Tag: coronavirus

Bombshell Study Censored by The Lancet Finally Released: Confirms ‘High Likelihood of Causal Link Between COVID-19 Vaccines and Death’

As previously reported by The Gateway Pundit, a COVID-19 vaccination study is back in the news.

On November 17, 2024, Science, Public Health Policy and The Law journal published a peer-reviewed study titled, “A Systematic Review Of Autopsy Findings In Deaths After Covid-19 Vaccination.“

This study was publicly available, but publications such as The Lancet made repeated attempts to censor it. After far too long, it has finally been published.

Coincidentally, as the Trump administration and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. work on a transition plan, these types of stories have entered back into the zeitgeist.

Dr. Peter McCullough, a well-known COVID-19 vaccine combatant, has been active on X recently, speaking of the dangers of the vaccine and advocating for its removal.

Last week, The Gateway Pundit reported on another study -by two of the same authors – citing evidence that the current bird flu strain was leaked from laboratories performing gain of function research.

While there has long been evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine has been harmful because of the spike protein, this study made even broader claims.

“The findings of these researchers present an illustrative case of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche’s thesis that mass vaccination with nonsterilizing vaccines can result in the emergence of a new, more virulent viral strain.”

As the incoming Trump Administration looms over the swamp of Washington, the timing of such studies appears ominous for an unaccountable health bureaucracy.

The mounting evidence show a poorly constructed vaccine strategy for combating the pandemic. With this study having been previously censored by medical journals such as The Lancet, it begs the question as to why it has suddenly been accepted.

As one of the authors of the study, Nicolas Hulscher, observes, the CDC has remained silent.

Keep reading

DARPA, DoD, Nat’l Intelligence Office Classified, Concealed EcoHealth’s DEFUSE Proposal, Hiding ‘Smoking Gun’ COVID-19 Pandemic ‘Blueprint’

New evidence reveals that federal agencies, including DARPA, the Department of Defense (DoD), and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), classified and concealed EcoHealth Alliance’s unclassified “DEFUSE” proposal, effectively concealing what a letter from Senator Roger Marshall (R-KA) describes as a “blueprint” for genetically engineering SARS-CoV-2.

In a letter to the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) on November 14, 2024, Senator Marshall has called for an investigation into whether “deliberate actions” were taken by federal agencies to suppress key information during the COVID-19 origins probe.

The government-suppressed documents show that EcoHealth’s DEFUSE plan submitted to DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), if carried out, “could have produced a synthetic coronavirus in 2019 with the same unique construction as SARS-CoV-2 (SARS2).”

Sen. Marshall predicts a proper OIG investigation could uncover that these deliberate actions taken by DARPA, the DoD, and the National Intelligence Office “rise to the level of misconduct, false statements, obstruction of federal proceedings, conspiracy, conflicts of interest, or infractions of administrative or civil laws.”

DARPA’s current director is Dr. Stefanie Tompkins.

Dr. Tompkins also served as the deputy director of DARPA’s Strategic Technology Office as well as director of DARPA’s Defense Sciences Office, which is “the agency’s most exploratory office in identifying and accelerating breakthrough technologies for national security,” according to the bureau’s website.

Keep reading

Scientist who battled for COVID common sense over media and government censors wins top award

Few in the media seemed eager to attend a ceremony last week in Washington, D.C., where the prestigious American Academy of Sciences and Letters was awarding its top intellectual freedom award.

The problem may have been the recipient: Stanford Professor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.

Bhattacharya has spent years being vilified by the media over his dissenting views on the pandemic. As one of the signatories of the 2020 Great Barrington Declaration, he was canceled, censored, and even received death threats.

That open letter called on government officials and public health authorities to rethink the mandatory lockdowns and other extreme measures in light of past pandemics.

All the signatories became targets of an orthodoxy enforced by an alliance of political, corporate, media, and academic groups. Most were blocked on social media despite being accomplished scientists with expertise in this area.

It did not matter that positions once denounced as “conspiracy theories” have been recognized or embraced by many.

Keep reading

Idaho Man Paralyzed 10 Days After Getting J&J COVID Vaccine

An Idaho man who received a COVID-19 vaccine when his employer “strongly implied” he should get the shot was left paralyzed 10 days later from a blood clot.

Doug Cameron, who previously avoided getting a COVID-19 vaccine, was 64 and healthy when he received his first and only Johnson & Johnson (J&J) COVID-19 vaccine on April 5, 2021.

He was a manager at TLK Dairy Farms in Mountain Home, Idaho, where he had worked for 15 years.

COVID-19 vaccines had been available for months at local pharmacies when TLK Dairy Farms hosted an on-site vaccination clinic to encourage vaccination.

“They were seeing that a lot of people weren’t getting the shot, and they decided to bring the shot to the farm,” Cameron told The Defender. His company’s leadership team didn’t mandate that he get the shot. “They just strongly implied” that they expected it, he said.

Cameron said the “intimidation” to get a COVID-19 shot “was extremely strong all the way around” for him and his co-workers.

“People can deny it all they want,” he said, “but the fact of the matter is that if they had never brought it and never pushed it on people, I know a lot of people would’ve never got it — I am one of those people.”

Cameron told them he didn’t want a COVID-19 shot. “They said, ‘Well, you’re a manager and it’d be good if your name was first on the list of people’” who signed up to receive a shot.

Cameron said, “Well, OK,” and got the shot. He sat for 15 minutes as instructed by the clinic workers, then hopped back in his pickup truck to continue working around the 10,000-acre farm.

That was Monday. The next day, he didn’t feel quite right. His hips hurt a lot. Sitting or lying down was uncomfortable. “That just kept getting worse,” he said.

More symptoms occurred, including urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Cameron wanted to finish his workweek. He told his wife, Carla, he would go to a clinic on Saturday to get checked out.

Keep reading

UK Regulators Decide Pregnant Women Don’t Need COVID Vaccines

The United Kingdom’s (U.K.) vaccine advisory committee won’t recommend that pregnant women take the COVID-19 vaccine in 2025-2026, according to a rapid response letter published today in The BMJ.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) made the decision during its Oct. 2 meeting, citing the low risk of serious COVID-19 illness in pregnant women and infants and the vaccine’s cost. The committee did not address safety concerns about the vaccines for pregnant women and their infants.

The committee’s new recommendation — which must be ratified at the next meeting — followed presentations by researchers on COVID-19 epidemiology and cost-effectiveness.

The researchers presented evidence showing that COVID-19 posed a very low risk to pregnant women and their infants and that the vaccines provided minimal benefit.

They concluded that COVID-19 vaccination for pregnant women becomes cost-effective only if the cost of procuring and administering the vaccines could be kept between 10.07 and 13.19 pounds ($12.74-$16.69) per shot. They considered it “very unlikely” that this would be feasible.

The only way to increase the price at which vaccines were considered cost-effective would be if they could show the vaccine averted neonatal deaths from COVID-19 or posed a greater threat to infants. There is no existing data to support this, they said.

Doctors in the U.K. told The Defender they don’t understand why the JCVI hasn’t told them or pregnant women why the committee is waiting until next year to stop recommending the COVID-19 shots to all pregnant women.

Keep reading

Biden Administration and HHS were the leaders in carrying out the IHR and Pandemic Treaty Globalist Agenda

Lawrence O. Gostin is a global public health attorney. He has held high-level positions in the World Health Organisation and has been involved in drafting the controversial Pandemic Treaty and International Health Regulations (“IHR”) amendments.

“Lawrence Gostin seems to have been at the centre of every really bad public health effort over the past 25 years,” Dr. Meryl Nass writes.

Gostin was present during the WHO’s negotiations on the IHR amendments and played a key role in their adoption, with the US Health and Human Services Secretary threatening to walk away if the amendments were not adopted. And so, they were adopted.

“That’s how it happened. It should have failed. But the big bully came in and said he was taking his toys and going home if everybody didn’t cooperate,” Dr. Nass said.

In case you did not already know that the Biden administration and the Department of Health and Human Services were the leaders in carrying out the Globalist agenda, now you will.

Apologies for this long introduction, but Mr. Gostin has been my bête noir for the past 23 years, and it is extremely important to explain who Gostin is, what he has done, and the enormous influence he has had in the pandemic/bioterrorism landscape as a medical-legal “expert” on vast matters.

I talked about how Maurice Strong, and then Gro Harlem Brundtland almost singlehandedly brought the globalist climate-health agenda forward from around 1970. Lawrence O. Gostin’s name should be #3 in this list, beating out even Jeremy Farrar and Tony Fauci, who would be #s 4 and 5. These people created the architecture, the framework, the academic foundation from which the edifice of global governance through public health was created.

Lawrence O. Gostin is a global public health attorney (he used to call himself a public health attorney but now calls himself a global health attorney) who leads an Institute at Georgetown University. His career trajectory for at least the past 25 years has involved trying to centralise power over citizens via public health while restricting our human rights. He has a face and biography only a mother could love.

Keep reading

Most U.S. Health Care Workers Reject COVID-19 Booster Shot This Year

A recent study published in U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) showed a decline in the uptake of COVID-19 shots among health care workers in the United States this year.1 During the 2023–2024 respiratory virus season, fewer than one in six health care personnel working in acute care hospitals and nursing homes reported receiving a COVID booster, and fewer than one-half of health care personnel working in nursing homes had received a flu shot.2

Findings from the study highlighted that only 15.3 percent of health care workers in acute care hospitals, 10.5 percent in nursing homes, and 12.7 percent of licensed independent practitioners reported receiving the updated COVID booster shot, a sharp drop compared to previous seasons.3 In the 2022-2023 respiratory virus season, 17.8 percent of health care workers in hospitals and 22.8 percent in nursing homes had received a COVID booster.4

This decrease comes after the expiration of a vaccine mandate for health care workers in June 2023, which had been implemented by the Biden administration during the earlier phases of the pandemic in 2021 and 2022. The end of government-funded COVID shots also likely played a role in this lower COVID shot uptake.5

Keep reading

New Study: A Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths Following COVID-19 Vaccination

“Contributed risk from other factors, however, does not exonerate the vaccine, which was used on patients with, and without those risk factors.”

Introduction: Investigating Unanswered Questions

The COVID-19 vaccination program is one of the largest global public health initiatives in history. With over 13 billion doses administered worldwide, serious adverse events must be systematically studied to ensure safety. A newly published systematic review, A Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination, by Hulscher et al., examines the role of vaccines in post-mortem cases.

This study reviews 325 autopsy cases, concluding that 73.9% of the deaths were causally linked to COVID-19 vaccination. The leading causes of death included sudden cardiac events, thromboembolic complications, myocarditis, and immune-mediated conditions such as vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT). These findings underscore the importance of continuous monitoring and investigation.

Key Findings and Their Context

Of the 325 cases reviewed, causality was assessed using clearly described, standardized criteria, revealing:

  • Sudden cardiac death accounted for 35% of vaccine-related cases.
  • Thromboembolic events (pulmonary embolism and VITT) represented significant contributors at 12.5% and 7.9%, respectively.
  • Myocardial infarction (12%), myocarditis (7.1%), and multisystem inflammatory syndrome (4.6%) were also implicated.

These findings raise sound concerns. Causality assessments in autopsy studies rely on detailed pathological examinations and clinical correlation. These methods are robust in spite of a few hypothetical limitations, such as increased risk due to pre-existing conditions, which may be understudied due to incomplete medical histories.

Keep reading

The CDC Planned Quarantine Camps Nationwide

No matter how bad you think Covid policies were, they were intended to be worse. 

Consider the vaccine passports alone. Six cities were locked down to include only the vaccinated in public indoor places. They were New York City, Boston, Chicago, New Orleans, Washington, D.C., and Seattle. The plan was to enforce this with a vaccine passport. It broke. Once the news leaked that the shot didn’t stop infection or transmission, the planners lost public support and the scheme collapsed. 

It was undoubtedly planned to be permanent and nationwide if not worldwide. Instead, the scheme had to be dialed back. 

Features of the CDC’s edicts did incredible damage. It imposed the rent moratorium. It decreed the ridiculous “six feet of distance” and mask mandates. It forced Plexiglas as the interface for commercial transactions. It implied that mail-in balloting must be the norm, which probably flipped the election. It delayed the reopening as long as possible. It was sadistic. 

Even with all that, worse was planned. On July 26, 2020, with the George Floyd riots having finally settled down, the CDC issued a plan for establishing nationwide quarantine camps. People were to be isolated, given only food and some cleaning supplies. They would be banned from participating in any religious services. The plan included contingencies for preventing suicide. There were no provisions made for any legal appeals or even the right to legal counsel. 

The plan’s authors were unnamed but included 26 footnotes. It was completely official. The document was only removed on about March 26, 2023. During the entire intervening time, the plan survived on the CDC’s public site with little to no public notice or controversy. 

It was called “Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings.” 

“This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings. This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available.”

By absence of empirical data, the meaning is: nothing like this has ever been tried. The point of the document was to map out how it could be possible and alert authorities to possible pitfalls to be avoided. 

The meaning of “shielding” is “to reduce the number of severe Covid-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (‘high-risk’) and the general population (‘low-risk’). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or ‘green zones’ established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector, or community level depending on the context and setting. They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.”

In other words, this is what used to be concentration camps. 

Keep reading

Leaked documents from Germany’s RKI prove that they knew every aspect of the covid pandemic response was NOT SCIENCE, it was POLITICAL

A whistle-blower obtained 10GB of information from the Robert Koch Institute. This so-called RKI Leak reveals that covid was a scam from start to finish. Professor Stefan Homberg presented the evidence on 2 November 2024 in the second largest room of the German Bundestag, which is intended for committees of inquiry.

The Robert Koch Institute (“RKI”) is a German federal government agency and research institute responsible for disease control and prevention. Located in Berlin and Wernigerode, it advises the specialist public and government on preventing and tackling infectious disease outbreaks.

The trove of documents reveals that RKI knew the covid response was not based on science but were political decisions to spread fear, control the population and promote the experimental “vaccines.”

In 2023, documents were obtained through legal action under the Freedom of Information Act. The files show that politicians ordered the experts to make up stories and narratives so as to support the government’s preconceived measures.  These documents are referred to as the RKI Files.  You can find the RKI Files HERE.

“Internally, RKI experts thought FFP2 masks were useless and believed that vaccines would not stop the virus spread. In the public, however, RKI vigorously advocated mask and vaccine mandates and discrimination of the unvaccinated,” Dr. Homberg said in the description of an April 2024 video explaining what the RKI Files revealed.

Earlier this month, Prof. Homberg presented what is being referred to as the RKI Leaks in the Bundestag.  “The RKI Leaks encompasses much more [than the RKI Files], he said. “Namely, all protocols, not just some of them.”

“All of them are completely unredacted.  And we obtained a lot of additional material such as letters, for example, a letter from President Macron to Germany, suggesting both countries conduct lockdowns in a similar fashion.  We also got Excel sheets, emails, PowerPoint presentations and so on,” he said.

Keep reading