Curiously Curated Conspiracies, Cover Ups and Corruption. All content is 'for your consideration' only. "The Truth, when you finally chase it down, is almost always far worse than your darkest visions and fears." ~ Hunter S. Thompson
More than 1,000 Canadians have applied online to testify about serious health problems they say they experienced following COVID-19 vaccination, according to organizers of an upcoming inquiry led by Conservative MP Dean Allison.
The Allison Inquiry is a non-partisan preliminary inquiry intended to give Canadians who report being injured by COVID-19 vaccines an opportunity to share their experiences.
The hearings are scheduled to take place on Parliament Hill from September 8 to 11, with approximately 50 Canadians expected to testify.
Allison, the MP for Niagara West, provided an update on the inquiry during a press conference in Ottawa on Thursday, saying the response from Canadians has been far greater than organizers anticipated.
“More than 1,000 people have now applied online asking for the opportunity to have their voices heard,” Allison said.
Allison said many applicants have spent years struggling with their health, looking for answers and attempting to navigate a medical system they believe has failed to address their concerns.
A new Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal study is being promoted by the pharma-captured mass media apparatus as a massive 2.56-million-child analysis disproving an MMR–autism association, but major methodological problems undermine the entire paper.
They did not use a truly unvaccinated control group, did not clinically adjudicate autism, did not interview parents, did not independently verify vaccine histories, and used a narrow ICD-coded autism definition.
No True Unvaccinated Control Group
Most importantly, there was no true unvaccinated control group. The comparison children were only those without a recorded MMR vaccination during the relevant analysis. They were not required to be vaccine-naive and could have received other routine childhood vaccines. The study itself reports that 62.1% of the overall cohort received a PCV booster.
Even their MMR status was not independently verified. Vaccination exposure came from Epic records, including historically documented doses, with no reported state immunization-registry confirmation, parent interview, or outside-record review. That means some children classified as “unvaccinated” in the dataset could theoretically have received MMR outside the participating Epic/Cosmos system without that dose being captured.
Autism Was Based on ICD Codes, Not Clinical Adjudication
The study relied entirely on electronic health records. Autism was defined by an ICD-10 F84.0 encounter code, not by independent clinical adjudication, ADOS testing, chart review, or parent interview. Nearly 9% of autism cases had only a single encounter carrying the diagnosis. Vaccine status was likewise taken from Epic records, with no reported state-registry verification, parent confirmation, or external record review.
The Study Did Not Measure the Full Autism Spectrum
The investigators counted only ICD-10 F84.0 “childhood autism,” a relatively narrow diagnostic code, rather than the broader range of autism-spectrum diagnoses captured under F84.. Yet the 3.2% national benchmark they cite reflects that broader autism-spectrum definition. This means their 2.55% autism prevalence is not directly comparable to the national 3.2% figure and may miss children coded under other autism-spectrum categories. The authors themselves acknowledge this limitation and state that future studies should examine the full F84. spectrum.
Newly disclosed text messages show Dr. Anthony Fauci privately entertained the possibility that the COVID-19 vaccine could trigger first-trimester miscarriages, months before he told the public there was no risk.
The messages come from atrove that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) released, containing more than 34,000 texts and 522 voicemails the Senate Homeland Security Committee pulled from Fauci’s government-issued phone. Among the trove is a January 2021 text chain between Fauci, Dr. Vivek Murthy and Dr. Rochelle Walensky, who went on to serve as the Biden administration’s surgeon general and CDC director, in which the three officials worked through how the vaccine’s risks might interact with pregnancy.
On Jan. 25, Murthy opened the thread with a question. “For pregnant women considering getting the vaccine, are you aware of any data or theoretical reason why vaccinating early vs late in pregnancy would be preferred? And any sense of when there will be more robust data on vaccine risk in pregnant women?”
Walensky noted that more than 15,000 pregnant women had already enrolled in the CDC’s V-safe vaccine safety monitoring system. Fauci wrote there “are no data or theoretical reason to believe that vaccinating early versus later in pregnancy would be preferred.” He also flagged a caveat that would later look prescient. “Yet, some people (even female health care professionals) feel concerned about injecting a ‘genetic’ vaccine very early in pregnancy,” he wrote.
Nearly two hours passed before Fauci circled back with something he had not mentioned the first time. “I asked around a bit more and another issue came up that you need to be aware of,” he wrote. “Since many people have significant cytokines storm and fever after the 2nd dose, this theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester.”
Before the press was captured, vaccine injuries were openly covered on national TV. Now the dam of censorship is breaking, and we can finally confront the tragic history that keeps repeating.
A key theme I’ve tried to highlight in this publication is that the same medical catastrophes keep repeating (because those responsible are never held accountable), so by understanding what happened in the past, you can see and understand what is happening now and what will likely happen in the future.
For example, because vaccines are “risky but necessary,” the medical profession and government, again and again, concluded that they needed to tell the public all vaccines were “safe and effective” as the potential injuries a mass vaccination campaign would cause were outweighed by “necessary” benefit the vaccines could offer. As such, examples can be found again and again of severe injuries being systematically covered up for the “greater good” (e.g., the earliest documented example I know of this happened in 1874 with the smallpox vaccine) and health authorities concocting the same set of excuses we’ve seen since smallpox as to why those vaccines failed to prevent the diseases they were supposed to.
Since the risks of most vaccines (detailed here) far outweigh their benefits, a mass-vaccination paradigm can only be sustained by censoring the evidence of harm — and then citing that manufactured silence as proof of safety. Over the decades, more and more has been done to conceal those harms. For almost a century, severe neurological injuries after vaccination were routinely reported in the medical literature. Now vaccine injuries are censored, and it is nearly impossible to publish anything critical of vaccines in a “reputable” journal.
Likewise, despite the “science” that says vaccines are safe, it is nearly impossible to obtain the raw datasets that could actually answer the question — as Steve Kirsch showed the public throughout COVID-19 with his relentless, endlessly stonewalled quest to get that data. Likewise, VAERS, a public injury-reporting database only exists because the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act required a way for patients to bypass doctors refusing to report their injuries, and as such, ever since a law mandated its creation, everything possible has been done to undermine and discredit VAERS (except when the industry uses it as “proof” to prove vaccines are safe).
This is the inescapable problem at the heart of mass vaccination. When you take a product that is not completely safe and give it to an entire population, tens of millions of healthy people, most of whom were never at meaningful risk from the disease, even a small rate of serious harm guarantees that enormous numbers are injured or killed. Since there is no way around that arithmetic the authorities have chosen concealment every time, suppressing the data, reclassifying the injuries, and dismissing each casualty as a coincidence, because the alternative is admitting the paradigm itself produces the ever-increasing wave of chronic illness sweeping our society.
For a long time, the injuries were too numerous to fully hide, so the public kept reawakening to them and the mainstream media kept covering them. The industry’s solution came after it won liability protection in the 1986 vaccine law: spend whatever it took to censor the coverage and bury the injuries. But removing that check, the public finding out and objecting, removed the only real constraint on toxic vaccines reaching the market, and progressively more dangerous ones followed, until the COVID-19 catastrophe injured so many people that even a robust censorship apparatus couldn’t contain it. Numerous polls I’ve summarized in detail here demonstrate the scale of the vaccine injuries: depending on the survey, 7% to 13% of recipients reported a serious side effect, 24% to 28% say they know someone they believe died from the shot, and 46% to 55% believe the COVID vaccines have killed a significant number of people. Propaganda has its limits, and once numbers like those take hold, a new awareness of vaccine injury surfaces across the media ecosystem, occasionally on conservative networks, but mostly in the independent press.
Because we keep forgetting the past, the cycle repeats. My goal here is to show that what we are seeing now is nothing new, that it has happened countless times before, on a smaller scale that was easier to sweep under the rug, by collecting dozens of clips that were once routinely aired on television and are almost inconceivable today, given how brutal the censorship has become.
Newly released text messages from Dr. Anthony Fauci’s government-issued iPhone expose yet another stunning example of the COVID regime’s two-faced messaging.
Sens. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Rand Paul (R-KY) released the January 25-26, 2021 text chain Monday as part of the initial dump from more than 34,000 texts and 522 voicemails recovered from Fauci’s government phone. The exchange is damning.
Fauci himself raised the alarm about the second dose, writing that because “many people have significant cytokines storm and fever after the 2nd dose, this theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester.” Walensky replied that it was “definitely a good point, esp after dose two.”
Then Murthy piled on. In a follow-up text, the man who would soon become Biden’s Surgeon General responded to Fauci’s concern by adding: “I’ve been hearing the concern about the mRNA causing mutations in the developing fetus as well. That’s a really good point re the cytokine storm post second dose.”
The very next day, Murthy flagged a World Health Organization announcement advising against pregnant women taking the Moderna vaccine due to lack of data, asking Fauci and Walensky for their take because “I imagine we will all get asked about this.”
A draft strategic plan publicized by a federal autism committee last month outlines a framework for developing “precision” medical treatment and supporting better long-term care for autistic people — but, according to critics, makes no provision for studying a possible link between vaccines and autism.
The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC), which advises U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on autism policies, released the draft plan for public comment last month. The plan recommends defining autism as a condition that may have more than one cause, and that may lead to multiple medical conditions.
The draft plan is also linked to ongoing federal research examining the possible causes of autism and the reasons for its increased prevalence in the U.S. — rising from 1 in 150 children in 2000 to 1 in 31 children in 2022.
According to a statement by the Autism Action Network reviewed by The Defender, while the role of vaccines in autism “is the most contentious and important of the many unanswered questions about autism,” the draft strategic plan includes no mention of studying a possible link.
“Nowhere in the current draft … are ‘vaccines’ or ‘immunizations’ even mentioned, nor are they identified as research subjects for causing autism,” the statement reads.
According to the statement, the report cites environmental factors and medical products as possible factors contributing to the onset of autism. But while these are “broad categories which could include vaccines,” the plan lacks “unequivocal, explicit language” calling for vaccine-autism research.
However, a person familiar with the workings of the IACC who asked to remain anonymous told The Defender that “nothing is excluded and nothing is off the table.”
The source said it was “very important” for the committee to avoid focusing on any one particular potential cause, and for “multiple members of the committee not to be reductionistic and not to reduce autism to one cause or one factor, because I think it’s very clear at this point that this is a sort of a multifactorial process.”
The individual said that the community of autistic people and their caretakers is “drowning” — and requires care and support instead of negative attention.
“Our community is drowning. We have parents, support givers and caregivers who are just inundated with behavioral and caregiving stress … it was very important to the many members of the committee that we make headway on those areas without encountering the massive onslaught of negative attention and coverage that would come from naming any particular environmental exposure.”
Even though this is a crisis, we do not really want to know the true cause of autism.
Why? Because if we used a time proximity analysis, it would reveal that the parental decision to follow their pediatrician’s advice and vaccinate their kids is the cause.
Congress will not investigate because they will lean on large studies which use methods designed specifically not to find a signal to claim vaccines don’t cause autism. But those studies only prove that bad studies can fail to find a signal if they use the wrong methods.
The most sensitive method is simply to make a histogram of the time between a child’s most recent vaccine and the onset of rapid regressive autism. The methodology was described in my earlier Substack article.
You can do this in any autism practice anywhere in the world retrospectively. It is simple. NOBODY HAS DONE THIS. I wonder why?
It took a long time, but I finally located a large autism treatment clinic who was willing to share the statistical information that they had gathered from the parents of autistic kids in the clinic that I wrote about in an earlier Substack article.
This is new. This has never been revealed to the world before. Nobody would dare do that.
The clinic examined 182 patient records.
84 were “rapid onset autism” cases (46%).
Of those cases, a “routine vaccination” was mentioned as happening before the event in 98% of those cases.
In 40% of the cases, the regression happened within 2 days after routine vaccination.
In 76% of the cases, the regression happened within 2 weeks after routine vaccination.
However, if you believe otherwise, please explain in the comments what you think is causing these cases.
I predict there will be no follow ups on this from any country in the world because they don’t want to know the truth that they are causing the autism epidemic.
This data is stunning. I’m arranging funding of a larger version of this study and hopefully, we can get it on a preprint server. It will likely never be published in any mainstream journal.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) first EUA for a COVID-19 vaccine rested on its determination that the known and potential benefits of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine outweighed its known and potential risks. Yet the pivotal trial report did not bring those benefits and risks together within a common quantitative framework.
Better late than never: more than five years later, I did — and what I found was startling.
At first glance, the famous 95% efficacy against protocol-defined, laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 — based on eight versus 162 cases in a trial that randomized 43,548 participants — seems highly promising.
But when this finding is considered alongside the broader set of participant-relevant outcomes (dispersed across the trial publication, its Supplementary Appendix, and the contemporaneous FDA review materials), the overall clinical picture looks markedly different.
Depending on the counting period used, the vaccine group had 2-8 fewer cases of severe COVID-19, whereas the safety data showed numerical excesses of 4-101 participants across clinically consequential adverse-event categories. These categories are not directly comparable, and some may overlap.
Even so, the evidence did not establish that the vaccine’s clinically consequential benefits outweighed its potential harms. Nor did the trial establish that vaccination reduced the overall burden of COVID-19-like symptoms, let alone that it reduced person-to-person transmission.
Crucially, this conclusion does not rest on hindsight: the relevant evidence was already before the FDA when it issued the EUA.
The full basis for this conclusion is presented in my comprehensive reassessment of the evidence, currently available as a preprint. That reassessment is necessarily detailed because the relevant data are complex, scattered across multiple documents and subject to important methodological and interpretive qualifications.
The present column is not intended to replace that analysis, but to distill several of its central findings and implications for a broader readership.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) dropped another bombshell during Wednesday’s explosive Senate hearing with Dr. Anthony Fauci, confronting the former COVID czar with adverse event data that he argued should have triggered urgent scrutiny years ago—but instead was ignored while federal health agencies relentlessly promoted COVID vaccines and Remdesivir.
Johnson’s latest exchange came after he previously confronted Fauci with stacks of studies on ivermectin and questioned why federal officials dismissed evidence supporting alternative treatments before Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during the hearing.
The Wisconsin senator displayed comparative adverse-event figures during the hearing, arguing they represented safety signals that federal regulators refused to adequately investigate.
“These are averages. Again, it doesn’t prove causation, but there’s correlation. It’s there. It’s there for a safety signal,” Johnson said.
The chart, titled “Drug Adverse Event Comparison” and labeled “FDA and CDC Data: Worldwide,” compared adverse event reports, total reported deaths, and average deaths per year across multiple products.
According to the chart presented by Johnson:
Ivermectin (30 years, 1996–2026): 5,127 adverse events, 518 deaths, averaging 17 deaths per year.
Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) (38 years, 1988–2026): 37,270 adverse events, 5,404 deaths, averaging 142 deaths per year.
Flu vaccines (36 years, 1990–2026): 243,335 adverse events, 2,770 deaths, averaging 77 deaths per year.
Dexamethasone (57 years, 1969–2026): 143,017 adverse events, 25,589 deaths, averaging 448 deaths per year.
Tylenol (57 years, 1969–2026): 184,186 adverse events, 42,627 deaths, averaging 747 deaths per year.
For years, Dr. Anthony Fauci assured Americans that the COVID-19 vaccines were safe and effective. What he never mentioned, according to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is that he may have suffered one of those “rare” adverse events himself, and he hid it from the country while publicly insisting such injuries weren’t happening.
Kennedy appeared on Fox News’s The Ingraham Angle to discuss the newly released diary entries that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) made public, entries that document Fauci’s day-to-day life during the pandemic, on top of his disturbing obsession with himself and the power he wielded during the pandemic. When Laura Ingraham asked whether there would be any accountability for the trillions of dollars lost, the ruined education of America’s children, and the shattered reputation of the public health establishment, Kennedy didn’t hesitate.
“Yeah, and millions of people injured,” Kennedy said. “So he lied about masks, he lied about social distancing, he lied about the transmission, he lied about natural immunity, he lied about the capacity, as you just said, of the vaccine to prevent infection.”
Then came the bombshell.
“He got vaccinated at a very, very public press conference in January of 2021,” Kennedy said, noting that five months later, the diary reveals, Fauci “had a pulmonary infarction, which is one of the adverse events that NIH, CDC and FDA said are expected from the vaccine.”
“He never told anybody,” Kennedy said. “He got treated for it privately by the best doctors in America at the same time, he was telling everybody that was not an adverse event.”
Think about that for a second. The man who badgered every American into taking the shot, insisting it was perfectly safe, appears to have experienced one of the exact injuries his own agencies flagged, then quietly got elite private care while assuring the public that such reactions weren’t real. Ordinary Americans who reported similar problems got dismissed and mocked. Fauci got the best doctors in America.
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.