October 5 – A study is published in the Journal of the Endocrine Society titled, “7053 Sex Differences in Endocrine-Related Pre-existing, COVID-19- and COVID-19 Vaccine-Related Health Conditions and Adverse Events.” Researchers examined the impact the COVID jabs had on the endocrine system by surveying ~8,000-10,000 people around the world between February 2022 and October 2023 (62.5% of participants were from the US). The abstract reads in part, “Nearly 1.49% of respondents reported hospitalization after COVID-19, whereas 5.69% of the respondents reported hospitalization after vaccination in our cohort. SARS-CoV-2-related severe symptoms were reported by ∼9.3% of COVID-19 vaccinated versus 6.7% of unvaccinated individuals. Women reported more vaccine-related adverse events (AEs) than men; 30% of men and 19% of women reported no AEs after any vaccination dose. After the first dose, 60% of women and 48% of men reported some AEs, whereas after the second dose, 46% of women and 40% of men reported experiencing several AEs… In summary, reproductive AEs in vaccinated individuals without COVID-19 illness were more frequent than in unvaccinated individuals with COVID-19 illness. A detailed and thorough follow-up is needed to better understand if pre-existing health conditions exacerbated vaccine-associated AEs.”
October 6 – A study is published at ScienceDirect titled, “Using double-debiased machine learning [DDML] to estimate the impact of Covid-19 vaccination on mortality and staff absences in elderly care homes.” The “results” section of the study reads in part, “our DDML estimates reveal some evidence that higher resident vaccination rates may have reduced Covid mortality in elderly care homes at least in the period of the initial rollout (i.e. up to about September 2021). There is little evidence of any reduction in mortality in the booster period or from staff vaccination. Further, we do not find evidence of a reduction in Covid deaths in elderly care homes relative to deaths in the broader community, despite the much higher vaccination rates in care homes.” Contained in the “discussion” section the authors even present evidence that the jabs are causing an increase in COVID mortality writing in part, “Even using DDML, we are unable to identify strong evidence that vaccination rates amongst care home staff reduced mortality or that resident vaccination reduced mortality during booster roll out period (from September 2021). Indeed, in the later period, we find some evidence that higher vaccination rates are associated with higher Covid mortality.” Now if that’s not “safe and effective” I don’t know what is… The researchers ultimately conclude, “Using standard panel data regression analysis and [DDML] techniques suggests both that vaccination had only a limited impact on care home mortality and that any impact was restricted to the initial rollout period of the vaccine. Our analysis casts doubt on the hypothesis that high rates of vaccination were a particularly important factor in reducing Covid mortality after the initial waves. In turn, this has implications for public policy relating to Covid vaccination. In particular, it may be appropriate to look again at the case for continuing to expend resources on offering regular booster vaccination doses to vulnerable populations such as care home residents.” I would say the shots never offered any benefit to anyone, but it’s nice to see mainline science finally catching up with reality.
October 9 – The Cleveland Clinic publishes a news release with the scary-sounding headline, “History of COVID-19 Doubles Long-term Risk of Heart Attack, Stroke and Death.” Fortunately for us, the headline is also very misleading. After looking at a group of 10K COVID patients from the UK and comparing them to 220,000 Brits who were (supposedly) never infected with COVID, researchers determined “[t]he risk of MACE [major adverse cardiovascular events] was elevated in COVID-19 cases at all levels of severity and to a greater extent in cases hospitalized for COVID-19.” The problem with this claim, however, is that it was only the subset of hospitalized patients who saw an increase in these adverse events in the years that followed infection. Out of the 10K patients previously infected with COVID, 20% were hospitalized, and it was mostly people in this group who saw the increase. The other 8K people experienced strokes, heart attacks and deaths at roughly the same rate as the control group. According to Alex Berenson, “350 of the non-hospitalized group had MACE events in three years, a rate of 4.3 percent. In contrast, 9,183 people in the control group of 217,730 suffered similar events, a rate of 4.2 percent. The authors did not disclose these facts anywhere in the paper. They are available only in the supplemental appendix. Even there they have to be reverse-engineered, as they are never provided openly. In the paper itself, the authors briefly mentioned the doubled risk for the entire group of 10,000. They used the phrase ‘all levels of severity’ to make it sound like the non-hospitalized group had double the risk, while the hospitalized group had four times. This wording is canny: ‘all levels of severity’ includes rather than excludes the hospitalized group, so authors are basically double-counting the hospitalized group’s risk to hide the lack of extra danger for everyone else… This was scientific and medical malpractice. Roughly 98 percent of all adults, and 90-95 percent of adults over 60, who get Covid are healthy enough to recover without hospitalization. Their risk – or lack thereof – should have been clearly disclosed.” Hat tip to Mr. Berenson and his Unreported Truths Substack.
October 9 – A meta-analysis is published at Taylor & Francis Online titled, “The efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine at different doses and courses for COVID-19 prevention: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.” After looking at 20 randomized controlled trials involving over 12,000 patients, researchers determined a “hydroxychloroquine dose of 200-400 mg for a duration of 5-8 weeks may moderately reduce the risk of COVID-19 with a relatively low risk of adverse events.” I took it when I last had COVID and it worked just fine.
October 10 – A study out of South Korea is published at PLOS One titled, “SARS-CoV2 mRNA vaccine intravenous administration induces myocarditis in chronic inflammation.” Researchers implanted mice with an osmotic pump which was used to administer different solutions to six different groups of mice. “The mice were immunized intramuscularly [IM] or intravenously [IV] with 10 μg of Omicron Spike mRNA vaccines encoding the sequence of spike protein from the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant… The immunization schedule consisted of two injections: an initial prime injection, followed by a boost injection, with a two-week interval between them. Once the immunization protocol was completed, the mice were euthanized two days post injection… after immunization and whole blood samples and tissues were collected.” The researchers found, “Myosin light chain7 and calcineurin, which is one of the cardiac hypertrophy and damage markers, were significantly increased in the heart tissue of mRNA-administered groups with or without LPS pump implantation… mRNA vaccine IV immunization induces inflammation and inflammatory cytokine production in the heart more than IM immunization. Moreover, the pericarditis and myocardium damage dramatically increased in the mRNA vaccine IV injection with the chronic inflammation condition… COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were associated with pericarditis at a rate of 12.6–24 cases per million following a second dose. The enhanced cardiac damage and myocarditis following mRNA vaccine administration in our chronic inflammatory mouse model raises important questions regarding the potential risks of mRNA vaccines in individuals with preexisting inflammatory conditions. Thus, the inflammatory milieu created by chronic inflammation may contribute to cardiac damage exacerbation following mRNA vaccine immunization. Here, we found that chronic inflammation increases the risk of adverse events induced by mRNA vaccines, particularly in the heart. Interestingly, the IV mRNA vaccine administration affects heart pericarditis and inflammation more. However, the mice experiment has a lot of limitations to show the relevance in the human model because nobody is getting IV administration for the mRNA vaccine. Dr. Knowlton commented that vaccines uptake into the bloodstream accidentally, which may cause systemic acute inflammation and myocarditis…” This last point I chose to include is a key one. Originally we were told the COVID mRNA “vaccines” would remain at the injection site in the arm for several days before getting flushed from the body. Almost immediately this proved to be false, and subsequent autopsies of previously-injected individuals have repeatedly shown spike proteins make their way to just about every organ in the body. There is absolutely no doubt they also find their way into the bloodstream, which ultimately leads to the heart and causes damage in the form of myocarditis/pericarditis. Unfortunately, while it should have been game, set, match for these awful products a long time ago, our loving medical “experts” are still recommending people stay “up-to-date” with the death jabs.
October 11 – A study is published in the Journal of Public Health and Emergency titled, “COVID-19 vaccination decisions and impacts of vaccine mandates: a cross sectional survey of healthcare workers in Ontario, Canada.” Researchers surveyed 468 Canadian healthcare workers to examine the impact vaccine mandates had on the decision to get vaccinated, as well as the impact the decision to get vaccinated had. The participants in the study consisted mostly of nurses and other medical support staff. Of the 86 respondents who replied to questions about their “vaccination decision and experience,” only 13% took the jab to protect themselves, their family or the community from severe COVID outcomes (hospitalization and death). More than 80% took the shot because of a mandate, with a work mandate being the number one reason (75%). Only 22% of those who took the shot experienced no adverse reactions, while the other 78% experienced side effects that ranged from mild to severe, with one person reporting a life-threatening reaction after the first dose. 31% said they were forced to take a second dose even after experiencing side effects following the first. Interestingly, only 16% of vaccinated respondents reported being satisfied with their decision to take the COVID clot shot, while almost 93% who refused the vaccination were happy they made that decision. The results section of the study reads, “Most respondents, with 16+ years of experience, were unvaccinated and terminated due to mandate non-compliance. Participants reported safety concerns about vaccination regardless of vaccination status, yet they rarely requested exemptions due to high rejection rates by employers. Unvaccinated workers reported satisfaction with their choices but faced significant negative impacts on their finances, mental health, and personal relationships. Conversely, vaccinated respondents were generally dissatisfied, often experiencing adverse events, and one-quarter felt coerced into receiving further doses. Further, a large minority of respondents reported issues such as underreporting of adverse events, poorer treatment of unvaccinated patients, and concerning protocol changes. Nearly half intended to leave the healthcare industry.” The study is only about 20 pages and reads fast.
October 15 – The German Newspaper Neue OZ reports “[m]ore than one in six Germans has experienced side effects in connection with a corona vaccination… According to the study, 17 percent of respondents answered ‘no’ when asked whether they had ‘tolerated the corona vaccinations well overall.’ Another 10 percent said they had not received a vaccination. Almost three quarters of respondents (73 percent) said they had no side effects. According to the survey, the majority of Germans also believe that a Bundestag committee of inquiry into the Corona crisis is unnecessary. 58 percent answered no to the question of whether such a form of investigation was ‘necessary.’ 40 percent answered yes to this question. A total of 1,002 people were interviewed for the Forsa survey on October 7 and 8. In designing the survey, our editorial team cooperated with the online magazine ‘Multipolar,’ which had won the release of the ‘RKI files’ [see July 23rd, 2024] in court, i.e. the crisis management protocols of the Robert Koch Institute.”
October 24 – A study is published at Cambridge Core titled, “The impact of COVID-19 status and vaccine type following the first dose on acute heart disease: A nationwide retrospective cohort study in South Korea.” Using data from the country’s National Health Insurance Service COVID-19 database, researchers “ analysed heart disease risk, including acute cardiac injury, acute myocarditis, acute pericarditis, cardiac arrest, and cardiac arrhythmia, in relation to vaccine type and COVID-19 within 21 days after the first vaccination date, employing Cox proportional hazards models with time-varying covariates. This study included 3,350,855 participants.” After looking at the data, researchers concluded, “[i]ndividuals who received mRNA vaccines had a higher risk of acute heart disease compared to those who received other vaccines… The risk of acute heart disease was higher among individuals who had COVID-19 within 21 days after the first vaccination than among those whom this was not registered… Younger individuals in their 20s and 30s, when compared with older individuals in their 70s and above, exhibited higher risks of acute heart disease… The younger the age of mRNA vaccine recipients, the higher the risk of acute heart disease… Particularly, among mRNA vaccine recipients, compared to individuals aged 70 and above, those in their 20s showed the highest HR [hazard ratio], followed by those in their 30s…. Additionally, elevated risk was also observed among individuals in their 40s and 60s… However, this increased risk was not observed among those in their 50s… The study results showed that the risk of acute heart disease was higher among individuals who received mRNA vaccines compared to those who received other types of vaccines… we observed that individuals vaccinated with mRNA vaccines had a higher risk of acute heart diseases compared to those who received other vaccines, and those with COVID-19 within 21 days after the first vaccination had a higher risk than those without. Furthermore, the interaction effect between the type of vaccine and age group revealed that among individuals who received mRNA vaccines, younger age was associated with a higher risk of acute heart disease.”
October 26 – Tell me it’s the vaccine without saying it’s the vaccine: A study is published in the Journal of Epidemiology titled, “Changes in mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: descriptive analysis of national health statistics up to 2022.” Using “official Vital Statistics from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare to assess the impact of the pandemic on mortality trends,” the study found that, “[a]mong men, the annual all-cause ASMR [age-standardized mortality rates] per 100,000 people increased from 1356.3 in 2021 to 1437.8 in 2022 (6.0% increase). Among women, the annual all-cause ASMR increased from 722.1 in 2021 to 785.8 in 2022 (6.5% increase). Compared with the period 2020 to 2021, COVID-19, senility, heart disease, malignant neoplasms (for women) and ‘other causes not classified as major causes’ substantially contributed to the increase in all-cause ASMR from 2021 to 2022.” COVID “vaccine” uptake in Japan was among the highest in the world, hitting a “fully vaccinated” rate of about 75% by the fall of 2021. The blind spot so many people working in the field of medicine have when it comes to these shots is as frustrating as it is baffling.
October 28 – Tell me it’s the vaccine without saying it’s the vaccine: An article is published in the European Journal of Public Health titled, “Excess all-cause mortality in 21 countries during 2022: COVID-19 impact by C-MOR project.” The abstract reads in part, “Excess mortality was calculated by comparing the weekly 2022 age-standardized mortality rates per 100,000 population against a baseline mortality, estimated using historical data from 2015-2019. Excess cumulative mortality for 2022 was found in all 21 countries. The excess mortality for the total population varied between 8.6 and 116.2, with the minimum excess belonging to Peru and the maximum to Georgia. Australia, Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Georgia, Greece, Israel, and Norway showed a higher excess in 2022 than in 2020, while Australia, Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, Israel, Italy, Norway, Spain, and Sweden also showed a higher excess in 2022 than in 2021. Mauritius showed a significant excess mortality for the first time in 2022. For all countries, but Australia, the % of COVID-19 deaths out of all deaths decreased in 2022 compared to 2021. Contrary to the ‘harvesting effect’, which would expect a decline in mortality rates post-pandemic, our results underscore a sustained excess mortality throughout 2022… All countries investigated experienced continued all-cause excess mortality during 2022, compared to pre-pandemic years. For most, excess mortality in 2022 was higher than in 2021 and 2020.” On a side note, while scrolling through the other articles looking for this one, I couldn’t help noticing that this journal was absolutely teeming with crackpot nonsense. For example, I found an article titled, “Vaccine conspiracy beliefs are the main determinant of adult vaccine hesitancy,” which concluded, “The vaccine conspiracy beliefs play a major role in the development of VH [vaccine hesitancy]. The interventions aimed at the change of anti-vaccination attitudes should address the problem of widespread conspiracy beliefs.” You see, vaccine hesitancy is not caused by the fact that these horrible injections are killing and maiming people at rates never seen before… It’s caused by kooky conspiracy theorists!
November 1 – A study is published in the International Journal of Innovative Research in Medical Science titled, “COVID-19 Vaccines: A Risk Factor for Cerebral Thrombotic Syndromes.” Using data from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), researchers compared the number of cerebral thromboembolism adverse events (blood clots in the brain) that occurred following COVID-19 vaccination to the number that occurred following seasonal flu vaccination, as well as all other vaccinations. The study concluded there were “5137 cerebral thromboembolism AEs [adverse events] reported in the 3 years (36 months) after COVID-19 vaccines compared to 52 AEs for the influenza vaccines over the past 34 years (408 months) and 282 AEs for all other vaccines (excluding COVID-19) over the past 34 years (408 months)… There is an alarming breach in the safety signal threshold concerning cerebral thrombosis AEs after COVID-19 vaccines compared to that of the influenza vaccines and even when compared to that of all other vaccines. An immediate global moratorium on the use of COVID-19 vaccines is necessary with an absolute contraindication in women of reproductive age.” As Nicolas Hulscher at the Courageous Discourse Substack points out, these numbers indicate brain clots are 112,000% more likely to occur following a COVID “vaccine” compared to a seasonal flu vaccine, and 20,700% more likely to occur when compared to any other vaccination.
Image taken from the linked Hulscher article.
November 4 – A study is published in the Poultry, Fishes and Wildlife Sciences Journal titled, “Proximal Origin of Epidemic Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5N1 Clade 2.3.4.4b and Spread by Migratory Waterfowl.” The purpose of the paper was to investigate possible lab origins of the bird flu strain (H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b) that is currently circulating around the US. Regarding how fast this strain has spread, researchers wrote, “Currently the world is facing a global pandemic of H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b – first detected in October 2020 in the Netherlands – that purportedly evolved from H5Nx viruses and possesses even greater pathogenic functions. An especially striking feature of the newly emerged H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b is how rapidly it spread from birds in Europe to birds in North America. This rapid spread contrasts with the previously slow intercontinental spread of the goose/Guangdong-lineage of H5N1. After emerging in China in 1996, it was first detected in Europe in 2005, and then in the United States in 2014. While it apparently took nine years for earlier variants to spread from Europe to the United States, H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b was first detected in the Netherlands in October 2020 and then in the United States in late 2021. What could account for the new variant’s extraordinarily rapid intercontinental spread? In a July 11, 2022 paper in Nature titled ‘Transatlantic spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 by wild birds from Europe to North America in 2021,’ a large international team offered the hypothesis that birds migrating from Europe to Iceland and other North Atlantic islands, and from there to North America in 2021, must have carried the virus across the Atlantic… This conclusion contains an implausible element and a notable omission. First, the hypothetical spread of a new avian influenza variant by migratory birds from Europe to North America by crossing the North Atlantic has never been documented before and therefore appears to be unprecedented. Second, the paper’s conclusion omits the fact that at the same time (December 2021) the H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b was purportedly detected in birds in Newfoundland, it was also detected in ducks in South Carolina, just two hundred miles east of the USDA’s Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory (SEPRL), which began performing serial passage experiments with H5Nx viruses on mallard ducks in the spring of 2021… HPAI H5N1 belonging to clade 2.3.4.4b (genotype B3.13) are currently infecting a large number and variety of animal species in the United States, resulting in sporadic human infections. In the context of modern viral outbreaks involving pathogenic organisms, it is crucial to evaluate the potential origins of the virus, including the possibility of laboratory involvement… The above circumstances prompted us to pose a question – namely, is it possible that HPAI H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b evolved not in nature, but as a result of serial passage or other Gain-of-Function (GOF) research in a laboratory?”
Regarding the possibility the strain originated from the USDA SEPRL in Athens, Georgia, the authors highlight the fact the facility “has a history of performing GOF research on H5N1 viruses prior to their current serial passage experiments. In 2008, Wasilenko et al., from SEPRL generated recombinant H5N1 viruses by exchanging individual gene segments from two parental H5N1 strains with differing pathogenicity. They specifically exchanged the PB1, PB2, NP, HA, NS and M genes in these recombinant viruses, which resulted in some mutant viruses exhibiting increased pathogenicity while others showed decreased pathogenicity. Regarding the serial passage experiments being performed at SEPRL, several mutations can arise [the authors cite several studies with examples of said mutations]… Genetic analysis of the H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b (genotype B3.13) from the human case reported in Texas on 1 April, 2024, revealed a PB2 E627K mutation. In contrast, the human case reported in Michigan on 22 May, 2024 (also genotype B3.13), exhibited a different mutation, PB2 M631L. As we’ve outlined above, these two mutations can be a result of serial passage GOF experiments… Concerningly, genotype B1.2 was found in a bottlenose dolphin… in March 2022 in Florida, indicating sudden new adaptations to different animal species. The dolphin exhibited neuronal necrosis and inflammation of the brain and meninges, and RT-PCR revealed the brain carried the highest viral load. Furthermore, the NP gene of H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b (genotype B3.13), which is causing unprecedented cattle infections, was reported to have likely originated from an avian influenza A virus resembling A/mallard/Alberta/567/2021 (H11N9)-like strains. These data indicate that a laboratory leak of H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b genotype B1 may have occurred and spread via mallard ducks, eventually resulting in the sudden outbreaks among various mammals, cattle, and sporadic human infections (Figure 2).”
The authors then provide some background information about past leaks, writing in part, “Laboratory leaks are far more common than one may realize from news reporting. Since 2001, there have been 309 confirmed and reported lab-acquired infections globally, with a vast majority (78.6%) occurring in the U.S. This number is expected to be even higher because not all cases are reported to the media or published in peer-reviewed journals. The risk of unreported lab leaks is suspected of being especially high in China, where the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) imposes a high level of secrecy about the activities of Chinese biolabs. In 2022, an illegal biolab tied to the People’s Republic of China was discovered in Reedley, CA. It contained thousands of samples of potential pathogens, including HIV, malaria, tuberculosis, and SARS-CoV-2, as well as nearly a thousand transgenic mice genetically engineered to mimic the human immune system. Lab workers said that the mice were designed ‘to catch and carry the COVID-19 virus.’ Additionally, the lab contained a freezer labelled ‘Ebola.’
The most common cause of pathogen escape is ‘procedural error.’ Animal escape is another cause of pathogen escape and could be the culprit behind any possible H5N1 leaks. Mallard ducks, which are used in serial passage experiments at the SEPRL facility, serve as natural reservoirs for many influenza A viruses. The mallard is the most numerous duck species in North America and Eurasia and is known to be an efficient asymptomatic carrier and spreader of H5N1 viruses…”
“In January 2014, the CDC experienced an inadvertent cross-contamination incident where a Low Pathogenic Avian Influenza (LPAI) A (H9N2) virus culture was contaminated with a HPAI A (H5N1) virus. This contaminated culture was subsequently shipped to the SEPRL in Athens, Georgia, but the issue wasn’t identified until May 2014, meaning that unrecognized H5N1 contamination could have been occurr[ing] for months. The contamination event revealed gaps in laboratory safety protocols and reporting mechanisms, underscoring the risk of H5N1 escape even within high-containment facilities such as SEPRL. Moreover, in 2012, Imai et al., using GOF techniques, modified H5N1 in the laboratory to better infect ferrets at the University of Wisconsin-Madison by introducing four specific mutations in the viral Haemagglutinin (HA) protein within a 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus backbone. These modifications allowed the H5N1 virus to preferentially recognize human-type receptors, replicate efficiently in ferrets, and transmit via respiratory droplets, while causing lung lesions and weight loss without high pathogenicity or mortality. In November 2013, a researcher at the University of Wisconsin-Madison accidentally pierced their finger with a needle containing this engineered H5N1 virus. The injured researcher was quarantined at home rather than in a specialized facility, raising concerns about the university’s preparedness for such incidents. In December 2019, another breach occurred at the same university when a trainee’s respirator hose detached during an experiment with a lab-engineered H5N1 virus. The university delayed notifying health officials and federal oversight bodies, raising concerns about inadequate safety measures and reporting practices. These incidents underscore critical lapses in laboratory safety and oversight that can occur at BSL-3 laboratories such as the SEPRL and the Erasmus Medical Center, highlighting the significant risks associated with GOF research. Merler et al., estimated that there’s a 5% to 15% chance that an H5N1 lab escape would not be detected at all using model simulations of a lab leak originating in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, the same city where Wang et al., conducted GOF experiments.”
The conclusion of the study reads, “The proximal origins of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 Clade 2.3.4.4b may be the USDA Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory (SEPRL) in Athens, Georgia and the Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Genetic evidence and historical context suggest that laboratory activities, including serial passage and GOF research, could have contributed to the emergence of H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b. However, causation has not been established, and further investigation is urgently needed to confirm these findings and to identify all H5N1 laboratory leaks that may have occurred with a focus on mallard ducks and other migratory waterfowl, which have the potential to infect a large number of poultry and livestock facilities around the world. A moratorium on GOF research including serial passage of H5N1 is indicated to prevent a man-made influenza pandemic affecting animals and humans.” Despite these common sense suggestions, government fear mongering over a bird flu pandemic is becoming louder, H5N1 vaccine production continues to ramp up, and millions upon millions of animals needed for food production are being needlessly slaughtered. It’s becoming increasingly obvious the death cult is trying to get another pandemic set in motion in case Trump pulls off the win so they can use it to disrupt the Make America Great Again agenda during his second term.
November 17 – A study is published in the Science, Public Health Policy and the Law journal titled, “A Systematic Review Of Autopsy Findings In Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination.” After looking at 44 paper that contained 325 autopsy cases and one organ-restricted autopsy case (heart), researchers determined, “[t]he most implicated organ system among cases was the cardiovascular (49%), followed by hematological (17%), respiratory (11%), and multiple organ systems (7%). Three or more organ systems were affected in 21 cases. The mean time from vaccination to death was 14.3 days. Most deaths occurred within a week from last vaccine administration. A total of 240 deaths (73.9%) were independently adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination, of which the primary causes of death include sudden cardiac death (35%), pulmonary embolism (12.5%), myocardial infarction (12%), VITT (7.9%), myocarditis (7.1%), multisystem inflammatory syndrome (4.6%), and cerebral hemorrhage (3.8%).” Conclusion: “The consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine mechanisms of injury and death, coupled with autopsy confirmation by physician adjudication, suggests there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death.” This paper was available a long time ago, but other journals like The Lancet, for example, attempted to censor it before it was eventually published.
December 3 – A peer-reviewed study is published in the Public Health Policy Journal titled, “BioNTech RNA-Based COVID-19 Injections Contain Large Amounts Of Residual DNA Including An SV40 Promoter/Enhancer Sequence.” Researchers used a series of experiments to answer three specific questions: 1) “can the large amount of residual DNA in BioNTech lots and even plasmids identified in Pfizer lots be confirmed on BioNTech only lots (BNT162b2, Comirnaty) distributed in Germany by different comparable DNA detection methods?” 2) “can residual plasmids or DNA fragments, if present, be efficiently transfected into human cells together with the coding modRNA?” and 3) “can these biologicals induce continued cellular expression of spike protein thus creating long-term foci for immune attack?” Based on the fact they “obtained positive results on all issues,” the researchers express serious concerns about the continued use of these experimental injections. Their conclusion reads, “We demonstrated that transfection of the human cell line HEK293 with four different BNT162b2 lots results in the production of spike proteins over several days, which are released into the cell supernatant via exosomes. We detected residual plasmid-DNA in all vials at concentrations far exceeding the allowed EMA limit of 0.33 ng dsDNA per 1 mg RNA. We identified all plasmid genes as well as the two copies of the SV40 promoter/enhancer element. The DNA was shown to enter and persist in the cells. Already before the start of the governmental vaccination campaign, physicians and scientists pointed out that serious adverse events would be triggered by the gene-based agents. In the meantime, the spectrum of adverse side events has become so multifaceted that the term ‘spikeopathy’ has been created to denote the new disease complex. The eternal dangers of all RNA biologicals are 4-fold: First, modRNA encoding any foreign protein will trigger detrimental autoimmune reactions. Second, the lipid nanoparticles are themselves highly toxic. Third, residual plasmid-DNA and reverse transcribed mRNA will genetically modify cells. Fourth, replacement of uridine in natural mRNA by N1-methyl-pseudouridine in synthetic modRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting resulting in haphazard production of utterly alien proteins. Our results confirm and extend published reports and raise grave concerns regarding the safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine. We call for an immediate halt of all RNA-based biologicals until these concerns are scientifically addressed and convincingly dispelled.”
December 7 – A study is published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research titled, “Menstrual Abnormalities Strongly Associated with Proximity to COVID-19 Vaccinated Individuals.” According to Nicholas Hulscher, a Master of Public Health and a prolific writer at the Courageous Discourse Substack, “the study found that women with daily close proximity (within 6 feet) to vaccinated individuals outside their household had a 34% higher risk of heavier bleeding, a 28% higher risk of menstruation starting over 7 days early, and a 26% higher risk of bleeding lasting more than 7 days. The scientific plausibility for these findings is supported by several key observations, which are discussed in the manuscript: 1) Timing Consistency with Shedding Studies: 68.4% of respondents reported symptoms within one week of being near a vaccinated individual, with 48.6% experiencing symptoms within 3 days or the same day, aligning with the FDA’s guidance on vaccine shedding timelines. 2) Prolonged Presence of Vaccine Components: The detection of mRNA fragments and spike protein in vaccinated individuals’ blood for extended periods (up to 187 days) provides evidence of prolonged circulation of potential transmissible components. 3) Documented Excretion Pathways: Established pathways for the excretion of lipid nanoparticles and spike protein, including saliva, sweat, breast milk, and potentially exhalation, provide mechanisms for environmental transmission. 4) Alignment with Previous Studies: Similar menstrual irregularities, such as heavier bleeding and prolonged cycles, have been documented in vaccinated individuals, reinforcing the relevance of these findings in unvaccinated individuals. 5) Potential Mechanisms of Action: The cytotoxic and estrogen-receptor-modulating properties of the spike protein, along with known inflammatory and autoimmune responses to vaccines, offer biologically plausible mechanisms for these observed effects.”
The researchers concluded, “…there has been a growing volume of scientific literature reporting adverse effects of exposure to COVID-19 mRNA gene therapies. Unvaccinated women have been sharing personal stories of adverse health effects after exposure to vaccinated individuals, such as heavier menstrual bleeding than usual, early menses, and extended menstrual bleeding. This observational study found that women with no direct COVID-19 vaccine or SARS-CoV-2 exposure seemed to be having menstrual abnormalities similar to those reported by the vaccinated population. Our findings suggest possible indirect transmission of ingredients or products of the COVID-19 vaccines, presumably through shedding, from people who received one or more of the COVID-19 injections. Aside from the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, several new mRNA-based vaccines are now in clinical trials. Our findings support the need for shedding studies for current and future gene therapy products, as detailed in the 2015 FDA guidance.” Hulscher concludes his breakdown by asking, “Why didn’t our regulatory agencies conduct shedding studies before mass product rollout?” I think I know the answer to that one, Nick. It’s because adequate testing of these products would have prevented them from coming to market, and Big Pharma – along with their lackeys in the regulatory agencies – needed to get them approved as fast as possible in order to cash-in on the hysteria they created… (But I’m pretty sure he already knows that). Update (12/16/24): Hulscher breaks down the results of a study released a week-and-a-half ago titled, “Protection From COVID-19 Vaccination and Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Children Aged 6 Months-4 Years, United States, September 2022-April 2023.” Unsurprisingly, the data shows “these injections do the opposite of what they’re supposed to do. Instead of protecting against COVID-19, these genetic injections either fail or increase the risk.” For the details click here.
December 11 – A study is published in Cell Host & Microbe titled, “Persistence of spike protein at the skull-meninges-brain axis may contribute to the neurological sequelae of COVID-19.” The discussion section of the study reads in part, “long-term complications of COVID-19 remain a major public health concern, and the long-lasting brain fog and significant brain tissue loss make it imperative to explore the mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2-induced brain damage. Increased plasma cytokine levels, blood-brain barrier disruption, and reactivation of latent herpesviruses have been correlated with cognitive symptoms associated with long COVID. The persistence of spike protein is also reported in patient plasma and immune cells, suggesting that the prolonged symptoms post-COVID-19 could stem from the enduring presence of viral proteins, alongside sustained systemic inflammation. Here, using tissue clearing and imaging, we detected spike protein in skull, meninges, and brain samples from acute COVID-19 patients and reported the persistence in post-mortem brain samples that were PCR negative for the virus, which may explain some aspects of COVID-19 symptoms… We found that the spike protein alone induced a broad spectrum of proteome changes in the mouse skull marrow, meninges, and brain that are similar to those observed in COVID-19 patients and that the isolated effects of the spike protein on the nervous system caused anxiety-like behavior without memory deficits… While these findings do not support the direct induction of clinical neurological symptoms by the spike protein, they suggest the long-term consequences of spike protein-induced inflammation and dysfunctional signaling in the brain. Further investigation is needed to elucidate the impact of spike protein on the brain and its association with other neurological diseases. Our data also suggest a mechanism for the virus’s entry into the central nervous system. In both mouse and COVID-19 human tissues, we found spike protein in the SMCs [skull-meninges connections], which the virus or virus components could use to travel from the skull marrow to the meninges and the brain parenchyma. Brain entry of virus-shed spike protein has previously been found in some COVID-19 cases and has been linked to a compromised blood-brain barrier or trafficking along the olfactory or vagus nerve. More data will be needed to establish the relative contribution of the different routes of brain invasion by SARS-CoV-2 and its spike protein, which might differ between different parts of the brain. Systemic hyperinflammation has previously been observed in multiple organs during autopsies of COVID-19 cases. Our molecular analysis suggests activation of immune response in the skull-meninges-brain axis, potentially via recruiting and increasing the activity of neutrophils similar to what has been reported in the respiratory tract. In the skull marrow and meninges, the upregulation of proteins involved in neutrophil degranulation may be linked with a process known as NETosis to contain the infection. NETs could further propagate the inflammation, potentially inducing tissue damage, including endothelium damage, leading to pathologies such as thrombosis and alterations in the coagulation process, as alterations in such processes are found in lung tissue and plasma of COVID-19 patients.”
December 18 – Commiefornia governor Gavin Nuisance declares a state of emergency over the non-existent bird flu outbreak taking place. The move comes on the heels of a press release issued earlier today by the CDC declaring “the first severe [human] case of H5N1 bird flu” was just confirmed in the state of Louisiana. According to the linked CompleteBS article, “to date there have been no recorded cases of person-to-person spread of bird flu in California or anywhere else.” Wow. Sure sounds like an emergency to me… Update (12/19/24): The Courageous Discourse Substack publishes an article titled, “H5N1 in Cattle Is Extremely Suspicious.” Citing a 2019 study, author John Leake explains how the sudden spread of bird flu through dairy cattle herds is unprecedented. The article also includes an interesting 25-minute documentary about this disturbing new trend, how it is being mishandled by the government, and possible motives for exaggerating and/or exacerbating the problem. Also see this. Update 2 (12/30/24): The leftist criminals running Maricopa County, AZ – who are also quite the nuisance – issue a press release announcing bird flu has been detected in the county’s wastewater.
December 19 – A study is published in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders titled, “Cardiac findings in a phase II double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial of combination therapy (HAZDPac) to treat COVID-19 patients.” The study found “ outpatient treatment of COVID-19 patients with HAZDPac which includes Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin, was not associated with prolongation of QTc compared to placebo and QTc remained within normal range.” In his reporting about the study, Nicholas Hulscher, who is also one of the doctors who conducted the trial, noted “[n]one of the COVID-19 patients treated with HAZDPac experienced severe adverse events or mortality, underscoring the safety and potential efficacy of this therapy. Our findings provide strong evidence to counter the notion that hydroxychloroquine is unsafe due to QTc interval prolongation, as no significant changes to abnormal QTc ranges were observed compared to placebo in this rigorously monitored outpatient trial… Our study was published just as the Academic Publishing Cartel unethically retracted the study, ‘Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial.’ This landmark study, which demonstrated hydroxychloroquine’s benefit against COVID-19, was published for four years and cited by 6,713 scientists, physicians, and researchers before being unjustly removed. One way the Biopharmaceutical Complex promotes their genetic injections is by censoring and attacking cheaper, safer, and more effective treatments like hydroxychloroquine.”
December 29 – A study is published in the Journal of High School Science titled, “A rapid detection method of replication-competent plasmid DNA from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines for quality control.” Conducted at the FDA’s BSL-1 research lab in Maryland, the study found Pfizer’s COVID clot shots exceed DNA contamination limits by 6 to 470 times. Writing at her Substack, Maryanne Demasi notes “the peer-reviewed study challenges years of dismissals by regulatory authorities, who had previously labelled concerns about excessive DNA contamination as baseless. The FDA is expected to comment on the findings this week. However, the agency has yet to issue a public alert, recall the affected batches, or explain how vials exceeding safety standards were allowed to reach the market.” In her article, Demasi also includes the reaction of Kevin McKernan, a former director of the Human Genome Project, who considers what this study has brought to light a “bombshell.” McKernan, who believes the findings could well be an underestimation due to the methodology of the study, told Demasi “[c]hronic activation of the cGAS-STING pathway could paradoxically fuel cancer growth. Repeated exposure to foreign DNA through COVID-19 boosters may amplify this risk over time, creating conditions conducive to cancer development.” The study also raises concerns because traces of SV-40 were detected in the DNA fragments, though the authors concluded these fragments were “non-replication-competent” despite not proving that assertion through the proper testing. According to McKernan, “the methods used in this study don’t effectively capture the full length of DNA fragments. A more rigorous sequencing analysis could reveal SV40 fragments several thousand base pairs long, which would likely be functional.” So, will these products be pulled off the market? Will there even be a warning issued by the FDA?? While I would typically advise against holding one’s breath, the people Trump is tapping to fill important roles in his next administration gives me a glimmer of hope that something might be done about these experimental and dangerous mRNA products.
December 30 – A study is published in the European Journal of Neurology titled, “The association between acute transverse myelitis [ATM] and COVID-19 vaccination in Korea: Self-controlled case series study.” The study reads in part, “[t]his nationwide population-based SCCS [self-controlled case series] study identified a significant increase in the incidence of ATM within 1-42 days following COVID-19 vaccination. This elevated risk was consistent across various subgroups, including different types of vaccine products and patients… Although the overall incidence of ATM is still rare, our study showed an increased risk of ATM following COVID-19 vaccination… Our findings indicate an increased risk of ATM following COVID-19 vaccination regardless of whether it is a viral vector and mRNA vaccine. Physicians should exercise caution regarding the possibility of ATM following vaccination, enabling early diagnosis and appropriate management.” All four brands of the COVID clot shot included in the study were associated with increased risk for spinal cord inflammation: Pfizer (99% increase), AstraZeneca (231% increase), Moderna (157% increase) and Johnson & Johnson (233% increase).