Tag: covid-19

British doctor has medical license revoked over warning of COVID shot dangers

British doctors continue to be removed from medical practice for warning patients of the dangers of the so-called mRNA COVID “vaccines.”

In December 2024, consultant psychiatrist Dr. Daniel Armstrong was struck off the medical register following his description of pharmaceutical companies as “evil.”

Armstrong had appeared in a video shared on BitChute in which he described the COVID regime and the attendant “vaccines” as part of a “deception on a grand scale” – saying the injections put people’s lives at risk. In the video, titled Navigating the Truth-Deception Duality, he said:

My message is clear to everyone: don’t take any more. You’ve a doctor here, he’s got his licence on the line – given it up. Don’t take any more of the injections. These guys are evil.

The tribunal which deprived Armstrong of his right to practice medicine concluded he was “highly likely in future to act so as to put patients at unwarranted risk of harm” – as the Daily Mail reported on January 2.

According to the minutes of the tribunal, an anonymous email alerted the General Medical Council to Armstrong’s video – which had been initially released on July 17, 2023.

The tribunal has found that Armstrong’s use of his medical credentials to warn the public of the dangers of the so-called vaccines is a violation of medical ethics, stating the physician had “undermined public health information and posed a serious risk to members of the public who may have placed reliance on his opinions.”

Keep reading

Covid Vaccines Contain Cancer Virus Fragments & Mutagenic DNA Contamination — Study

A peer-reviewed study published Sunday documented findings from Covid gene-therapy vaccine analysis conducted in the BSL-1 research facility at the FDA White Oak campus. The findings detailed how the mRNA injections contain fragments of SV40 cancer virus, as well as DNA contamination.

“Using 4 vials of experimental mRNA vaccines, we found that two out of four vials of those experimental mRNA vaccines contained residual plasmid DNA that transformed Escherichia coli cells. We subsequently applied our method to assess 2 separate lots of Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and found no replication-competent plasmid DNA. However, these authorized vaccines do contain residual DNA to a level that exceeds 10 ng per dose,” the study said in the ‘Abstract’ section.

While SV40 cancer virus fragments were detected, the researchers stated that since it was just fragments it’s unlikely they’d have the same carcinogenic effect as fully intact SV40 cancer viruses, yet may still cause localized reactions.

It should be noted however that other researchers have detected larger SV40 cancer virus fragments in their mRNA Covid vaccine samples.

“Although some investigators have reported the presence of larger DNA fragments with SV40 promoter/enhancer from the commercial mRNA vaccines (18), our results showed the efficient digestion of plasmid DNA in Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccines,” the study said in the ‘Discussion’ section. “Since we only detected DNA fragments < 35 bp in our study, it is practically unlikely for these broken pieces of SV40 promoters to be functional. The plasmid DNA template does not contain oncogenes. Therefore, it is less likely that these DNA fragments will be oncogenic or infectious. Smaller DNA fragments can be immunostimulatory, contributing to local reactions after vaccination.”

Perhaps ironically, the impetus of this study was to “report a simple method to detect residual replication-competent plasmid DNA that is present in mRNA vaccines as impurities” in order to “suggest that stringent and transparent monitoring of DNA impurity may aid in the buildup of public trust in mRNA vaccines.”

Keep reading

The covid-19 pandemic was an illusion; those in power deliberately ignored science to impose their will on populations to dominate and control them

Analysis of All-Cause Mortality Rates and the Absence of a Spreading Pathogen

Rancourt emphasised that his conclusions are based on hard data, specifically all-cause mortality rates, which have been collected by nations for over a century and are considered reliable.

According to the data, there was excess mortality before the vaccines were rolled out, contradicting the claim that mortality only started with the vaccine rollout.  However, after analysing the temporal and spatial dependence of all-cause mortality Rancourt found that there was no spread of a pathogen, as the mortality rates did not increase in neighbouring regions following hotspots of death.

The first paper Rancourt published was on 2 June 2020; it concluded that there was no spread of a pathogen.  The data showed that mortality rates were often limited within jurisdictional borders, such as county or country borders, suggesting that local government policies and hospital environments played a significant role in determining deaths.

“This is institutions and governments killing people by the measures that they’re applying, mostly in hospitals and so on. I was very clear. I spelt that out in that publication right away and showed the data that demonstrated that,” he said.

Rancourt identified northern Italy, specifically the Milan region, and New York City as areas where the use of mechanical ventilators was particularly heavy and likely contributed to the high mortality rates.

“In Milan, they actually told people, don’t just stay at home, come straight into the hospital, we’ll save you,” he said.  “And they developed an improvement, they considered, where they could put two people on one ventilator. And they were just putting everybody on ventilators.”

“The ventilators are accompanied with sedation.  Sedation makes your breathing even worse. And the ventilators are known to be strongly associated with developing pneumonia. And at the same time,  there was a hesitancy to treat pneumonias because everyone was saying, ‘Oh, it’s viral, it’s viral. You’re being irresponsible as a [medical doctor] or a hospital if you’re over-treating with antibiotics’. So, there was withdrawal of antibiotics and these very dangerous techniques and sedation and so on. And there were also some experimental drugs that were being used that were shown to be very, very deadly.”

In contrast, Germany did not adopt these treatment methods and did not experience excess deaths at the beginning of 2020.

There were many different causes of excess death during the covid era, not everyone was doing the same thing, Rancourt said.  One of the important causes of death is severe treatment of elderly and frail people including isolation, disruption of their routine and removal of their usual care.

“Isolating them is extremely deadly. And removing their usual routine, their usual way that you give them nourishment and also hydrate them, and the care that they normally would have. All of that was disrupted tremendously and they were isolated and treated as a danger to themselves, between themselves and so on. So that certainly would have contributed enormously to deaths [of] the frail people,” he said.

Adding, “What was done in care homes and hospitals to elderly and sick people was absolutely horrendous. It was a death machine, basically.”

Rancourt believes that the actions taken in care homes and hospitals were not just malfeasance but a deliberate decision to roll out a “military campaign” to implement vaccines, regardless of the science or consequences.

Keep reading

Court Upholds $7.8 Million Verdict For Transit Workers Fired For Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine

A federal judge in California has rejected an effort by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) to overturn a jury verdict that awarded $7.8 million to six former employees who were fired for refusing to comply with the agency’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate on religious grounds.

In a Dec. 30 order, Judge William A. Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California acknowledged minor “imperfections” in the jury trial—including flawed instructions to the jurors—and determined they were not severe enough to invalidate the jury’s October decision requiring BART to pay each of the six former workers between $1.2 million and $1.5 million.

Alsup denied BART’s post-trial motions to overturn the verdict and seek a new trial, saying that the agency failed to demonstrate that accommodating the employees’ religious objections would have posed an undue hardship.

“Simply put, on the instructions given and evidence received, a reasonable jury could have found that BART had not carried its burden of proving its affirmative defense,” Alsup wrote, referring to the fact that, in order to prevail in the case, BART had to prove that granting accommodations such as masking, testing, or remote work in lieu of vaccination would have imposed an undue burden on the agency.

BART’s defense relied heavily on expert testimony to argue that no alternative measures were as effective as vaccination against COVID-19, with the judge noting that the agency claimed it had presented “‘unrebutted’ scientific expert testimony” to that effect. However, Alsup noted that the jury was entitled to weigh the credibility of the experts, particularly given their financial ties to the agency.

“In light of the large sums paid to the experts by BART, our jury was entitled to find that they were ‘bought and paid for,’ were merely parroting the ‘company line,’ and were not credible in light of their bias, common sense, and other evidence,” the judge wrote. “An expert witness is like any other witness, and it is up to the jury to decide how much weight their testimony deserves.”

Keep reading

Did COVID Vaccines Cost More Lives Than They Saved? Public Deserves a Rigorous, Truthful Evaluation

“Do you think there would have been less deaths overall if we hadn’t had a vaccine?”

This question was posed to Dr. Aseem Malhotra by Steven Bartlett during an interview on Bartlett’s podcast “Diary of a CEO.” To which Malhotra responded simply “Yes.”

Full Fact, a fact-checking organization, has written a verdict on Malhotra’s answer, claiming: “False. There is clear evidence that the vaccines saved far more lives than they cost.”

Part I: The illusion of certainty — Deconstructing claims of vaccine efficacy

The assertion that “There is clear evidence” of COVID-19 vaccines’ benefits outweighing their harms” exemplifies a dangerous oversimplification of complex medical realities.

This claim, often propagated by fact-checkers and mainstream narratives, fails to acknowledge the fundamental limitations in our current understanding and the methodological flaws inherent in much of the existing research.

The missing gold standard: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)

In evidence-based medicine, properly conducted RCTs measuring all-cause mortality are the gold standard for determining an intervention’s overall impact. For COVID-19 vaccines, no such trials have demonstrated an all-cause mortality benefit.

The original trials were not designed or powered to detect differences in all-cause mortality, and follow-up periods were too short to capture long-term effects. Without this crucial evidence, claims of clear benefit are premature at best and misleading at worst.

The pitfalls of observational studies

In the absence of robust RCT data, fact-checkers often turn to observational studies. However, these studies are fraught with potential biases that consistently overestimate benefits and underestimate harm:

Selection distortion: Healthy user bias and time-dependent effects inflate apparent vaccine benefits and mask potential harms due to inherent differences in vaccinated groups and changing study conditions.

Temporal misclassification: Survivorship bias and miscategorization of vaccination status in early post-injection periods artificially inflate efficacy estimates and underestimate potential harms.

Classification bias: Vaccine status classification errors occur in a single direction, with the vaccinated often misclassified as unvaccinated. This results in infections and harms in the vaccinated being misattributed to the unvaccinated group, overestimating benefits and underestimating harms.

Reporting bias: Systematic underreporting of adverse events following vaccination due to factors like lack of recognition, dismissal of potential vaccine-related causes, or fear of professional repercussions leads to underestimation of vaccine risks and overstates safety.

Publication bias: The preferential publication and promotion of studies showing positive vaccine effects, coupled with the suppression or non-publication of studies showing no effect or negative effects, skews the overall body of evidence and public perception.

Keep reading

Shocking report in the UK finds 95% of COVID-19 deaths were among the vaccinated

The devastating truth behind the worldwide rollout of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines continues to come out, exposing a staggering reality that governments and corporations have either ignored or deliberately concealed. Official data released by the UK government has revealed an alarming surge in deaths among those who received the vaccination, starkly contrasting with the negligible impact on the unvaccinated population.

According to the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), as of July 2022, over 18.9 million people had refused the first dose of the COVID-19 injection, with another 21.5 million people refusing the second dose. Furthermore, a significant portion of those who received the first dose later refused additional injections, with 2.6 million people refusing the second and 30.4 million refusing the third shot. These figures indicate a widespread rejection of the vaccine, yet the ramifications for those who did comply with this “lifesaving” intervention were ultimately catastrophic.

The data, published by the UK government’s Office for National Statistics (ONS) in the “Deaths by Vaccination Status” dataset, is unequivocal. Between July 2021 and May 2023, there were 965,609 deaths among the vaccinated, compared to just 60,903 deaths among the unvaccinated. This stark disparity is a damning indictment of the policies that mandated and promoted these vaccines.

The UK’s vaccinated population, which accounted for 95% of all COVID-19 deaths, has suffered disproportionately high death rates in each age group since July 2021. The most dramatic increases were observed among the 80 to 89-year-old age group, with the highest number of vaccinated all-cause deaths soaring to 19,914 in December 2022.

Keep reading

Bombshell Study Exposes Toxic Effects of Covid mRNA ‘Vaccines’; A troubling new study has exposed the “toxic effects” of administering repeated doses of Covid mRNA “vaccines.”

“A troubling new study has exposed the “toxic effects” of administering repeated doses of Covid mRNA “vaccines.”

The researchers found that the injection caused severe damage that could cause a range of deadly diseases and trigger sudden death.

The study was conducted by leading South Korean researchers at the Seoul National University Hospital.

Led by professors Jae-Hun Ahn and Byeong-Cheol Kang, the team set up a preclinical laboratory-based study to evaluate the toxicological effects of Covid mRNA “vaccines.”

Their findings were published in the Archives of Toxicology.

The researchers tested the vaccines in six-week-old mice, focusing on repeated dosing and administration routes.

The mice were administered the vaccines intramuscularly twice at two-week intervals or up to five doses.

The intervals sought to replicate the vaccine schedules for humans as advised by most government health officials.

The study found that “toxic effects” started to emerge two days after the second injection.

According gto the study, these toxic effects were recorded as reduced lymphocyte and reticulocyte counts, anemia-related changes, and elevated cardiac damage markers (troponin-I and NT-proBNP).

Histopathological analyses revealed inflammation and necrosis at injection sites, bone marrow suppression, thymic cortical atrophy, and spleen enlargement.

They noted that some of the effects had resolved by 14 days after the injection.

However, many of the toxic effects persisted.

The researchers noted spleen damage and injection site injury appeared to be impacted long-term, possibly permanently.

Repeated doses led to cumulative toxicity, and intravenous and intramuscular routes resulted in distinct toxicological profiles.

These findings highlight potential toxicological risks, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of administration routes and dosage regimens in vaccine safety assessments.

The researcher also note that “multiple side effects of mRNA vaccines have been reported, including myocarditis, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, and Guillain–Barré syndrome (Bozkurt et al. 2021; García-Grimshaw et al. 2021; Hanson et al. 2022; Kadali et al. 2021; Sangli et al. 2021).

“Therefore, safety assessments for mRNA vaccines should differ from those for conventional drugs or vaccines.”

Published in Archives of Toxicology, the authors report:

“In summary, our investigation into the toxicological effects of four SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine candidates revealed various toxicological changes.

Keep reading

A Systematic Review Of Autopsy Findings In Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination

Background: The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, combined with a high number of adverse event reports, have led to concerns over possible mechanisms of injury including systemic lipid nanoparticle (LNP) and mRNA distribution, Spike protein-associated tissue damage, thrombogenicity, immune system dysfunction, and carcinogenicity. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate possible causal links between COVID-19 vaccine administration and death using autopsies and post-mortem analysis.

Methods: We searched PubMed and ScienceDirect for all published autopsy and organ-restricted autopsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination up until May 18th, 2023. All autopsy and organ-restricted autopsy studies that included COVID-19 vaccination as an antecedent exposure were included. Because the state of knowledge has advanced since the time of the original publications, three physicians independently reviewed each case and adjudicated whether or not COVID-19 vaccination was the direct cause or contributed significantly to death.

Results: We initially identified 678 studies and, after screening for our inclusion criteria, included 44 papers that contained 325 autopsy cases and one organ-restricted autopsy case (heart). The mean age of death was 70.4 years. The most implicated organ system among cases was the cardiovascular (49%), followed by hematological (17%), respiratory (11%), and multiple organ systems (7%). Three or more organ systems were affected in 21 cases. The mean time from vaccination to death was 14.3 days. Most deaths occurred within a week from last vaccine administration. A total of 240 deaths (73.9%) were independently adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination, of which the primary causes of death include sudden cardiac death (35%), pulmonary embolism (12.5%), myocardial infarction (12%), VITT (7.9%), myocarditis (7.1%), multisystem inflammatory syndrome (4.6%), and cerebral hemorrhage (3.8%).

Conclusions: The consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine mechanisms of injury and death, coupled with autopsy confirmation by physician adjudication, suggests there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death. Further urgent investigation is required for the purpose of clarifying our findings. 

Keep reading

Former State Department Official David Asher: Americans “Will Soon Learn” COVID Origins Truth

Revelations that senior US intelligence officials in the early days of the virus pandemic suppressed research indicating a Chinese lab leak as the origin of Covid-19 surfaced in a new Wall Street Journal report titled “Behind Closed Doors: The Spy-World Scientists Who Argued Covid Was a Lab Leak” late this week. 

The investigation by WSJ’s Michael Gordon and Warren Strobel shows the disagreements within the intelligence community over Covid origins…  

But an investigation by The Wall Street Journal shows that the disagreements among intelligence experts over what should be included in the report ran deeper than is publicly known. Nor were the FBI scientists the only ones who believed that the intelligence directorate’s review didn’t tell the whole story.

Three scientists at the National Center for Medical Intelligence, part of the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency, conducted a scientific study that concluded that Covid-19 was manipulated in a laboratory in a risky research effort. But that analysis was at odds with the assessment of their parent agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and wasn’t incorporated in the report presented to Biden. -WSJ 

Specifically, who decided to exclude input from the Defense Department and the FBI—the only agency to conclude with “moderate confidence” that a lab leak was the likely origin—from the August 2021 briefing to President Biden and the subsequent official federal conclusion that Covid most likely originated naturally?

David Asher, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and former head of State Department investigations into Covid origins, joined Vince Coglianese, host of WMAL’s “The Vince Coglianese Show,” on Friday evening to discuss the cover-up of Covid’s origins during the Biden administration.

Keep reading

Two undisclosed deaths in Pfizer Covid vaccine trials

Pfizer-BioNTech did not disclose the deaths of two participants in its COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials before the FDA granted emergency use authorization (EUA) in December 2020. Documents released nearly three years later revealed the deaths of a 63-year-old Kansas woman and a 58-year-old Georgia woman, both classified as “sudden cardiac death.” Researchers have criticized Pfizer for failing to report these incidents within the required 24-hour timeframe, with one case taking 37 days to be filed.

Dr. Jeyanthi Kunadhasan, an Australian anesthesiologist and researcher with the watchdog group Daily Clout, called for an investigation by Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach. She raised concerns that withholding this information may have impacted the perception of the vaccine’s safety profile.

“If the additional two deaths had been disclosed at the time of the EUA, it would have shown that the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID vaccine intervention provided no reduction in deaths.”
— Dr. Jeyanthi Kunadhasan, Anesthesiologist, Daily Clout

These revelations are part of a broader controversy surrounding transparency. In 2022, a federal court ordered the FDA to release 1.2 million pages of clinical trial documents after rejecting a 75-year delay request. This included the trial data that Pfizer had an opportunity to disclose to the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee but did not.

Kansas Attorney General Kobach has also filed a lawsuit against Pfizer, accusing the company of misleading the public about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness. The suit alleges the company failed to disclose risks like myocarditis, pericarditis, failed pregnancies, and deaths while promoting the vaccine as “safe and effective.”

Pfizer classified the deaths as unrelated to the vaccine and omitted them from a December 2020 New England Journal of Medicine paper that lauded the vaccine’s safety and efficacy. Critics say this omission reflects a troubling pattern of selective reporting.

Keep reading