Andrew Pollard, one of the developers of the AstraZeneca vaccine, recently addressed a U.K. parliamentary group with a timely warning. What the virus will throw up next, he said, “is a variant which is perhaps even better at transmitting in vaccinated populations [and which is] even more of a reason not to be making a vaccine program around herd immunity.” Further, “[w]e need to get used to the concept that this will become what we call an endemic disease rather than a pandemic disease. A disease that is with us all the time—probably transmits seasonally a bit like influenza where we see winter outbreaks.”
In the technical terminology of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, “the ongoing universal mass vaccination program will soon promote dominant propagation of highly infectious, neutralization escape mutants,” which will “no longer offer any protection to immunized individuals whereas high infectious pressure will continue to suppress the innate immune defense system of the nonvaccinated.” In other words, in an ironic reversal of popular thinking, the unvaccinated are at risk of vaccinated transmission. A study in Nature offers tentative support for his prognosis. Bossche has been much maligned by his detractors as a “doomsday prophet” but his basic research, though predictably contested, appears plausible.
This is a hard pill to swallow for the current crop of diehard vaccinologists, who will labor to obscure the issue with meretricious stats. The political echelon and the medical establishment are engaged in an act of truth-formation, that is, a kind of credible dissimulation, forming a story, as Albert Norton Jr. observes in another context, by “selectively assembling and spinning facts and inferences to support it,” thus diluting our “intuition of significance.”
To take one example, as Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, former chair of Medical Microbiology at the University of Mainz, writes, deaths due to other factors than SARS-CoV-2 were regularly recorded as owing to Coronavirus—“The numbers may have been grossly exaggerated.” Covid fatality numbers were routinely inflated by the inclusion of unrelated morbidities. The CDC, for another example, will begin to count anyone who was hospitalized or died within two weeks of getting the jab as “unvaccinated.”
No less troubling, many governments have embarked on a scorched earth policy, vowing to keep restrictions in place until the virus is totally eliminated. But as Pollard points out, the push to reach “Covid zero” is a fool’s errand, for the virus, according to many such competent professionals, is like the seasonal flu and the common cold and will be with us in perpetuity. Dr. Peter McCullough, among the world’s most widely published medical scholars, stated before the Texas Senate Health and Human Services Committee that the disease cannot be defeated, but with the proper approach and treatment it can be managed. Over-the-counter supplements, including Vitamin D3, Vitamin C, Quercetin, Zinc and aspirin and, as the Great Barrington Declaration recommends, “focused protection” for the elderly, are far more sensible alternatives than the present foolhardy therapeutic agenda of masks, lockdowns, injectable products and discriminatory passports.
Sweden gets it right. As Kevin Downey Jr. remarks, “One would think the world would take notice, and tips, from a country with no lockdowns, a healthy economy, and comparatively few deaths…While people worldwide are rioting against despotic Covid lockdowns and mandates, Swedes are enjoying cocktails after returning home from work, just like they have been since the beginning of the pandemic.” History professor and blogger Tom Woods shows that “this year Sweden, even during the Delta phase of all this, where mitigation measures have been light at best and schools have been open without masks or distancing, excess mortality has actually been lower than normal.” Woods includes a comparative graph contrasting Sweden to the U.S.:
And as of September 10, Denmark will be lifting all Covid restrictions, including vaccine passports.
Our political leaders and health officials are not paying attention. They are determined to implement policies that have little chance of success and whose primary effect will be to exacerbate an already dire situation—the vulnerability of the already vaccinated, the trauma of viral transmission, the constant irruption of ever new variants, and the creation of two classes or “varnas” of citizens resembling India’s Brahmins and Shudras. In at least partial confirmation of such debilities, Public Health England provides much pertinent information on the issue.
If, in their blind pursuit of an elusive solution, the powers that be do not consider a course correction even at the eleventh hour, a social, medical and attendant economic disaster now well into its second year will persist into the indefinite future, and life as this generation knew it will likely never return to what we once called “normal.”
Viral Vaccines and the Jabberwock
As one contemplates—and experiences—the mad, topsy-turvy, inconsistent and patently absurd atmosphere of pandemia, one may be forgiven for thinking we are living inside a Lewis Carroll world of snarks, boojums, borogoves, Jubjub birds, Bandersnatches and Jabberwocks. It is becoming increasingly difficult to negotiate a blizzard of often conflicting reports, statistical findings and public recommendations emanating from the political and medical establishments.
We were initially told that the viral curve would be “flattened” in two weeks. Eighteen months later, in many places around the world, we are still wearing masks and enduring punitive lockdowns or restrictions. Most recently, New Zealand has gone into national lockdown after a single case was detected. One “jab” should have sufficed, then two were required, and now three, with perhaps more to come.
Twas brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe: All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe.
“Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!”
We know that medical protocol requires a minimum five-year trial period to validate a vaccine, perhaps more. After less than a year, the product is still in the experimental stage, yet it has been approved for emergency use and may soon be ratified by the FDA.
PCR testing of the asymptomatic population was supposed to be failproof, yet the Ct (Cycle threshold) rates are generally so high as to produce enormous numbers of false positives. Even The New York Times is quizzical. High amplification cycles are too sensitive to be definitive. Curiously, the CDC and the FDA are suddenly re-evaluating their advocacy.
Many state authorities and health officials believe in a “Zero Covid” recovery scenario before mandates and restrictions will be lifted. Yet it now widely known that the virus will be with us indefinitely, like the flu and the common cold. Covid is here to stay. Herd immunity may be the best option.
We were assured that the vaccines would render us immune to the disease. It now turns out that the vaccinated are suffering “breakthrough” cases. The numbers will vary according to the source, but “leakage” or “waning effectiveness” is a fact. The recent “Covid cluster” in a strict-entry, health-pass nightclub in Bordeaux (as well as in a Dutch club) is just another sign that vaccination is not a ticket to pharmaceutical heaven. But the blame will inevitably be placed on lax security.
The toves do slythe...
We know that viral/respiratory infections diminish significantly during the warm season; yet as Dr. Daniel Stock, who is a trained immunologist, asks: “Why is a vaccine that is supposedly so effective have a breakout in the middle of the summer when respiratory viral syndromes don’t do that?” As we have come to expect, Dr. Stock’s six-minute video has been taken down by YouTube and his claims “factchecked” to death by an innumerable host of politically complicit Internet sites and media shills. Open debate and informed argument are obviously not tolerated in the current repressive milieu. Dissenting views are ritually dismissed as junk, myth or “misinformation”—or simply suppressed.
We are informed that the recent spike in cases occurs among the unvaccinated, yet it is now known that the vaccines may not reliably block transmission. As Peter Smith writes in The Pipeline, “According to a CDC study and Public Health England, the viral load of those vaccinated who catch the virus is about equal to those unvaccinated…Those vaccinated can still catch the virus and pass it on.” Similarly, Harvard epidemiologist Dr. Michael Mina bluntly states that there will be “unabated transmission among the vaccinated.” Despite such occasional admissions, this worrisome trend will be downplayed or routinely debunked by the array of “interested parties”—the mainstream press, the Internet self-appointed watchdogs, and government-aligned medical practitioners—while the unvaccinated will continue to be scapegoated.
Distinguished virologists and epidemiologists, such as Nobel Laureate Dr. Luc Montagnier and the inventor of the mRNA vaccine himself, Dr. Robert Malone, have deposed, with considerable evidence, that a condition called Antibody dependent enhancement, which allows the pathogen to invade cells, will render the vaccinated prone to the proliferating emergence of variants. Indeed, the vaccine itself is understood to be a variant amplifier, that is, it trains new variants to escape immune systems. And sure enough, we now confront Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta, with doubtless more to come. Dr. Malone has further warned against the spurious way in which the vaccines have been tested and clinical data manipulated—and he should know.
The word “jab” has taken on a new valence and entered the common lexicon to signify an injection of the aforementioned gene therapy substance, an mRNA delivery system that is by no means what is popularly understood as a regular antibody vaccine. Nevertheless, we are assured that that these elixirs are effective and safe, despite the fact that adverse reactions continue to be reported (or massively underreported). An Open Letter from Doctors for COVID Ethics records a total for the EU/UK/USA of 34,052 vaccine deaths and 5.46 million injuries as of August 1, 2021. Those who administer the jabs are highly reluctant to consider or even question these figures.
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
My own GP will not hear of countervailing data and, to all intents and purposes, has banished me from his office, despite the Hippocratic oath he has sworn. He resolutely refuses to discuss the issue. The vaccines work, they are necessary, they are no different in their effect and function from previous vaccines, and all reports to the contrary are merely anecdotal and not to be credited. That’s the long and the short of it. The world’s best virologists (apart from the aforementioned)—authorities in their field like Sucharit Bhakdi, Peter McCullough, Byram Bridle, Peter Doshi, Geert Vanden Bossche, Christian Perronne and others who have warned against the vaccines are of no account to him. Perhaps he has not even heard of them, given that many “contrarian” scientists with advanced degrees, professional renown and extensive clinical experience have not only been attacked for trafficking in falsehoods and misdiagnostics but have also been summarily deplatformed.
I have come to regard my physician—and the many others like him—as Carrollian Jabberwocks, primed and determined to accept the government and Big Pharma line at all costs and ply the needled jab without let or hindrance. It makes some sense, I submit, to take Carroll’s advice, to rest by the meditative Tumtum tree and stand awhile in thought. There will be trouble, of course, for:
as in uffish thought he stood, The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame, Came whiffling through the tulgey wood, And burbled as it came!
It’s high time to unsheathe the “vorpal blade” and fight the burble back. I firmly believe that the vaccines should not be mandated, whether by government or corporate enterprises, but remain the personal decision of the individual — moreover, an individual who is privy to full disclosure regarding both sides of the debate, a task admittedly growing more and more mercurial under the prevailing rule of media and Internet censorship. Censorship almost always means there is a valid or important argument across the polemical meridian that the authorities and their journalist enablers do not want people to hear. Anything that challenges unexamined beliefs and rattles unsifted confidence must be cancelled.
Trust the science, said the Mad Hatter.
I have performed my own risk-benefit analysis and have decided to resist my Jabberwock’s dogmatic insistence. I take a modicum of comfort in the penultimate verse of Carroll’s poem.
And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!” He chortled in his joy.
I neither chortle nor am beamish with joy, but am convinced that the right to exercise one’s own decision regarding one’s bodily integrity and independence of judgment is fundamental and lawful in a functioning democracy. The data-welter is disorienting but does not excuse mental laziness and the refusal to pursue discovery as best one can. Otherwise, we are on the route to a state of social, political or medical apartheid as the saved and the damned, the elect and the disenfranchised, the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, are rigorously segregated from one another, to the exclusion of the latter who will become social pariahs and cultural outcasts.
Mixed messages from the official sources will continue to ramify to add to our confusion. Celebrity medicos and opinion leaders will reverse themselves time and again. But the fact remains. The momes may rath outgrabe all they like, the slithy toves gimble, and the Jabberwocks flourish their implements, but a skeptical mind is a civil prerequisite, responsible inquiry is a moral and intellectual virtue, and a principle is a principle.
Those Covid Vaccines: Blessing or Curse?
Don’t want to get too provocative but wouldn’t it have been better if the vaccines hadn’t appeared at warp speed? Or appeared at all? At least these improvised vaccines. Many more people would have died, millions perhaps, is the official line. I am certainly not in favour of deaths. And maybe the official line is correct, and my questioning is wayward. It could be. I don’t know.
Let me start at a conceptual level with two propositions; neither of which should be particularly contentious. First, correlation is not the same thing as causation. Second, as the French political economist Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850) put it, adverse unseen effects of policies and actions, collateral damage if you like, often dwarf seen effects. To the first proposition:
Public Health England produces regular and updated information on the virus and vaccinations in England. Its Covid-19 vaccine surveillance report for week 32 (Aug 12, 2021), claimed, based on modelling, that “84,600 deaths and 23,395,000 infections have been prevented [up to 6 August] as a result of the COVID-19 vaccination programme.”
Possibly, but only 60,000 lives saved (to 23 July) were claimed in the previous report, quite a jump; and recall Neil Ferguson’s Imperial College modelling back in March 2020, which grossly exaggerated the likely deaths from Covid-19; and keep in mind also those “over-heating” climate models.
Trust the science.
Modelling of complex real phenomena is always tenuous. Have all relevant variables been included, logged as appropriate, and measured accurately? Have all irrelevant, distracting variables been omitted? There is no way of knowing. Moreover, when modelling says that the change in one variable is caused by the change in another, we know that the two are correlated. Models are not magical. Correlation is everything.
Suppose an expensive large-scale vaccination program was put in place and after a time there was an observed fall in infections and in the rate of hospitalisations and deaths per infection. You would need a very clever, and non-confirmation-biased, model not to show a strong causal connection. But there are other possible contributors.
The virus might have become less pathogenic through time as viruses generally do. Perhaps the cohort of the population particularly susceptible to the virus caught it in the early waves before the vaccinations became available or widespread. Perhaps spring and summer in the northern hemisphere has contributed to an attenuation of the virus’s virulence.
Bear in mind I am not at all saying that the vaccinations don’t work. The question is how effectively and for how long? Any hypothesis that they don’t work nearly well enough has been undercut by correlation. The vaccines are now somewhat bullet proof. Yet cases are rising again. For example, the rise in cases in the U.K. and Israel is put down to immunity waning and the consequential need for booster jabs. Those vaccinated can still catch the virus and pass it on. Conclusion: need for a booster jab. According to a CDC study and Public Health England, the viral load of those vaccinated who catch the virus is about equal to those unvaccinated. Conclusion: need for a booster jab.
Booster jabs and tinkering with the vaccines may well become the public-health objective. Slipping into the shadows will be the objective of preventing serious illness and deaths. It’s called “Solutioneering” after the philosopher Roger James. Means become ends.
They can't hurt, they might help.
Without vaccines much more focus would have been put on treatments. Natural immunity and treatments (even discounting the politically unacceptable ones like Ivermectin and HCQ due to their association with the dreaded Donald Trump) might well have put us in a better place right now. Of course, it’s counter-factual. There is no way of knowing. What we know is that boosters will be on offer. And maybe as frequently as every six months, judging by the success the virus is having in surviving the first round of vaccines.
Is there a way out? There is. It depends on the virus. We need the virus to become adept at infecting the vaccinated while becoming progressively less lethal. There has been speculation to that effect in the U.K. Natural selection might work in our favour. Mind you, a terrible outcome of a more deadly virus circumventing vaccines isn't worth thinking about, so I won't.
Vaccinations need to be seen as becoming redundant, despite any kicking and screaming from drug companies. Absent this outcome, the incipient collateral damage from vaccine dependency will become endemic. What will that look like?
First, loss of freedom. Vaccines are shepherding in identity papers. Worse, in this digital age, they’re shepherding in Big Brother. There will be data bases. They will know where you’ve been.
Media shills maintain that this is no different in principle from needing a yellow fever jab to travel to certain tropical places. Or, from parents effectively being obliged to ensure their children have certain prescribed vaccinations. No, these requirements are not remotely in the same ballpark as burdening the ordinary business of life with a need to establish one’s medical credentials before entering football stadiums, night clubs, shopping centres, churches, trains, buses and the like.
Second, division; to wit, effectively, medical apartheid. Extraordinarily, some putative conservative commentators are pushing the line that the way out of lockdowns is to provide those vaccinated with normal freedoms. Implicitly that means denying those same God-given freedoms to the unvaccinated. How long before the unvaccinated need to wear badges? Here in Australia you can see numbers of them on Rupert Murdoch’s Sky News.
What could go wrong?
Third, degradation of human interaction. Vaccines which don’t prevent infection and transmission, point to continuing mask mandates. We know those on the left love masks. They will need little reason to insist we keep wearing them.
“Approximately 60-65% of all meaning in human encounters derives from non-verbal clues,” according to an article by Burgoon and Hoobler in the Handbook of Interpersonal Communication, 2002."The nonverbal component of the communication process is as important to the teacher/student relationship as the verbal component and often much more so," according McCroskey and Payne in Nonverbal Behaviour in Interpersonal Relations, 1991. It's not contentious. Covering faces, masking, is no small imposition. It's a crippling one.
The response of governments to Covid has already severely damaged human well-being. Continual rounds of vaccinations and all that goes with them is a road to a sickening future. Ripping the agenda out of the hands of public health officials is one key to a better future. More political leaders like Florida governor Ron DeSantis. Fewer sell-out conservatives in the media. But more than anything, a relatively benign, highly transmissible, virus mutation for which vaccinations have no answer.
How Effective are the Vaccines?
Despite the steady drumbeat from the media, government agencies, Big Pharma and the established medical bureaucracies attesting to the safety and effectiveness of the COVID vaccines, those who remain skeptical of their trustworthiness advance a range of countervailing arguments.
The vaccines are really panaceas, essentially unreliable, innocuous or even useless.
Favorable trial results are statistically manipulated. The Pfizer math is shifty and the “per protocol” method is frankly disingenuous, constituting a violation of bioethics laws.
The vaccines are potentially harmful, yielding dangerous side-effects, aka “adverse reactions,” that are routinely underreported in passive, voluntary sites like VAERS in the U.S. and Yellow Card in the U.K.
Liability immunity: the PREP Act and the EUA (Emergency Use Authorization)) ensure that neither Big Pharma nor the FDA can be sued in the event that the vaccines cause harm, thus creating reasonable suspicion.
The pharmaceutical giants are profiting enormously from the marketing of their product—Pfizer alone projects earnings of $33.5 billion—and rank high in lobbying and advertising budgeting, giving them decisive leverage over politicians and media outlets to enforce the party line.
Major criminal settlement payments totaling in the billions levied against Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson for withholding risks and for dodgy marketing practices are a deeply troubling circumstance.
Since the vaccines are experimental substances still lacking FDA approval, have not been tested for the appropriate minimum of five years or more, and are in reality a form of gene therapy, their long-term effects are unknown.
If it's not one thing, it's another.
Adding to what appears to be growing doubt of vaccine efficiency and safety, there have been a surge of cases among the vaccinated, primarily with respect to the Delta variant.
According to reports, COVID cases among the vaccinated are skyrocketing in various countries around the world. Iceland, for example, is 90 per cent fully vaccinated, yet it continues to set new daily case records. The vast majority of Gibraltar's population is fully vaccinated; notwithstanding, cases are soaring and continue to rise. Sourcing The Washington Post, Deseret News writes that Israel, the poster child for a national vaccination program, has seen a significant rise in cases, again among the vaccinated. “Among adults, about 85 percent have been vaccinated which means that Israel’s vaccinated is five times larger than its unvaccinated community.” The jab seems to be dysfunctional.
Of course, as to be expected, both the Post and Deseret twist themselves in knots trying to explain the presumably inexplicable by mobilizing expedients such as “low baselines,” dredging of selective data, re-interpretation of the Israeli prime minister’s worried remarks, and so on. Cases in the U.K. are also spiking among the vaccinated though the mainstream media and the plethora of so-called “fact-checkers” routinely tell us not to worry, the cases are mild, are somehow caused by the assumedly infectious unvaccinated (which is nonsense given that the vaccinated are supposedly immune), or compare favorably with previous case numbers, etc. But the simple fact remains that cases are mounting among the vaccinated and they cannot be so easily explained away.
In several recent articles and editorials, most recently on The Pipeline, I referred to acclaimed French virologist and Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier, whose skepticism about the vaccine rollout is actually more than skepticism. It's alarm. Montagnier fears that the vaccines and viral variants are intimately related, owing to a condition called antibody-dependent enhancement(ADE), a phenomenon in which viral antibodies may cause viral replication. As his research indicates, “variants will continue to proliferate as a direct result of the vaccines themselves.” On cue, Alpha, Beta and Gamma variants have appeared in the U.K., South Africa and Brazil. We now have a Lambda variant in Peru. The Greek alphabet may eventually be exhausted.
Her infinite variety...
Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA technology used in these gene therapy vaccines, is now of similar persuasion. We have arrived at a point, he warns, where, owing to antibody-dependent enhancement, the vaccine “is causing the virus to replicate more efficiently.” Alluding to Anthony Fauci’s often contradictory postures about the virus and its mutations, Malone targets “another misleading set of statements from Dr Fauci. The escape mutants that are escaping vaccine selecting pressure are most likely developing in the people that have been vaccinated, not in the unvaccinated.” To claim otherwise is “just another convenient lie.”
We ignore the testimony of the world’s top authorities, in this instance a Nobel Laureate and an inventor of mRNA technology, at our considerable peril. Others among the world’s most reputable epidemiologists, microbiologists and immunologists, like Sucharit Bhakdi, Peter McCullough, Byram Bridle,Peter Doshi, and others, none of whom have ties to government agencies, have also sounded the alarm.
Do the vaccines really do what they are supposed to do? It’s no stretch to regard the issue as moot. It makes sense to suggest that to vaccinate or not to vaccinate should be a personal decision, as I continue to stress, rather than a political or corporate mandate. It is equally sensible to ponder without preconceptions the demonstrable rise in cases among individuals who have been vaccinated and to consult the best, non-aligned professionals who have not invested in predetermined results.
And it is certainly the better part of prudence to set the affidavits of the aforementioned authorities in the field over the protestations of a compliant and suborned media apparatus, the vigorously censoring tech platforms, and the doubtful bona fides of interested parties like Anthony Fauci, the CDC’s Rochelle Walensky, the W.H.O.’s Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and the U.K.’s Imperial College number cruncher and presumed “expert”Neil Ferguson, all of whom have whiffled back and forth since the beginning of the COVID event and whose prognostications have been clearly over-inflated. Their credibility has thus been strained to the breaking point. And, of course, let us not forget that inimitable expert on COVID mitigation, Joe Biden. Caveat emptor.
Regarding Covid, What Are 'Breakthroughs'?
Amid the welter of conflicting reports, contradictory information, breathless warnings and a veritable blizzard of confusing statistics regarding the efficacy of the Covid vaccines, especially with respect to the Delta variant, one is hard put to determine a proper course of action. Should people enthusiastically embrace the official push to vaccine compliance or retain a saving skepticism about these new wonder drugs, which have been rushed to market in record time and in a manner granting pharmaceutical companies immunity from liability?
Dr. Peter Doshi writes in the BMJ (British Medical Journal), a subsidiary of the British Medical Association, that the world:
has bet the farm on vaccines as the solution to the pandemic, but the trials are not focused on answering the questions many might assume they are… None of the trials currently under way are designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths. Nor are the vaccines being studied to determine whether they can interrupt transmission of the virus… the truth is that the science remains far from clear cut.
As if this were not enough to induce a certain lack of confidence, renowned cardiologist Peter McCullough has added his testimony to the debate, asserting that the vaccines are not safe and should not be recommended. He is one of many.
A new category of alarm has recently entered the discussion about the prevalence of what are called “breakthrough cases” where the vaccines do not appear to have provided reliable immunity from the disease and its variants. Again, the statistics are confounding, depending on where one gets one’s information. On the one hand, breakthroughs may be infinitesimal. On the other, breakthroughs may be distressingly frequent, fully vaccinated people displaying all the symptoms of the disease. Which is it? I suspect that the fly in the ointment is more like the elephant in the room.
Just say... let's think about it.
U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams, while recommending vaccination, admits that vaccines “still don't prevent the spread of the disease because of the mutation.” The New York Post reports on a CDC study claiming that the virus, primarily in the form of the Delta variant, and may be transmissible by vaccinated people who suffer “breakthrough” infections. A Covid-19 outbreak in Massachusetts occurred mainly among vaccinated people: “74 percent occurred among the fully vaccinated, according to a new CDC study.” The beat goes on.
The vaccines may be not only harmful as many top-tier virologists and immunologists have stated, but also basically ineffective against the virus. There is, however, another possibility to consider. As I have written in a previous article for The Pipeline, world-celebrated virologist and Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier argues:
the vaccines and viral variants go hand in hand, owing to a condition called antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), a phenomenon in which virus-specific antibodies enhance the entry of the virus and may also cause viral replication. Variants will continue to proliferate as a direct result of the vaccines themselves.
His explication is technically complex but convincing, in my opinion. (Montagnier has been panned by “liberal” sites galore, but his credentials are impeccable and theirs are not.) Similarly, the highly respected medical journal Vaccine has released a study exposing the danger of vaccine-caused long-term healing complications. This means that the vaccines could aggravate viral infections, resulting in a “covid spike.”
If such is in fact the case, the vaccines themselves may be responsible for the emergence of breakthroughs. Indeed, the word “breakthrough” may be deceptive. What we may be witnessing is not a “breakthrough” but a malignant side-effect of the vaccine itself, which will continue to be touted as an antidote when it might well be an amplifier.
Theories and hypotheses will obviously continue to abound and the issue will remain vexed, but there is more than sufficient confusion being generated to warrant at least some degree of hesitancy. The stakes are too serious to fiddle with solutions that could prove to be toxins, in particular when there exist benign remedies and countermeasures like HCQ, Ivermectin, Zinc and Vitamin D3 supplements, when natural immunity is a significant factor, and when the recovery rate for the vast majority is extraordinarily high, as even the CDC has admitted. (Warning: do not trust the preponderance of hostile social media and progressivist “factcheckers” that have adopted a duplicitous label.)
The first principle of the Nuremberg Code treating of medical ethics establishes reads:
The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should…be able to exercise free power of choice, without…any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion, and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.
The issue is that the plethora of conflicting reports renders an informed decision regarding taking the vaccine difficult to make. Under the circumstances, it should certainly not be mandated. It should be left up to the individual to determine whether or not he will allow a problematic substance to be injected into his body.
The real breakthrough would be to lucidly consider one’s options, to be skeptical of an officialdom that had far too much skin in the game of persuasion, profit and power, and to refuse to be stampeded into unreasoning panic.
Don’t Combat Covid Hysteria with Vaccine Hysteria
Conservatives are supposed to be rational, thoughtful, and logical, relying on data and reason to reach supportable conclusions. These conclusions form the basis for our beliefs and policy, and is one of the ways that we distinguish ourselves from Leftists. Regrettably, however, there is a disturbing trend that runs counter to these tenets regarding the Covid-19 vaccines. If we are to fight Covid-19 hysteria, we must do it with data and facts, not unsupportable hysteria surrounding the vaccines or anything else. Vaccinations, like everything else, are a matter of choice, so let's choose wisely.
All of the data in this article is consistent across the USA and the world.
About the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization
The FDA has a rigorous process for drugs to earn approval from the agency. In circumstances like a pandemic, there is an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) process. The process is exactly the same, but occurs on an expedited basis. What matters the most is not the timeline so much as number of participants. All three vaccines cleared Phase I and II. For Phase III trials, Pfizer had 43,000 participants, Moderna had 30,000, and J&J had 40,000. Patients were followed for 60 days after treatment. All trials included a placebo group, so we’re concerned with events in the vaccine group.
All vaccinations may result in “adverse events,” i.e. relatively minor side effects. Those don’t concern us. Serious Adverse Events (SAE), or “any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability/incapacity,” were almost non-existent.
Pfizer’s data: Out of 43,448 participants, Bell’s palsy was reported in four vaccine participants, consistent with observed frequency in expected background rate in the general population. Two deaths over age 55, one from a heart attack 62 days after vaccine dose #2, and the other from arteriosclerosis 3 days after dose #1. Non-fatal SAE’s included 0.04 percent (17 people) with appendicitis, 0.02 percent (9 people) had a heart attack, and the same had a stroke.
Moderna’s data: SAE frequency of SAE was 1 percent in the vaccine group and the placebo group. The most common SAEs which were numerically higher than the placebo group were heart attack (0.03 percent), gall bladder inflammation (0.02 percent), and kidney stones (0.02 percent). Six died, three of whom had pre-existing cardiac disease.
J&J’s data: No imbalance between vaccine and placebo groups. There were seven cases of SAEs in the vaccine group, and 3 deaths.
The CDC’s data since the advent of the EUAs has shown similar lack of serious adverse events.
Statistically, you're safe.
On the basis of aggregate population, a given individual is ten times more likely to die from Covid-19 than from a vaccine. After eliminating the Covid-19 deaths from people age 65 or older, a person is four times more likely to die from Covid-19 than the vaccine, with the chances of a SAE being roughly equal to dying from the virus.
If we are going to call out the absurdity of locking the world down over a virus with a 0.2 percent chance of killing the general population, in which 94 percent of deaths were in those 65 or older with an average of three comorbidities, it is incumbent that we call out equivalent absurdities regarding vaccines fears.
Anyone can make an entry into the VAERS. There is no supporting evidence required. There is no medical professional follow-up required. Covid-19 reports have been tracked down per the above link, supporting the low rate of SAEs.
Some 551,172 reports regarding the vaccines have been made to VAERS. Even if all of them were legitimate and verified, they represent 0.17 percent of the 321 million doses administered in the U.S. thus far. The unverified count for death, permanent disability and life-threatening reports numbered just over 29,000, representing an infinitesimal 0.009 percent of the vaccine population. That’s on par with each manufacturer’s data. Again, those numbers are unverified. The actual number is likely less.
Interestingly, the number of reported deaths from the virus is 598,624 out of a population of 328 million. The total VAERS reports are nearly identical to the number of deaths attributable to the virus for almost exactly the same size data population.
Are The Vaccines Effective?
The aggregate incidence of Covid-19 in the U.S. is about 11 percent, assuming testing is accurate, which it probably is not. It is likely that PCR-testing gives a significant number of false positives. It is also unclear just how many deaths are truly attributable to the virus alone.
However, we can look to data from Johns Hopkins to determine any correlation between vaccine administration and case count. By clicking on the map of virtually any state or country, vaccinations are correlated with a decline in case count. It’s critical to note that this is merely a correlation, and does not prove causation. A rigorous statistical analysis would be required to determine the rate of case decline at various points before and during vaccination periods. Indeed, case count had already started to decline from their peak when the vaccines began to be distributed.
However, Pfizer reported 95 percent effectiveness with its vaccine, Moderna reported 94 percent, and J&J reported 64 percent. “Effective” does not mean you are immune. It means your body will respond as designed to limit the severity of any illness.
"Vaccinated" doesn't mean "immune."
Are the Vaccines Necessary?
It is notable that 94 percent of all virus deaths occurred in people who had an average of three comorbidities. 80 percent of deaths were in those persons aged 65 and older. About 74,000 people under age 54 have died from Covid in the U.S., or about 12 percent of the total. Roughly 14,000 have died under age 39, of which slightly more than 1,000 were under age 24.
In Sweden, where restrictions were far looser than in equally-populated Los Angeles County, there are fewer confirmed Covid cases (10.8 percent vs 12.6 percent). Sweden’s population is 37 percent vaccinated, while L.A. County is at 70 percent. Sweden’s death rate is 1.46 percent vs. L.A. County’s 2 percent.
The fairly strong inference here is that the lockdowns made no difference. Yet one other possible inference is that vaccinations made no material difference. That’s because the virus had already burned through the most vulnerable populations (the sick and the elderly).
No More Myths:
No, the vaccines don’t “change your RNA.” This presentation offers a solid explanation of how the mRNA vaccine works.
No, the spike protein doesn't make you ill. See above.
No, the vaccines are not some sinister plot by Bill Gates to reduce population.
No, Big Pharma is not in league with the government to put poison in your body. The only way to encourage private enterprise to develop vaccines was to remove liability.
No, the CCCP did not intentionally release the virus. It would make for a really lousy bioweapon that only kills old and/or sick people. China depends on the global economy, especially that of the U.S., for its own economic health (for now). Had this been intentional, multiple people would have been deliberately infected and flown around the world to spread it. That didn’t happen.
World's worst bio-weapon? Or yummy soup!
As sad as it is to hear stories from people who have lost a loved one as an apparent result of a vaccination, it is critical to recognize that these are anecdotal incidents no different from those of people who say they know someone “young and healthy” who died from Covid. The chances of either occurring are extremely remote. In neither case can any broad conclusion be drawn.
Why is the government at every level pushing everyone to get vaccinated? It isn't some conspiracy. It's because politicians have been reactionary from the start, terrified that people will die, they will get blamed, and lose their jobs and power. They are doing what they always do -- covering their collective and individual asses.
Reason. Logic. Data. Analysis. That’s what makes us special. Keep it that way.
The Oxymorons Heard 'Round the World
News reports inform us that Covid cases are rising exponentially, particularly in the U.K., which has reportedly enjoyed the most successful vaccine rollout on record thus far, with about 85 percent of the population receiving a first dose and 62 percent receiving two. Yet no connection is made between a massive vaccination program intended to reduce or prevent the spread of infections and the fact that cases are said to be skyrocketing. The vaccines are extravagantly touted as reliable antitoxins; at the same time the disease apparently continues to surf from wave to wave and variant to variant.
Meanwhile, as Matt Margolis at PJ Mediareports, the World Health Organization has stipulated that fully vaccinated people should keep wearing face masks and practicing social distancing in order to prevent new variants of Covid-19 “even though Covid deaths have not surged.” Cases are up, fatalities down, which latter may be owing to the gradual acquisition of natural herd immunity. (The rash of new cases may be partially attributable to the kernel choice of high test cycles, which will often reflect residual genetic material, such as junk or dead virus, rather than a peak in viral infections.)
Despite these odd discrepancies in recommendations, we are still counseled that the vaccines work, which does not prevent the authorities from declaring that the disease is spiking. The two obvious reasons for this contradiction are never mentioned or even recognized:
The vaccines are ineffective, mere panaceas. The limited trials were flawedas nobody was exposed to the virus during the relevant studies; indeed, the actual numbers show there is no such thing as a miraculous vaccine. Pfizer math purporting trial success rates has been shown to be radically unconvincing if not deceptive. In any event, whether the vaccines are effective or not, they are clearly not safe. Adverse symptoms will routinely be blamed on “anxiety” or some other emotional reaction, or some pre-existent medical condition. As Stacey Lennox writes discussing traumas of this nature and the staple explanations adduced by professionals, “There are no words strong enough to describe how cynical and dismissive these medical providers are.”
The surge in “cases,” predictably assigned to the always timely arrival of new mutations, may be the result, as dependable sources have claimed, of the vaccines themselves via a condition known as antibody-dependent enhancement. Prominent French virologist and Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier, the bête noir of the leftist establishment, contends that mass vaccinations are “an unacceptable mistake… they are creating the variants.” The virus is cleverly adaptive and will find a way to circumvent the vaccines or, as noted, even use the vaccines to aid in adopting new forms. Similarly, the top-tier medical journal Vaccinehaswarned that the vaccines may exacerbate rather than attenuate viral infections, and remains skeptical of their viability. Additionally, previously infected persons who have been vaccinated, warns Pennsylvania immunologist Hooman Noorchashm, could suffer a “re-ignited critical inflammatory disease or blood clotting complications.”
Now wait just a minute there...
Not to be denied, the media and official organizations will argue that growing case numbers are attributed to the stubborn resistance of a minority cohort of anti-vaxxers. The W.H.O has even now called the unvaccinated “Covid variant factories” who may prolong the pandemic, an assumption there is no way of proving but which is obviously intended to lay the groundwork for future vaxxports. Moreover, given the vast numbers of vaccinated people who are or should be immune and the fact that young and healthy people are naturally resistant to serious complications, the assumption is highly implausible. Nonetheless, the conjurations and hexings proceed apace. The shamans and medicine men have spoken.
The palpable fact is that the vaccinated, who are now presumably shielded, should have no fear of the unvaccinated. It doesn’t seem to matter. I have met many of the jabbed who diligently avoid those who have demurred—even close relatives—though if the vaccines they swear by were potent, they should clearly have acquired immunity and be assured of their security. They are confident, yet frightened, a perfect instance of cognitive dissonance of which they remain unaware.
And there’s the rub. Such people are not governed by reason but by a species of magical thinking, a kind of voodoo conviction. Despite whatever inner tremors they feel or doubts they may have struggled to suppress, they insist on the soundness of the vaccines and rush to the inoculation booths. These confections are like magical elixirs, bunches of dill or lavender laid at the door to keep out demonic beings, or talismans affixed to the lintel to ward off the angel of contagion.
If the sorcery doesn’t work, it could only have been improperly invoked or may demand a more powerful form of juju. After all, the signs and portents are everywhere. Time for a booster, and then another, ad infinitum. The U.K. has already announced a third jab for vulnerable populations to be offered beginning in September. Johnson & Johnson may require annual vaccine shots—even though longitudinal studies are years from completion and the vaccines remain in the experimental stage.
We are an advanced society, a highly civilized and increasingly secular people. On the surface this is true, but in essence we are as primitive and credulous as our stone age ancestors. Magic, not reason, remains the psychological default. Amulets and incantations will keep us safe, our tribal elders are repositories of arcane wisdom, our witch doctors are acknowledged to be clinically infallible, and the practice of exorcism will banish the evil spirit that has possessed us. A passion for the occult supersedes the reliance on reason and common sense.
The best minds of our generation have spoken.
As Amelia Janaski observes in the American Institute for Economic Research, in regard to the issue of “excess deaths” owing to bungled COVID policy responses, “epidemiological models have largely failed to predict real-world outcomes…plans often end up based on a pretense of knowledge rather than real-world evidence or understanding.” This is certainly true not only with respect to mask mandates and periodic lockdowns but equally to what has become a therapeutic obsession, to wit, the prevalent vaccine cult and fetish. We believe in the enchantment of “models” and the charm of cryptic statistical artifacts the way we believe in the apotropaic force of totems and idols. Vaccinology carries the day.
We might say that we are idol worshippers, votaries of Francis Bacon’s four Idols of false reasoning and superstition, laid out in the Novum Organum: the Idols of the Tribe, The Cave, the Marketplace and the Theater. We are currently prone specifically to the Idols of the Marketplace, which refer to proclaimed opinions that are ephemeral or manifestly not sensible, given the available evidence; and to the Idols of the Theatre, which refer to belief in groundless scientific theories and presumed facts in the absence of valid empirical confirmation.
Proneness to idolatry is par for the human condition, as is the susceptibility to magical thinking. But in the present age and, especially, in the “Covid moment,” idolatry and magic have become psychological vectors that govern our response to the real world. And, as always, and to our detriment, reality will have the last word.
Regarding the Vaccines: Exercise Extreme Prudence
In a measured presentation on the subject of vaccines delivered this February, Dr. Byram Bridle, a viral immunologist at Guelph University in Canada, expressed skepticism about these presumed vehicles of salvation. “I would probably prefer to have natural immunity,” he said. Confirming Bridle’s skepticism, a recent study from the Washington University School of Medicine finds there to be lifelong immunity after Covid, owing to natural antibody-producing cells rather than synthetic infusions.
As Global Research explains, a major issue involved in rejecting the vaccines is that they are forms of gene therapy deputizing for vaccines and are potentially hazardous, “exotic creatures… that actively hijack your genes and reprogram them.” In other words, the vaccines are not really vaccines as commonly understood but genomic substances responding to what is likely a digital virus.
Moreover, anew study by British professor Angus Dalgleish and Norwegian scientist Dr. Birger Sørensen, soon to be published in the Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics, claims that it is “now beyond a reasonable doubt…that unique fingerprints in SARS-CoV-2 [are] indicative of purposive manipulation," concluding that “SARS-Coronavirus-2 has no credible natural ancestor.” Indeed, after initial denials across the media for over a year, opinion now seems to be shifting toward a laboratory origin for the virus. A synthetic antidote to a manufactured virus would seem to belong in Frankenstein’s lab, not in the natural world.
No, really, I feel fine. Why do you ask?
Dr. Peter McCullough, a prominent cardiologist, believes that with increasing reports of adverse effects, it's too risky for people who have a more than 99 percent survival rate to receive one of the experimental vaccines. “Based on the safety data now, I can no longer recommend it," he said in an interview with journalist and author John Leake, which was predictably scrubbed on YouTube. Too many people die “on days one, two and three after the vaccine.”
McCullough has been attacked as a right-wing crank by the usual swarm of dubious “factcheckers” populating the Net. McCullough has 600 peer-reviewed publications to his name, many of which have appeared in top-tier journals such as the New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet. He is also the president of the Cardiorenal Society of America, co-editor of Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine and associate editor of the American Journal of Cardiology and Cardiorenal Medicine. His credentials are impeccable and he should be taken seriously. Left-wing cranks should not.
Furthermore, the recent controversy surrounding prominent French virologist and Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier needs to be put in context. He did not say that all who had been vaccinated would die within two years, as was widely reported. What he did say was that the vaccines and viral variants go hand in hand, owing to a condition called antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), a phenomenon in which virus-specific antibodies enhance the entry of the virus and may also cause viral replication. Variants will continue to proliferate as a direct result of the vaccines themselves: in each country, he says, “the curve of vaccination is followed by the curve of deaths.” Because of the vaccines, “the virus is forced to find another solution, or die,” thus creating vaccine-resistant variants.
Naturally, Montagnier has been mocked, slandered, “factchecked,” refuted and misreported in a veritable Netblitz. Nonetheless, that one lockdown insensibly succeeds another, that new viral variants continue to appear irrespective of counter-measures, and that top-off injections will likely be administered at regular intervals add weight to his argument. (The French video interview between Montagnier and journalist Pierre Barnérias has been rendered exceedingly difficult to find, but the effort is worth it.)
What could possibly go wrong?
Corroborating Montagnier’s analysis, an international team of virologists and microbiologists writing for the quality journal Vaccine has released a study exposing the vaccine fiasco foisted upon a fearful and credulous public. They describe more than 20 possible long-term healing complications, including severe pneumonia from cross reactivity; this means that the vaccine could potentially cause a “covid spike.” Vaccines, they fear, could “exacerbate[e] rather than attenuat[e] viral infections.” The efficacy of the vaccines, they claim, has been vastly overstated...intentionally.The skeptics appear to have been right all along.
The debate has raged far and wide among those who swear by the necessity of the vaccines and those who remain doubtful or condemnatory. Official sites such as the British MHRA (Medicines & Healthcare Regulatory products Agency) require a considerable amount of data dredging in order to arrive at reliable conclusions. Reconnoitering the terrain of what is nothing less than a species of fractal embedding is an arduous process; one feels a bit like Joshua’s spies sent out to probe the defenses of Jericho. But the results are startling. The number of adverse reactions is enough to cause a pandemic of vaccine hesitancy.
By May 19 in the U.K. alone, there have been at least 245,276 adverse reports and counting. The alarming incidence of adverse effects such as blindness, impaired vision and other eye disorders, nervous system disorders, brain damage, facial paralysis, strokes, capillary leak syndrome, cardiac issues, blood disorders and gastrointestinal disorders cannot be taken lightly.
The total number of deaths as of May 19 is 1,192 in the U.K. alone. These are government-authorized figures. Of course, statistical taxonomies appear to reduce the significance of adverse results; tell that to the growing number of vaccine recipients who have suffered the consequences. And we must remember that the reporting scheme, which is passive and voluntary, is significantly underused. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) found that less than one percent of side-effects following vaccination are in fact reported.
It is consoling to remark that, as of April 16, six American states have banned the use of vaccine passports. According to NewsNation, for April 27, the count is even higher: at least 40 states “are advancing legislation to ban COVID-19 vaccine requirements for businesses and schools.” Becker’s Health IT for May 6 reports that several other states are considering legislation to the same effect. Hospital workers in Houston are suing to block mandatory vaccinations. It’s a running total.
It is also comforting to note that now-beleaguered medical guru Anthony Fauci, whom Jon Sanders writing in the American Institute for Economic Research called “that ubiquitous font of fatuous guidance,” admitted that asymptomatic spread of the virus, despite the dire media and official narrative as well as his own whiffling, was extremely rare. In a February 2020 email, Fauci wrote, “Error in my statement to you. I meant to say that “……most transmissions occur from someone who is symptomatic — not asymptomatic.”
"Error in my statement."
Our national governments and affiliated medical institutions will be fighting these developments tooth and nail. The Biden administration, we learn, may be considering the introduction of vaccine passports for international travel, as well as incentivizing employers to require vaccinations. The alliance of government funding and medical ideology is a powerful force for compliance. And for the most part, all we hear from the corporate media are crickets when we should be hearing kettle drums.
Former Pfizer Vice President and chief scientific researcher Michael Yeadonbelieves that these vaccines, as they “go from the computer screens… into the arms of millions of people,” may contain “characteristics which could be harmful and could even be lethal.” The scale of the menace we are facing, he says, not from COVID but from the oligarchs, politicians, media types and technocrats who have exploited it and the billionaire companies that manufacture the vaccines, may be unprecedented. Like practically all vaccine skeptics, he will be “factchecked” to death by the usual suspects who have skin in the game.
But the menace is real. The aforementioned Professor Bridle has admitted that “We made a big mistake. We didn’t realize it until now… we never knew the spike protein itself was a toxin and was a pathogenic protein. So by vaccinating people we are inadvertently inoculating them with a toxin.” Bridle reprises a Japanese study showing how the synthetic mRNA spike protein circulates in the bloodstream and accumulates in tissues such as the liver, the adrenal glands, the spleen and the ovaries, likely causing extreme pathogenic reactions.
Similarly, pediatric rheumatologist J. Patrick Whelan has warned that the spike protein may cause microvascular damage to the liver, heart, and brain in “ways that were not assessed in the safety trials.” Whelan worries that hundreds of millions of people might “suffer long-lasting or even permanent damage to their brain or heart microvasculature as a result of failing to appreciate in the short-term an unintended effect of full-length spike protein-based vaccines on other organs.”
The news from Israel is as distressing as it is revelatory. The country launched one of the strictest vaccine programs in the world, creating two classes of citizens: the vaccinated who retained their social privileges, the unvaccinated who were stripped of them. A report just released by two Israeli researchers, Drs. Haim Yativ and Hervé Seligman, relying on tables provided by the Israel Ministry of Health, reveals that most COVID deaths during a five-week-long vaccination period “are for vaccinated people.”
The numbers show that “the vaccines, for the elderly… killed about 40 times more people than the disease itself would have killed, and about 260 times more people than the disease among the younger age class.” Additionally, confirming Luc Montagnier’s predictions, the researchers state that “in a few months we expect to face mid-and long-term adverse effects of the vaccination as ADE (Antibody-dependent Enhancement) and the vaccination-resistant mutants selected by the vaccines.” The Internet archive has, and no doubt will continue to suppress these numbers. There is far too much money, power and reputation involved to admit error.
People need to understand that such warnings are not conspiracy theories. They reflect the knowledge and apprehensions of reputable professionals who are not beholden to government funding and the big pharmaceutical companies. The accelerated quasi-vaccines may well have been the greatest mistake that our political, medical and media orthodoxies have ever committed. It makes good sense to act and think independently, to attend to and examine the official instruments with due diligence, and to exercise prudence when considering taking the jab. As counterintuitive as it may seem in the midst of an orchestrated panic, this is nothing less than a responsibility one owes oneself and one’s family.
After Masks and Lockdowns, Here Come the 'Vaccines'
We have been wearing masks for over a year. We have been quarantined in government facilities and in our homes. We have been rigorously locked-down in a futile attempt to control a virus that is clearly unimpressed by our efforts. The latest installment in the Covid frenzy is the love affair with the various vaccines, a mammoth suite of pharmaceutical interventions, that have flooded the market, promising eventual salvation from the ravages of the pandemic. Yet the negative side of these disparate vaccines has gone largely unreported.
While assuring us that pharmaceutical tests have been professionally run on the whole, New York Times reporter Alex Berenson writes in Unreported Truths about COVID-19 that “the companies failed to test the vaccine on the ‘right’ people—the people at high risk of dying from Covid. They failed to prove that it actually reduced deaths, leaving a tragic hole in our medical and scientific knowledge.” Berenson mentions “realistic theories about possible long-run harms from the vaccines, such as the risk that they can lead to a dangerous rebound effect on people who later become infected with COVID.”
In Berenson’s judgment, “regulators failed at every point in the development of these vaccines—the preclinical work, the major clinical trials, and the approval process”—though he gives them the benefit of the doubt, owing to the pressures they were under and still recommends that people be vaccinated. Nonetheless, all the vaccines accomplished was to “reduce moderate illnesses in people who were at low risk from COVID anyway.”
A little jab'll do ya.
The ramifications of the vaccines are far worse than that. Symptomatic reactogenicity is not uncommon. In just a few months, a spectrum of concerning side-effects have appeared, ranging from blood clots, erythema, cardiovascular ailments and Bell’s Palsy to anaphylactic reactions, swollen lymph nodes, chronic pain and untimely deaths. It should be no surprise that the general population will be constantly assured by a complicit network of authorities and pseudo-authorities that adverse reactions are statistically insignificant and should not be heeded. The incurious will be easily persuaded, especially as countervailing reports will be duly censored.
A typical example of what is really happening comes from British Columbia doctor Charles Hoffe who, in a letter to the Ministry of Health, reports “numerous concerning allergic reactions and neurological side effects from the vaccine,” and observes that “In stark contrast to the deleterious effects of this vaccine in our community, we have not had to give any medical care what-so-ever, to anyone with COVID-19.” He concludes that “this vaccine is quite clearly more dangerous than COVID-19.”
Equally worrying, mysterious problems of contagion from vaccinated to unvaccinated women have also arisen, causing serious and perhaps lifelong menstrual irregularities and reproductive dysfunctions following Covid vaccines. Dr Christiane Northrup, a leading authority in women’s health, argues that the vaccines do not entail a normal immunization program but create harmful synthetic proteins within the body, whose effects are transmissible. Naturally, she has been accused by the mainstream media of spreading disinformation, but the evidence for this newest pathology is compelling.
The effect on pregnant women is also very much in question. Children’s Health Defense(CHC) refers to Dr. Sherry Tenpenny, “a triple-board certified osteopathic medical doctor and an expert on the potential adverse impact of vaccines on health, who… brings up a most critical point, that we simply have no idea what the potential effects of these warp-speed developed, Emergency Use Authorized, experimental mRNA vaccines might have on a developing fetus.”
What potential effects these injections might have on the population at large is no less moot. The CHC editorial concludes with the rider:
This article contains a growing list of deaths that occurred after the experimental COVID vaccine was administered. The death reports are culled from the media and from social media, as well as from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and reporting systems outside the US.
A Freudian slip by a newscaster reporting on a growing trend of vaccine refusal may have some truth to it. People are unwilling to be “euthanized,” he said, before correcting to “immunized.” The CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) considers the vaccines “safe and effective,” yet reports 2,794 dead, 56,869 injured following experimental Covid injections through April 5, 2021. Even CNN uncharacteristically reports that “5,800 fully vaccinated people have caught Covid anyway in US.”
The results from the U.K. are distressing, as they are from Norway and India. The news from Israel is no less disturbing. The mortality rates recorded in many sites are truly alarming. Other sites and fact-checkers downplay or scoff at these numbers as inflated, remarking instead on an infinitesimal percentage of adverse consequences. Sometimes the statistical accounts are so complex as to be difficult to assess. Obviously, the warnings will be contentious and the numbers disputed.
No thanks, I'll take my chances.
The truth is that reliable vaccines require ten or more years to develop and test, moving from the (1) exploratory to the (2) pre-clinical to the (3) trial and (4) post-licensure stages before they can be approved as safe for public distribution. Otherwise, not only their immediate efficacy but their future impact remains uncharted.
This fact is so glaringly obvious, it boggles the mind that it is rarely mentioned and commented on, or that it remains inadmissible in debate and discussion. A vaccine that arrives in just a few months when a decade or more is needed to create a reliable product cannot be trustworthy. They may, quite plausibly, be hazardous. What is known as “Operation Warp Speed” may pertain to the Starship Enterprise but is contraindicated in vaccine production. Slow and careful are the watchwords.
One can see the problems. We know the vaccines are clinically precarious for an undetermined number of recipients, but we do not know, regardless of what we are told, whether the vaccines are, on the whole and for a majority, actually effective, or merely placebos. Plainly, there are no means for ascertaining their effectiveness in the present moment—one takes it on faith.
Because someone may not or does not contract the disease following receipt of the vaccine is no proof of its potency; one may be already immune or resistant, or may suffer from the virus weeks or months later. And in the absence of longitudinal studies several years in duration, future side effects linger in a region of empty speculation and deferred research. People could find themselves suffering from any number of unexpected maladies—anemia, cognitive decline, clinical depression, or physical disorders as yet unspecified. Vaccines released years too early will likely have unpredictable pathogenic effects. Given their all-too-rapid and kluge-like development, the current rush to COVID-preventive jabs and boosters is a fools’ errand.
This fact has not prevented Big Pharma from scaling up its profit margin. Former Pfizer Vice President and Chief Scientist Dr. Michael Yeadon claims that new, top-off dosages designed to fight viral variants will be released without “clinical safety studies” and that these variants are in any case incapable of “immune escape,” that is, they are so similar to the original virus—“samients,” Yeadon calls them—that they are easily recognizable and controllable by a healthy immune system. Moreover, current “vaccines” consist of “superfluous genetic sequence for which there is absolutely no need or justification” while the ultimate purpose of these superfluous top-offs, Yeadon believes, is to surreptitiously give every person “a unique digital ID” in concert with the plans behind the Great Reset for global hegemony.
You'll take it and you'll like it.
Even Merriam-Webster has joined the quasi-medical cult, newly defining the word “vaccine” as “a preparation of genetic material (such as a strand of synthesized messenger RNA) that is used by the cells of the body to produce an antigenic substance (such as a fragment of virus spike protein).” In reality, this is not a vaccine, which introduces antigens into the system to activate antibodies, but an invasion of one’s genomic substance in order to generate an alien protein. Adding a layer of vexatiousness to the issue is the question involving the Nuremburg Laws. The informed consent principle was defined as a human right and was intended to prevent forced medical interventions in any form, including vaccines. The first principle in the Nuremberg Code reads in part:
The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should…be able to exercise free power of choice, without…any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion, and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.
The code’s application in the current circumstances is debated by many “fact-checking” venues, unconvincingly in my opinion. The fact-checkers need to be checked for their facts; when one considers that accounts critical of the vaccines are regularly suppressed by Big Tech and generally unreported or massaged in “the Marxist Mainstream Media” (the phrase is Dr. Steve Turley’s), one must be skeptical of unrestrained vaccine advocacy. The central fact remains that the efficacy of these drugs comes without proof, as should be obvious considering the conditions under which they have been fabricated: as noted, neither immediate nor long-term confirmation of their outcomes is realistically possible. Ignorance may be bliss, but only temporarily.
A historiccourt judgmentin Weimar, Germany illuminates the overall dilemma. The vast majority of studies rely on “a purely mathematical estimation or modeling study based on theoretical assumptions without real contact follow-up.” We are proceeding without valid epidemiological knowledge. We do not know the precise extent to which our governments and their salaried health officials and media collaborators are lying to us or are simply incompetent and cowardly. We have no idea what may be coming down the pike. We do not even know if the vaccines work as they are advertised. One does not need statistics, only common sense, to be doubtful and even suspicious of their viability.
The Tower of Babel Rises Again
Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.
-- Proverbs 16:18
Although human society, generally speaking, has undergone massive cultural, political, scientific and technological changes over the millennia, the structure of the human psyche has remained stable. The moral code of the Judeo-Christian West, honored more in the breach than the observance, is still intact, however occluded. The deadly vices and the cardinal virtues remain in place. The personality types are similar.
The myths, stories, characters and admonitions we read in the Hebrew Bible are as relevant today as they were in the 15th Century BC, in particular the familiar tale of the Tower of Babel. (Genesis 11:1-9.) The story is known to everyone. After the flood, a wandering people found a plain in the land of Shinar where they settled, and said “let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven.” It did not go well for the over-reachers. The Lord came down, as the passage reads, confounded their language, and “scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth.”
The Tower of Babel, a word-play for Babylon, mocks the grandiose plans and brazen presumption of megalomaniac personalities. The Book of Daniel, written thirteen centuries after Genesis, takes up the same theme. King Nebuchadnezzer, who gloried in his regal splendor, built “the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty.” The city that rose on the alluvial plain—in actuality, the plain of Shinar—was meant as a tribute to his authority and grandeur. He was shortly reduced for his self-exaltation to the condition of “the beasts of the field,” until his reason returned to him and he awakened to the folly of his pride.
What's past is prologue.
The biblical account of human hubris, dismissed as a mere fable, is a warning we have failed to heed. Here the wisdom of the prophet Habbakuk would apply: “I will take my stand at my watchpost and station myself on the tower, and look out to see what he will say to me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved.” (Habbakuk 2:1.) The tower in question is a watchtower, a vantage point from which one detects and renounces the conceit associated with that other Tower.
The point is, of course, that there are mysteries we should not tamper with, that exceed our powers of understanding and control. While extending our reach to acquire knowledge, to plumb the Creation, and to harness nature to our benefit, there are limitations to human pride and impetuosity we would do well to acknowledge. It is a fine line but an irreversible one that should not be crossed. What may be a mortal sin in a theological view of life may be regarded as an unforgiving error in a secular world.
Man does with dangerous curiosity These unfathon’d wonders try: With fancied rules and arbitrary laws Matter and motion he restrains; And studies lines and fictious circles draws: Then with imagin’d sovereignty Lord of his new hypothesis he reigns.
-- Matthew Prior, On Exodus III
In our present moment, Green technology fetish is a typical example of so transgressive a blunder. A quasi-scientific fiction of how reliable energy can be generated in an environmentally friendly way, it is worse than a mere fantasy. It is an intervention into the forces of nature that leads to the destruction of the environment, the production of noxious substances, the uprooting of economies from their productive base, and the near-impossibility of safe and efficient re-cycling.
Wind turbines rise like micro-installments of the Tower of Babel, promising to exploit the weather in ways that have proven ineffective and, in fact, harmful. They are “technological, financial, and ecological scams,” distorting the landscape, causing hecatombs of avian and insect life, producing prodigious amounts of radioactive wasteand neurological hazards like ILFN (Infrasound and Low Frequency Noise). The acoustic signature of wind turbine noise can be profound; moreover, as Australian acoustical engineer Steven Cooperconfirms, the signal pulsations occur across entire frequencies, and are not just limited to the infra-sound region. Indeed, the only windmills worth tilting against are wind turbines. One needs a revitalized and success-oriented Alonso Quixano the Good, aka Don Quixote, to eviscerate a public mirage, Green energy, whose reason for existence is predicated on faulty and deceptive computer models.
Wanted: a modern man of la Mancha.
Michael Crichton was right when he urged in State of Fearthat we need “more people working in the field, in the actual environment, and fewer people behind computer screens.” Once again, he writes, “the measures being urged have little basis in fact or science. Once again, groups with other agendas are hiding behind a movement that appears high-minded. Once again, claims of moral superiority are used to justify extreme actions.” Green is a theory without adequate basis in reality. Anthropogenic Global Warming is a prepossession advanced by the extortionate and the ignorant, who divide the “territory” between them.
An equally if not more destructive foray into the structural complexities of the natural environment involves the project to reduce global warming—the most hypothetical of theoretical constructs—by tampering with stratospheric chemistry. Bill Gates, our contemporary Nebuchadnezzer, has advanced a preposterous and dangerousbioengineeringplanto spray tons ofcalcium carbonate (CaCO3) dust into space to dim the sun’s rays.
This is a prelude to disaster, an intervention of the worst kind, and a telling instance of the obtuseness and naiveté of the supposedly super-brilliant. Though generally favorable to Gate’s solar engineering venture,Forbesreminds us that such science comes with unpredictable risks and that a “[m]ajor disruption of global climate could bring unintended consequences”—drought, crop failure and famine.
In this respect, Gates resembles Obama’s Energy czar John Holdren, who absurdlyproposedlast-resort interventionist options, such as “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays”—an atmoforming scheme that would unleash a geoengineered climate debacle. One recalls, too, the loony 1975 IPCCproposal to spread black carbon (soot) across the ice fields to absorb the heat of the sun and so reduce global cooling.
Another no less destructive intervention into the complexities of nature, in this case human biology, entails what is euphemistically called “gender confirmation surgery,” especially with regard to young children encouraged to “transition.” Turning males into females and vice versa is considered by many—rightly, I believe—as an abomination, an intrusive manipulation of biologically established sexual identity that will often lead to a lifelong condition of traumatic dysphoria. Some regard this as a violation of a Divine dispensation, others as crime against nature and a psychological travesty. Whatever perspective we may adopt on the issue, the mission to permanently reorder or denormalize the givens of genetic and physiological codes and structures is a form of meddling with the parameters of life that almost inevitably issues in misery and confusion.
Still another infringement of natural law involves the introduction of so-called vaccines to combat the coronavirus infection. As I have written in a previous article for The Pipeline, they are not “vaccines” as we understand them. They are experimental mRNA strands injected into and systematically altering a person’s genetic code, and may severely exacerbate the degree of suffering we are seeing. Global Research makes no bones about this. The mRNA “vaccines” made by Pfizer and Moderna “are a dangerously new exotic creature…that actively hijack[s] your genes and reprograms them.” Dr. Tal Zaks, chief medical officer at Moderna Inc., admits that “We are actually hijacking the software of life.”
Adverse consequences abound: facial paralysis (Bell’s Palsy), blood clotting, anaphylaxis, and even death. According to the National Vaccine Information Center, there have been as of February 26, 2021, 25,212 recorded adverse advents and 1,265 deaths. These are conservative estimates since less than 1% of all vaccine injuries and deaths are reported to VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), a passive, government funded database that relies on voluntary submissions.
It is cold comfort indeed that the American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI) has informed clients that “Policyholders should rest assured that nothing has changed in the claims-paying process as a result of Covid-19 vaccinations.” That alone tells us what we need to know.
We should keep in mind that Covid is a digital virus, constructed from a computer database generating a genomic sequence. The vaccine was not based on “an actual isolated sample of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.” Neither its long- nor short-term safety and effectiveness is assured. Global Research points out that these “vaccines” are really operating systems installed not in computers but in our bodies. Approximately 15 countries to date have suspended the AstraZeneca vaccine. (The AstraZeneca product has not yet been approved for emergency use by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.)
Of course it's safe -- why do you ask?
The prognosis is sobering. Once we have reached the inflexion point of re-engineering the sky, scrambling sexual differentiation and re-mapping the genetic code, we will have crossed the line of no return, and the Tower of Hubris we have raised will crumble before us. We will never be the same. As the Bible warns, we will scatter in disarray, we will babble in futile recriminations, victims of an overweening arrogance that has breached the natural limits of our tenure on this planet.
Will our reason return to us and will we awaken to the folly of our pride, as happened providentially to the Babylonian tyrant? “The pride of thine heart hath deceived thee,” the prophet rebukes the self-important, “thou that dwellest in the clefts of the rock, whose habitation is high; that saith in his heart, Who shall bring me down to the ground? Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down, saith the LORD.” (Obadiah 1:3). One need not be a believer to take the exhortation to heart.