This observation is consistent with prior findings that associated more significant adverse events, including myocarditis to the 2nd dose of the vaccine. A second increase in the CA and ACS call counts is observed starting April 18th, 2021, which seems to track an increase of single-dose vaccination to individuals who recovered from COVID-19 infections. This is consistent with prior findings that suggest that the immune response generated by a single dose on recovered individuals is generally stronger than the response to the 2nd vaccine dose in individuals, who were not exposed to COVID-19 infection. Additionally, the graphs emphasize the absence of correlation between the call counts and COVID-19 infection counts, which is most clearly seen during the two major pandemic waves in 2020. While increased CA incidence was not observed among the 16-39 age group in 2020, there was a significant increase in the proportion of CA patients that died on scene during 2020, relative to 2019, emphasizing the potential direct and indirect harmful effects of the pandemic on out-of-hospital CA patient outcomes. The percent of patients that died on scene remained elevated in 2021. The large increase in the incidence of CA and ACS events in the population of age 16-39 parallel to the vaccination rollout and its association with the vaccination rates could be consistent with the known causal relationship between the mRNA vaccines and incidents of myocarditis in young people, as well as the fact that myocarditis is often misdiagnosed as ACS, and that asymptomatic myocarditis is a frequent cause for unexplained sudden death among young adults from CA. This is further supported by more anecdotal reports describing sudden cardiac death following COVID-19 vaccination. While vaccine-induced myocarditis was predominantly reported in males it is interesting to note that the relative increases of CA and ACS events was larger in females. This may suggest the potential underdiagnosis or under-self-reporting of myocarditis in females, or other unique patterns, which is consistent with the ongoing challenge of gender-related differences related to cardiovascular disease diagnosis and care.” These major findings will likely be completely ignored.
May 3 – A study out of Germany shows serious injuries related to the experimental COVID jabs are occurring at a rate 40 times higher than what was previously reported. The article states, “Around 40,000 vaccinated people are interviewed at regular intervals throughout Germany. Participation is voluntary and is independent of how the vaccines affect the test persons. One result: eight out of 1,000 vaccinated people struggle with serious side effects. ‘The number is not surprising,’ explains Prof. Dr. Harald Matthes: ‘It corresponds to what is known from other countries such as Sweden, Israel or Canada. Incidentally, even the manufacturers of the vaccines had already determined similar values in their studies.’ With conventional vaccines, such as against polio or measles, the number of serious side effects is significantly lower.” Dr. Matthes also says there have been about a half million serious adverse events following the administration of 179 million doses, which is nearly 3%.
June 9 – The findings of a new survey shows unvaccinated people experienced less severe COVID when compared to their jabbed counterparts. The international survey, which used data from nearly 19,000 respondents, also found unvaccinated people from over 175 countries relied on self-care to prevent and manage COVID using natural products like vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc, quercetin, and drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Some of the women who responded reported bleeding and menstrual abnormalities possibly due to spike protein exposure through viral shedding. Many of the participants also said they experienced discrimination for refusing to take the gene therapy drugs and dealt with mental health burdens because of the stigma some unvaccinated people feel living in what’s quickly become a mostly ‘vaccinated’ society. Also see this and this.
June 17 – A study is published in Andrology titled, “Covid-19 vaccination BNT162b2 temporarily impairs semen concentration and total motile count among semen donors.” The results of the study confirms what the kooks were worried about as the clot shots were being rolled out world wide – that one of the side effects could be an impaired reproductive system and/or sterility. The results of the study “revealed -15.4% sperm concentration decrease on T2… leading to total motile count 22.1% reduction… compared to T0.” T0 is the pre-vaccination baseline control, while T1 is the short term evaluation (15-45 days), T2 is intermediate (75-150 days), and T3 is long term (over 150 days). The authors present their data as good news by claiming long term evaluations “demonstrated overall recovery. Semen volume and sperm motility were not impaired.” But is this really the case, or are the authors spinning the results like others have in different studies covered in this timeline? Unfortunately, true long term data that can provide meaningful insight into just how safe – or not safe – these jabs really are will not be available for years. Though looking at table 2, provided in the appendix, tells a different story. It shows total motile count after the long term evaluation is -35.4%, down an additional 0.4% from the -35% recorded after the intermediate evaluation. This would indicate total motility not only failed to recover, but actually decreased between the intermediate and long term evaluations. In fact, while a recovery was measured in regard to semen volume (up to -6.3% after T3 from -14.7% after T2), sperm concentration and sperm motility both continued to decline after T2 in addition to the total motile count. Since I’m not a scientist, there is certainly a chance I could be misinterpreting the data, but reading through all of the columns in all of the tables indicates to me the opposite of what the authors conclude is what actually occurred. I also find it strange these tables are part of the appendix, which comes after the list of references, instead of being included somewhere in the middle where the data is being interpreted. By separating the tables from the analysis it’s quite possible that most of the people who read this study will never make it to the section that includes the table, which is the actual data. I’ll be sure to keep my eyes peeled for an independent analysis from someone who is more qualified to make sense of all this, but in the meantime, please take the time to read the study and look at the tables. Hat tip to Alex Berenson.
June 22 – ABC reports the findings of a recent Pfizer study suggesting vaccinated individuals and people with a low COVID risk don’t stand to benefit from taking Paxlovid. Youri Benadjaoud writes in part, “…mounting evidence suggests Paxlovid may not benefit everyone equally. The company recently announced the results of a new study that found the drug did not meaningfully benefit people without underlying medical conditions or no previous infection of COVID… Some infectious disease experts interviewed by ABC News said the new study could influence the way doctors prescribe the drug, potentially declining to prescribe it to vaccinated, otherwise healthy patients.”
June 25 – A study out of France is published in Nature showing Moderna’s COVID “vaccine” in particular significantly raises the chance (44x increase) a young adult will develop myocarditis. For the Pfizer jab there was a 13x increase. From the study: “In this nationwide study involving a population of 32 million people aged 12 to 50 years having received 46 million doses of mRNA vaccines, we provide detailed estimates of the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis by sex, age categories and vaccine type. We find that vaccination with both mRNA vaccines was associated with an increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis within the first week after vaccination. The associations were particularly pronounced after the second dose, and were evident in both males and females. We found a trend of increased risks towards younger age groups but a significant risk was also found in males over 30 years to develop myocarditis and in females over 30 years to develop a pericarditis after vaccination. Reassuringly, these cases of myocarditis and pericarditis, although requiring hospitalization, did not result in more severe outcomes than those unrelated to vaccination.” Reassuringly? Heart inflammation takes years off your life.
July 12 – A study published at Research Square finds the symptoms people continue to experience more than four weeks after vaccination “may be driven by the persistence of SARS-CoV-2 S1 protein persistence in intermediate and non-classical monocytes.” In other words, the spike proteins your body creates after receiving the COVID jab can linger in the body for weeks and even months, sometimes causing debilitating symptoms. Also see this.
July 15 – The New York Slimes finally gets around to covering a vaccine-related issue that’s been known about for more than a year (see this and this) with an article titled, “Largest Study to Date Shows How Covid Vaccines Affect Periods.” It appears the headline was changed because scrolling the mouse over the open tab shows a different one (“COVID-19 Vaccines Temporarily Affected Periods, Study Shows”). As you would expect from the Slimes, the article is chock full of woke drivel with oddly placed references to gender appearing in each of the first three paragraphs. The references include “cisgender women who menstruate” and “gender-diverse people” – though to be fair some of the language comes right from the study. In addition to using the Slimes as a vehicle to drill woke language into your brain, the article’s author – Knvul Sheikh – also has no problem lying and shilling for Big Pharma. The entirety of the third paragraph reads, “Although the vaccines have largely prevented deaths and severe disease with few reported side effects, many medical experts initially brushed aside concerns when women and gender-diverse people started reporting erratic menstrual cycles after receiving the shots.” I guess she considers over a million vaccine injuries and at least tens of thousands of vaccine deaths to be a “few reported side effects.” The Big Pharma ad article goes on to discuss a study which found “42% of people with regular menstrual cycles bled more heavily than usual, while 44% reported no change after being vaccinated. Among respondents who typically do not menstruate, 71% of people on long-acting reversible contraceptives, 39% of people on gender-affirming hormones, and 66% of postmenopausal people reported breakthrough bleeding.” The data used came from over 39K respondents. Doctors believe “it is possible that when vaccines activate the immune system, which is what they should be doing, they also somehow trigger downstream effects in the endometrium, causing a disturbance in your menstrual cycle” though “menstruation tended to return to normal after one or two cycles.” In any event, you shouldn’t be alarmed by this as the article’s subheading made sure to mention “Experts say there is no cause for alarm.” At least that’s what the NY Slimes and the authors of the study would have you believe. I work with a woman who bled for nearly a month (I forget the exact number of days – maybe 26), which I found quite alarming, as did she.
July 21 – An article published in the New England Journal of Medicine titled “Duration of Shedding of Culturable Virus in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (BA.1) Infection” shows people who are vaccinated stay contagious longer than the unvaccinated following COVID infection. For a good breakdown of the study see this.
August 3 – A research letter is published at the JAMA Network website about COVID reinfection rates in Iceland between December 1, 2021 and February 13, 2020. “The aim of this study was to estimate the proportion of persons who become reinfected with SARS-CoV-2 during the Omicron wave in Iceland.” In the “discussion” section of the letter the authors write, “Longer time from initial infection was associated with a higher probability of reinfection, although the difference was smaller than expected. Surprisingly, 2 or more doses of vaccine were associated with a slightly higher probability of reinfection compared with 1 dose or less.” While the probability of reinfection was only slightly higher among those who took two or more jabs, the results of this study are a far cry from what we were initially told about the “safe and effective” injections and the “protection” they offer.
August 5 – A study out of the CDC claims children under the age of 17 who have had COVID and recovered are at greater risk for heart problems, blood clots, renal failure and type-1 diabetes. Unsurprisingly, the CDC did not consider vaccination status while conducting the study – which renders it all but worthless.
August 5 – A peer-reviewed study out of Israel shows COVID booster jabs may no longer be needed (not that they ever were) after the discovery of two COVID-neutralizing antibodies. The antibodies can be used to create an effective infusion to not only treat COVID, but also prevent it, regardless of the strain.
August 8 – A study out of Thailand finds 18% of the children studied between the ages of 13 and 18 had abnormal EKGs after being vaccinated. The paper also noted “Cardiovascular effects were found in 29.24% of patients, ranging from tachycardia, palpitation, and myo/pericarditis.” That doesn’t sound “rare” to me.
August 12 – A study out of Italy shows 94% of those who reported side effects after taking the COVID clot shot had abnormal blood containing “metal-like objects” one month after the injection. In fact, out of the 1,006 cases that were analyzed, only 58 (27 male and 31 female) “presented a completely normal hematological picture upon microscopic analysis after the last mRNA injection with either the Moderna or Pfizer concoction.” The blood of the other 948 subjects “showed aggregation of erythrocytes and the presence of particles of various shapes and sizes of unclear origin one month after the mRNA inoculation.” Erythrocytes (red blood cells) contain hemoglobin and are responsible for carrying oxygen to all parts of the body… kind of important. The study also noted “The vaccines are purported to contain at least the spike protein from SARS-CoV-2… but is known also to contain foreign particles that the CDC and the many promoters of the experimental injections claimed were not in them at all. Among those foreign components are metallic objects as demonstrated previously in this journal by Lee et al. (2022) which are confirmed in our results…” You can see in the side-by-side image below how blood cells are concentrated around the “foreign components” and no longer spherical 30 days after “vaccination.” It’s scary how after these Frankenshots were created governments around the world began promoting them and even forcing people to take them while the manufacturers don’t even have to disclose exactly what’s in them… sounds like something out of a dystopian science fiction story.
August 23 – A Spanish mask study published in the British Medical Journal finds “We found no significant differences in SARS-CoV-2 transmission due to FCM [face covering masks] mandates in Catalonian schools. Instead, age was the most important factor in explaining the transmission risk for children attending school.” The study found “SARS-CoV-2 incidence was significantly lower in preschool than in primary education, and an increasing trend with age was observed.”
August 24 – A large study out of Israel is published showing Pfizer’s Paxlovid had no “measurable benefit” for people under the age of 65, “while still reducing the risk of hospitalization and death for high-risk seniors.” This is the same claim we hear in regard to the “vaccine” though it’s more likely COVID has continued to weaken due to mutations in the virus and these Big Pharma boondoggles have had little to no effect in minimizing COVID’s severity or lethality. Moreover, one could argue the drugs and injections have done much more harm than good. Do you remember seeing people keeling over the way they have been before the COVID jab started being widely circulated? I don’t. Also see this.
August 24 – A study titled “A genetically engineered Plasmodium falciparum parasite vaccine provides protection from controlled human malaria infection” is printed in the Science Translational Medicine journal. Scientists are now creating genetically modified mosquitoes to deliver vaccines to protect against malaria. The abstract reads in part, “The vaccine was delivered by three… or five… immunizations with ~200 PfGAP3KO-infected mosquito bites per immunization. PfGAP3KO was safe and well tolerated with no breakthrough P. falciparum blood stage infections. Vaccine-related adverse events were predominately localized urticaria related to the numerous mosquito bites administered per vaccination. CHMI via bites with mosquitoes carrying fully infectious Pf NF54 parasites was carried out 1 month after the last immunization. Half of the study participants who received either three or five PfGAP3KO immunizations remained P. falciparum blood stage negative, as shown by a lack of detection of Plasmodium 18S rRNA in the blood for 28 days after CHMI. Six protected study participants received a second CHMI 6 months later, and one remained completely protected. Thus, the PfGAP3KO vaccine was safe and immunogenic and was capable of inducing protection against sporozoite infection.” According to Seattle scientist Sean Murphy, “We use the mosquitoes like they’re 1,000 small flying syringes.” Will mosquitoes eventually be used to get mRNA kill shots into the people who refuse to take them willingly?
September 1 – The Associated Presstitutes report on a study showing just how much US schoolchildren were negatively impacted due to our nation’s overreaction to COVID. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, reading and math scores saw the biggest declines, with reading scores seeing their “largest decrease in 30 years” and falling five points on average. Regarding math, “the average score for 9-year-old students fell 7 percentage points between 2020 and 2022… The pandemic’s upheaval especially hurt students of color. Math scores dropped by 5 percentage points for white students, compared with 13 points for Black students and 8 points for Hispanic students. The divide between Black and white students widened by 8 percentage points during the pandemic. Decreases were more uniform in reading: Scores dropped 6 points for white, Black and Hispanic students.” Interestingly, “[f]or Asian American students, Native American students and students of two or more races, there was little change in reading or math between 2020 and 2022.” Also notice how the AP author capitalizes the word “Black” but not the word “white.” This divisive decision was arrived at back in 2020, several years after the American left became a full blown communist race cult.
September 2 – In the latest example of how those running the show think we’re all uninformed, knuckle-dragging idiots, the JACC Journals website (the Journal of the American College of Cardiology) publishes a pre-proof article titled, “Acute Myocarditis – a new manifestation of monkeypox infection?” The article is an attempt by the authors to make people believe monkeypox is now causing heart inflammation even though the WHO has nothing about myocarditis on their monkeypox facts sheet web page, and they have never acknowledged a single case of heart inflammation as being associated with monkeypox since its discovery in 1970. The article’s abstract states, “A 31-year-old male patient with confirmed Monkeypox infection developed acute myocarditis days after the eruption of skin lesions. Cardiac magnetic resonance study confirmed myocardial inflammation. The patient was treated with supportive care and had full clinical recovery. This case highlights cardiac involvement as a potential complication associated with Monkeypox.” No, what this case highlights is the potential for a false reason to be given to the public that would account for the explosion in cases of both myocarditis and pericarditis over the last couple of years following the rollout of an unproven, experimental “vaccine” – a “vaccine” that is known to cause heart inflammation. It doesn’t matter how many lies these people tell, or how many bogus excuses they give us, there is simply no way for these JACC-asses to hide the truth.
September 7 – A study published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) finds “Total artificial sweetener intake was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular diseases… The findings from this large scale prospective cohort study suggest a potential direct association between higher artificial sweetener consumption (especially aspartame, acesulfame potassium, and sucralose) and increased cardiovascular disease risk. Artificial sweeteners are present in thousands of food and beverage brands worldwide, however they remain a controversial topic and are currently being re-evaluated by the European Food Safety Authority, the World Health Organization, and other health agencies.” Funny, these artificial sweeteners have generally been considered safe for decades, but now that hundreds of millions of people worldwide have been injected with drugs that are now known to cause heart inflammation and heart attacks, they’re being implicated as a potential cause for heart problems. I’m not saying artificial sweeteners are the healthiest things in the world – they’re clearly not – but if you ask me whether or not it was the mRNA injection you took or the Diet Pepsi you drink on a regular basis that caused your heart attack, I’m going to have to say it was the mRNA injection. In any event, artificial sweeteners can be added to the list of things being presented to the public as the reason for the sudden wave of heart problems since the roll out of the COVID shot. The list also includes your sleeping position, solar storms, sleeping with the TV on, cold weather, blood type, being tall, daylight savings, flight delays, trioxides, watching TV, paying more for energy, and gardening. By 2023 I suspect the headlines will read: “Everything causes heart attacks except mRNA gene therapy injections.”
September 12 – The Social Science Research Network (SSRN) publishes a 50-page paper titled “COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters for Young Adults: A Risk-Benefit Assessment and Five Ethical Arguments against Mandates at Universities.” The abstract reads in part, “Students at North American universities risk disenrollment due to third dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates. We present a risk-benefit assessment of boosters in this age group and provide five ethical arguments against mandates. We estimate that 22,000 – 30,000 previously uninfected adults aged 18-29 must be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation. Using CDC and sponsor-reported adverse event data, we find that booster mandates may cause a net expected harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented in previously uninfected young adults, we anticipate 18 to 98 serious adverse events, including 1.7 to 3.0 booster-associated myocarditis cases in males, and 1,373 to 3,234 cases of grade ≥3 reactogenicity which interferes with daily activities. Given the high prevalence of post-infection immunity, this risk-benefit profile is even less favourable. University booster mandates are unethical because: 1) no formal risk-benefit assessment exists for this age group; 2) vaccine mandates may result in a net expected harm to individual young people; 3) mandates are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given the modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; 4) US mandates violate the reciprocity principle because rare serious vaccine-related harms will not be reliably compensated due to gaps in current vaccine injury schemes; and 5) mandates create wider social harms. We consider counter-arguments such as a desire for socialisation and safety and show that such arguments lack scientific and/or ethical support.”
September 16 – Steve Kirsch publishes a partially redacted study prepared for the Liberal Party of Canada back in June. The study concluded in part “The abundance of evidence documented by Public Health Ontario (PHO), Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) and top-tier scientific journals demonstrates that the vaccines do not prevent infection or hospitalization. The Ontario data show that vaccination currently makes little difference in terms of hospitalization and death rates for those below age 60. Additionally, since there are known risks of adverse events and unknown long term effects, these must be considered in developing vaccine policies. The empirical evidence investigated in this report from PHO and PHAC does not support continuing mass vaccination programs, mandates, passports and travel bans for all age groups. Rather, it may be prudent to utilize a more targeted and cost-effective approach focused on vaccinating the high-risk group, while factoring in an individual’s potential risk of vaccine-related adverse events.” Kirsch also points out how “That’s what you get when the people writing the report remain anonymous and are free to speak the truth without fear of retribution.”
September 23 – Nature Communications publishes a study titled “Household transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in Denmark” that found “fully vaccinated and booster-vaccinated contacts are generally less susceptible to infection compared to unvaccinated contacts (Table 2).” Generally less susceptible, huh? Well I guess I better run right out and get vaccinated then… Before I go, I’m just going to go ahead and check out Table 2 real quick… Oh, I see now. They counted unvaccinated people with a previous infection as “vaccinated” and people with just one dose as “unvaccinated.” How clever. The death cult wants you to think they’re looking out for you when in fact it’s the opposite. These people will manipulate the data and then lie about it without thinking twice… Anything to just get that injection into you. One scientist on Telegram posted “Academia is dead and the peer-review process is a joke.” I couldn’t agree more.
September 26 – A study is published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research titled “Revisiting Excess Diagnoses of Illnesses and Conditions in Children Whose Parents Provided Informed Permission to Vaccinate Them.” The study showed “When the data for vaccinated versus unvaccinated children are examined… Estimates of Health Care Incidence (HCI) show that visits above regular HCVs [Health Care Visits] increase due to vaccination by 2.56 to 4.98 additional office visits for vaccine-related health issues per unit increase in vaccination per year [emphasis theirs].” For an excellent breakdown article about the background of this study see this.
September 26 – JAMA Pediatrics publishes a research letter titled, “Detection of Messenger RNA COVID-19 Vaccines in Human Breast Milk.” The results section reads in part “Of 11 lactating individuals enrolled, trace amounts of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were detected in 7 samples from 5 different participants at various times up to 45 hours post vaccination.” The earliest mRNA was detected in breast milk was one hour after vaccination. Unsurprisingly, the doctors who wrote the letter believe “breast-feeding after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination is safe, particularly beyond 48 hours after vaccination,” though they note “the potential interference of COVID-19 vaccine mRNA with the immune response to multiple routine vaccines given to infants during the first 6 months of age needs to be considered.” They also appear to contradict their own conclusion about breast-feeding after a COVID vax as “safe” by writing, “caution is warranted about breastfeeding children younger than 6 months in the first 48 hours after maternal vaccination until more safety studies are conducted.” While the study was very limited in scope, we once again see these shots doing something we were told they wouldn’t. Also see this breakdown from TechnoFog.
September 27 – The Washington Compost publishes an article titled, “Women said coronavirus shots affect periods. New study shows they’re right,” and like always they’re a day late and a dollar short. Like other mainstream propaganda outlets, the Compost initially called claims like this “conspiracy theories” and “misinformation” when various doctors and media personalities expressed their concerns about how the experimental mRNA injections could negatively impact the body when they were first rolled out. The Compost tries to reassure women by pointing out how the increased duration and intensity of women’s periods is only temporary, which at the end of the day isn’t very reassuring. The article was originally titled “Do coronavirus vaccines affect periods? A new study says they do,” but for some reason the Compost changed it… Maybe Pfizer liked the wording of the new headline better.
October 1 – A study out of Germany is published in MDPI (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute) titled “A Case Report: Multifocal Necrotizing Encephalitis and Myocarditis after BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination against COVID-19.” The study found “Surprisingly, only spike protein but no nucleocapsid protein could be detected within the foci of inflammation in both the brain and the heart, particularly in the endothelial cells of small blood vessels. Since no nucleocapsid protein could be detected, the presence of spike protein must be ascribed to vaccination rather than to viral infection. The findings corroborate previous reports of encephalitis and myocarditis caused by gene-based COVID-19 vaccines.” Interestingly, back in July the CDC quietly altered their list of “Facts About mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines” to no longer say “The mRNA and the spike protein do not last long in the body. Our cells break down mRNA from these vaccines and get rid of it within a few days after vaccination. Scientists estimate that the spike protein, like other proteins our body creates, may stay in the body up to a few weeks.” The 76-year-old man with Parkinson’s Disease whose case was analyzed for this study died three weeks after his third dose of the COVID “vaccine.” The man first took AstraZeneca’s jab in May of 2021 and followed it up with two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech jab in July and December of 2021. While we were initially told the mRNA generated spike proteins would remain at the injection site before being eliminated from the body, multiple autopsies since then have found spike proteins generated by the “vaccine” all over the body. Also notice in the images below how a statement on the CDC web page in July of 2021 that once read “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines WILL BE Rigorously Evaluated for Safety” was changed to “mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines HAVE BEEN Rigorously Evaluated for Safety” by July of 2022. So I guess I must have missed all those “rigorous” evaluations – as well as any reporting about them – while they apparently (and simultaneously) missed all the people being killed and maimed by the shots? Not likely. For more on the study check out this article by KanekoaTheGreat.
October 6 – Children’s Health Defense publishes an article titled, “Is the U.S. Blood Supply Tainted?” In addition to discussing the concerns about using vaccinated blood on unvaccinated patients, the piece references a study out of Italy in which “surgeons described atypical clumping of red blood cells and the presence of ‘extraordinarily anomalous structures and substances’ of ‘various shapes and sizes of unclear origin’ in over 94% of symptomatic, COVID-19-vaccinated individuals whose blood they examined. The 1,006 study participants, ranging in age from 15 to 85, received a first (14%), second (45%) or third (41%) dose of a Pfizer or Moderna mRNA vaccine about a month before the analysis of their blood.” My God. What have these people done?
October 10 – A new study published in Heart Rhythm claims “Electronic gaming can precipitate lethal cardiac arrhythmias in susceptible children. The incidence appears to be low, but syncope in this setting should be investigated thoroughly. In children with proarrhythmic cardiac conditions, electronic war games in particular are a potent arrhythmic trigger.” The findings are suspicious to say the least as they come at a time when COVID jabs – jabs known to cause heart problems – are being forced into children all over the world. Unsurprisingly, the mainstream media is dutifully parroting the questionable findings (check out the Google search results) despite this never being an issue before. It should also be noted the study did not look into whether the children who died from playing video games were injected with the experimental clot shots.
October 12 – The Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) publishes the findings of a study on Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (NMVr) – otherwise known as Paxlovid – and how it interacts with other drugs. The article states, “Co-administration of NMVr with medications commonly used to manage cardiovascular conditions can potentially cause significant drug-drug interactions [DDIs] and may lead to severe adverse effects… Concomitant administration of NMVr with several commonly prescribed cardiovascular medications can be associated with clinically relevant DDIs. Given the frequency of DDI with NMVr, dose adjustment or temporary interruption of these medications may be required when prescribing NMVr. NMVr should be avoided when potentially interacting cardiovascular medications cannot be safely interrupted.” The Daily Mail reported on other findings from the study that are inaccessible without a paid account with JACC, writing, “…Paxlovid can cause serious health problems when coupled with common heart disease medication such as statins and blood thinners. Researchers from Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Harvard Medical School and other US institutions found the Covid drug can increase the risk of developing blood clots when taken with blood thinners. It can also cause an irregular heartbeat when combined with drugs for heart pain and when taken alongside statins it can be toxic to the liver.” At this point it’s safe to say Big Pharma hasn’t offered one drug since the start of the pandemic that is actually safe and/or effective whether it be Remdesivir, Paxlovid or the “vaccines.”
October 14 – Scientists from Boston University publish a paper (not yet peer-reviewed) explaining how they were able to create a new COVID strain that killed 80% of the mice it was tested on by attaching the spike protein from the Omicron variant to the original Wuhan strain. The paper states, “We generated chimeric recombinant SARS-CoV-2 encoding the S gene of Omicron in the backbone of an ancestral SARS-CoV-2 isolate and compared this virus with the naturally circulating Omicron variant. The Omicron S-bearing virus robustly escapes vaccine-induced humoral immunity, mainly due to mutations in the receptor binding motif (RBM), yet unlike naturally occurring Omicron, efficiently replicates in cell lines and primary-like distal lung cells. In K18-hACE2 mice, while Omicron causes mild, non-fatal infection, the Omicron S-carrying virus inflicts severe disease with a mortality rate of 80%. This indicates that while the vaccine escape of Omicron is defined by mutations in S, major determinants of viral pathogenicity reside outside of S.” If you’re a normal person like me you’re probably asking ‘why the hell would they do something like this?’ I’m not sure, but knowing research like this is being conducted in Boston, MA while we receive regular warnings about the “next pandemic” is unsettling to say the least. Also see this. Update (10/20/22): The UK Daily Mail reports the NIH will be investigating the research conducted at Boston University after Dr. Emily Erbelding of the NIAID said the team at BU did not receive authorization from the agency for the experiment – even though they partially funded it. In fact, Erbelding claims she only found out about the experiment after reading about it in the Daily Mail on October 17th (linked above). It’s not very comforting to think the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing, especially when the left hand is creating deadly viruses. A CDC report released back in February showed Omicron spreading everywhere within one month’s time (the variant chart is shown below).
October 18 – A study out of Germany is published in JAMA showing one out of every 500 children under the age of five who took at least one dose of a COVID “vaccine” greater than three micrograms needed to be hospitalized. None of the 1,773 children (out of 7,806) who took the three microgram dose required hospitalization. The study also found 40 of the children (0.5%) experienced adverse effects that lasted for weeks or months (average was 12.2 days and the longest to recover was 60 days). For a longer breakdown of the study see this.
October 20 – A preprint study is published at bioRxiv titled “Endonuclease fingerprint indicates a synthetic origin of SARS-CoV-2.” Written by mathematical biologist Dr. Alex Washburne and his colleagues Valentin Brutte and Antonius VanDongen, the study shows “SARS-CoV-2 is an anomaly, more likely a product of synthetic genome assembly than natural evolution… and has a synthetic fingerprint unlikely to have evolved from its close relatives.” The researchers believe there is a “high likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated as an infectious clone assembled in vitro.” The study also states in part, “SARS-CoV-2 is a large RNA virus. To create infectious versions of CoVs, the entire 30kb RNA genome is reconstructed in DNA by in vitro genome assembly (IVGA). IVGA has been used to create reverse genetic systems for modified and chimeric RNA viruses for more than 20 years… Most importantly, IVGA methods can leave genetic fingerprints, and we find those fingerprints in the genome of SARS-CoV-2.” The full text of the study is not too long, relatively easy to read, and does a great job of explaining in pretty simple terms how the in vitro genome assembly technique is utilized by scientists. Also see this.
November 7 – The Daily Sceptic publishes an article titled “Study Finds 17% Higher Miscarriage Rate in the Vaccinated But Pretends it Doesn’t.” The article’s author, Dr. Richard Ennos, not only does a great job dissecting a slimy piece of propaganda put out by the UK’s Department of Health and Social Care, but he thoroughly dismantles the findings of a study published in the Nature Communications medical journal titled “A population-based matched cohort study of early pregnancy outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection.” After analyzing the data used in the study, Ennos determined “there is no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection poses a risk to early pregnancy outcomes, but… vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine increases the risk of early miscarriage.” Sadly, despite what their own data indicates, the authors of the study conclude the inverse and state, “Overall, our analyses found no evidence of an increased risk for miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy after COVID-19 vaccination, supporting current recommendations that vaccination remains the safest way for pregnant women to protect themselves and their babies from COVID-19.” If that seems like pure evil that’s because it is. When I write about how there is a death cult running the planet and explain how their minions – whether knowingly or unknowingly – will happily kill you or your children as part of their pursuit to “follow the science” I’m not just writing that for effect. I write about things like this because it’s the truth and you have to be aware of it in order to guard yourself against it.
November 12 – A study is published at PubMed titled “Association between vitamin D supplementation and COVID-19 infection and mortality.” The abstract reads in part, “Several studies have shown that Vitamin D deficiency is associated with increases [in] the risk of infection with COVID-19… In the population of US veterans, we show that Vitamin D2 and D3 fills were associated with reductions in COVID-19 infection of 28% and 20%, respectively… Mortality within 30-days of COVID-19 infection was similarly 33% lower with Vitamin D3 and 25% lower with D2… We also find that after controlling for vitamin D blood levels, veterans receiving higher dosages of Vitamin D obtained greater benefits from supplementation than veterans receiving lower dosages… Black veterans received greater associated COVID-19 risk reductions with supplementation than White veterans.” Wow, and all this time I thought it was just a conspiracy theory that vitamins and minerals were beneficial to a person’s health. Go figure.
December 2 – In addition to being heartless grandma-killers, the unvaccinated are now more likely to get into traffic accidents according to a moronic new study published in the American Journal of Medicine. The authors of the study believe “Coronavirus disease (COVID) vaccine hesitancy is a reflection of psychology that might also contribute to traffic safety” and concluded based on their findings “that COVID vaccine hesitancy is associated with significant increased risks of a traffic crash.” After looking at 6,682 traffic accidents caused by over 11.2M people (84% vaxxed and 16% unvaxxed), these geniuses determined because the unvaxxed accounted for 25% of the crashes the unvaxxed are therefore more likely to crash their cars. The geniuses also “theorized that individual adults who tend to resist public health recommendations might also neglect basic road safety guidelines.” So scientific… Their real endgame? “An awareness of these risks might help to encourage more COVID vaccination.” …Of course.
December 13 – A study is published in Cureus titled “The Effect of the COVID-19 Vaccine on the Menstrual Cycle Among Reproductive-Aged Females in Saudi Arabia.” The study found over 65% of women between 18 and 45 experienced changes to their menstrual cycle. For 27% of the women who responded, these changes persisted for more than three months. Moderna was associated with the highest rate of menstrual change (65.4%), while AstraZeneca was associated with the lowest rate (44.9%). The study concluded “COVID-19 vaccination is associated with a minor and transient change in the menstrual cycle, resulting mainly [in] more menstrual pain [22.9%] and increased bleeding [14.3%].”
December 19 – A study published at medRXiv (but not yet peer-reviewed) and conducted “to evaluate whether a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine protects against COVID-19” finds the jab to be only 30% effective against infection. Using data collected from over 51,000 “working-aged Cleveland Clinic employees,” the study also found “the greater the number of vaccine doses previously received the higher the risk of COVID-19.” After praising the original version of the COVID “vaccines” as “amazingly effective in preventing COVID-19” and crediting them with “sav[ing] a large number of lives, and chang[ing] the impact of the pandemic” – which is not an accurate assessment in my opinion – the authors are less enthusiastic about the effectiveness of subsequent boosters. In the “discussion” portion of the study the authors write in part, “The evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus necessitates a more nuanced approach to assessing the potential impact of vaccination than when the original vaccines were developed. Additional factors beyond vaccine effectiveness need to be considered. The association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior vaccine doses in our study, was unexpected. A simplistic explanation might be that those who received more doses were more likely to be individuals at higher risk of COVID-19… However, the majority of subjects in this study were generally young individuals and all were eligible to have received at least 3 doses of vaccine by the study start date, and which they had every opportunity to do. Therefore, those who received fewer than 3 doses (>45% of individuals in the study) were not those ineligible to receive the vaccine, but those who chose not to follow the CDC’s recommendations on remaining updated with COVID-19 vaccination, and one could reasonably expect these individuals to have been more likely to have exhibited higher risk-taking behavior. Despite this, their risk of acquiring COVID-19 was lower than those who received a larger number of prior vaccine doses. This is not the only study to find a possible association with more prior vaccine doses and higher risk of COVID-19. A large study found that those who had an Omicron variant infection after previously receiving three doses of vaccine had a higher risk of reinfection than those who had an Omicron variant infection after previously receiving two doses of vaccine. Another study found that receipt of two or three doses of a mRNA vaccine following prior COVID-19 was associated with a higher risk of reinfection than receipt of a single dose. We still have a lot to learn about protection from COVID-19 vaccination, and in addition to a vaccine’s effectiveness it is important to examine whether multiple vaccine doses given over time may not be having the beneficial effect that is generally assumed… The effect of multiple COVID-19 vaccine doses on future risk of COVID-19 needs further study.” Repeated boosters jabs are proving to only be useful when it comes to boosting Big Pharma’s profits and should be avoided. I also find it funny how the authors of the study consider people who choose to not follow “the CDC’s recommendations on remaining updated with COVID-19 vaccination” to be “more likely to have exhibited higher risk-taking behavior” when getting repeatedly injected with unproven and experimental gene therapy drugs is the real “risk-taking behavior.” Update (4/19/23): The study has now been peer-reviewed and published in the Open Forum Infectious Diseases medical journal.
