Pfizer And Moderna To Investigate Their Own Vaccines For Myocarditis Risks

Why is Big Pharma investigating their own covid vaccines for myocarditis side effects if the vaccines were already supposedly tested and proven safe and effective?

Both Pfizer and Moderna have announced that they will be undertaking studies to determine the longer term risks of Myocarditis (an inflammatory condition of the heart which can lead to death) for people who have been injected with the mRNA based covid vaccines. The decision comes after the release of multiple medical studies which show a correlation and causation between the vaccines and an exponential increase in heart problems, specifically among men 40 years old and younger. Only a year ago the link between covid vaccinations and myocarditis was widely denied.

Studies also show that myocarditis risk increases with the number of boosters a person has taken.

Before the year 2020, the average vaccine was tested and re-tested by pharmaceutical companies and the FDA for 10 to 15 years before it could be released to the public. This was done not only because testing is a complex process with a lot of red tape involved, but also because it is the only way to discover any long term side-effects that might be associated with a particular immunization product. If you read any medical journal or scientific outline on vaccine development published before 2020, they all agree that long term testing is necessary for public safety.

Suddenly, after 2020 and the advent of public activism against the covid mandates, a host of medical “professionals” and bureaucrats began arguing that the mRNA vaccines do not need the same lengthy testing time frame because government funding allowed for everything to be accomplished much faster. This is a lie.

Keep reading

Facebook Censors Posts on Vaccine Harms Because They “Make People Feel Unsafe”

This morning, a friend published a short post on Facebook, drawing attention to how it seemed to him the company was not even bothering any more to refer to the so-called ‘independent fact-checkers’ to justify their censorship. He had re-posted a clip where Fox reporter Tucker Carlson discussed the negative effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines, referring to peer-reviewed studies. The clip is available here.

How on earth can peer-reviewed results constitute “misinformation”? The peer review process isn’t perfect, far from it, but after all it is the accepted standard. A first conclusion therefore is that the word ‘misinformation’ does not refer to misinformation any more, it simply refers to any information the censor wants suppressed. The word has become meaningless.

The action, then, is suppression of a certain kind of information, but what about the reason? The reason for suppressing uncomfortable information about COVID-19 vaccines is that seeing this information may “make some people feel unsafe”. What does this mean precisely?

There are at least two possibilities, and here I’m talking only about those who believe in the narrative. The first is that people may feel unsafe seeing evidence that contradicts what they’ve been told by the authorities, the mainstream media and the social media giants; the ‘safe and effective’ mantra. Watching Tucker Carlson’s review of the evidence might make people feel unsafe, uncertain, sceptical towards the propaganda, relentlessly pushed towards them; this is what happens when you discover you’ve been deceived by someone you trusted. You feel unsafe for you don’t know who to trust any more.

Keep reading

NBC News Advises Parents To Keep Kids Away From “Unvaccinated Individuals”

As winter looms, NBC News has some top tips for parents who are concerned about their children catching respiratory viruses… keep them away from the dirty unvaccinated people.

In a recent segment, an infographic advised that those who want to “protect” their children should wash hands, stay home, get vaccines and “avoid physical interaction with unvaccinated individuals.”

There is no actual evidence that unvaccinated individuals are more at risk of transmitting COVID or that the vaccines prevent the spread of the virus, but never mind that inconvenient distraction.

The anchors then asked medical correspondent Dr. John Torres why more children are now so susceptible to RSV (respiratory syncytial virus), to which he responded “we don’t exactly know why.”

That is also not true, given that the CDC recently issued a report highlighting how a record number of children are now being hospitalised with common colds due to weakened immune systems.

Commenting on the findings, Dr Scott Roberts, a medical director at Yale University stated that lockdowns impacted the ability of children to build up immunity to common illnesses.

Keep reading

Official Data confirms the COVID Vaccine is killing Children – Europe has suffered a 552% increase in Excess Deaths among Children ever since EMA first approved the Pfizer Jab for Kids

On the 28th of May 2021, the European Medicines Agency extended the emergency use authorisation of the Pfizer Covid-19 mRNA injection to children aged 12 to 15. Six months later they extended the emergency use authorisation to 5 to 11-year-olds.

Before they first did this, deaths among children were well below expected levels. But ever since they have increased substantially.

So much so, that by the 6th of November 2022, excess deaths among children across Europe had increased by a shocking 552%. With an 848% increase recorded up to the end of 2021, and a 444% increase recorded so far in 2022.

EuroMOMO is a European Mortality Monitoring Project with official authorisation to collate and publish statistics given to them by the Governments of countries across Europe.

The organisation’s latest publication includes death statistics for 27 participating countries across Europe (they do not include Ukraine) up to week 44 of 2022.

Keep reading

COVID Vaccines Linked To Plummeting Fertility Rate, German Study Finds

An alarming study out of Germany reveals a “strong association” between the COVID-19 vaccine rollout and a sudden and dramatic drop in fertility rates in Germany and Sweden.

According to Germany’s Federal Institute for Population Research, “there is a strong association between the onset of vaccination programmes and the fertility decline nine months after.”

The description of the study explained that the fertility drop did not take place during the pandemic until after the so-called vaccines were introduced.

“Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, several countries faced short-term fertility declines in 2020 and 2021, a development which did not materialize in Scandinavian and German-speaking countries. However, more recent birth statistics show a steep fertility decline in the aftermath of the pandemic in 2022.”

The study noted that Germany saw a 14% decline in Total Fertility Rate (TFR) between 2021-2022, and Sweden saw a 10% drop during the same period.

Additionally, the study made clear that the drop in fertility was not associated with the pandemic policies or COVID, but the jabs.

“There is no association of the fertility trends with changes in unemployment, infection rates, or COVID-19 deaths. However, there is a strong association between the onset of vaccination programmes and the fertility decline nine months after of this onset,” the study noted.

Keep reading

Internal Emails Reveal Democrat Governor Pritzker’s Post-Election Plans to Force All Illinois Children to Get COVID-19 Shots

Top staff to Governor J.B. Pritzker (D-IL) are planning secret post-election preparations to force every child in the state of Illinois to receive a COVID-19 vaccination, or else they will be barred from attending school.

According to the internal emails from the Illinois Department of Public Health obtained by Wood House Substack, Pritzker is allegedly considering including the COVID shot in the school vaccination program.

It can be recalled that the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted to recommend COVID-19 vaccines to be included in the 2023 childhood immunization schedule in 15 unanimous votes.

Following the CDC committee recommendation, Illinois state representative Dagmara Avelar’s office sent an email on October 25th after she received feedback from constituents.

Keep reading

Study Details How Media, Big Tech Censored Doctors and Scientists Who Challenged COVID Narrative

A groundbreaking new scientific paper published Tuesday exposes the suppression and censorship of doctors and medical experts who opposed and challenged the official COVID-19 narrative.

Published in the sociological journal Minerva, “Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics,” details the experiences of medical professionals who spoke out against public health directives, and how they responded to efforts to suppress them.

The paper was co-authored by a team of Israeli and Australian scholars, including Yaffa Shir-Raz of the University of Haifa in Israel, Ety Elisha of The Max Stern Yezreel Valley College in Israel, Brian Martin of the University of Wollongong in Australia, Natti Ronel of Bar Ilan University in Israel, and Josh Guetzkow of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel.

As noted by Dr. Robert Malone, himself an outspoken critic of COVID-19 “orthodoxy,” the publication of this article is particularly significant as Minerva is released by “mainstream academic publisher” Springer, a “Q1 journal in its subfield” of sociology with a “decent” research impact factor in the social sciences — meaning that it enjoys a strong reputation within its academic field.

Malone said the article also is notable because one of its authors, Yaffa Shir-Raz, “broke the story with video from the internal meeting at the Israeli ministry of health” on “how they hid many of the key findings regarding the Pfizer mRNA vaccine adverse effects.”

Keep reading

Largest Funeral Operator in North America Seeing “Unheard of” Revenues

Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (SADS) has been a part of global news coverage for at least a year. The unexpected deaths of adults, including young athletes in their peak, are ignored by federal healthcare regulators, yet the funeral market is reacting to the “unexplained” phenomenon with record profits.

Alex Berenson, a former New York Times reporter, reported on Wednesday on the latest communication between Service Corporation International (SCI), the largest for-profit funeral operator in North America, and its investors. As it appears, “so far in 2022 the company has made almost $500 million in profits,” wrote Berenson, and, after the published phone call on that, SCI’s stock rose 10 percent. 

Eric D. Tanzberger, the chief financial officer and senior vice president of the company, described the company’s performance in 2022 as “very strong,” according to the transcript of the call.

“That’s going to revert to cash outflows related to ICP payments across the entire company in February [of 2023],” he told the investors, adding, “That would be close to 2 times even the targeted ranges.”

Thomas L. Ryan, SCI’s chairman, president, and CEO, plainly said that the uptick in revenues happened at “unheard of” rates:

If you go back in this industry and particularly with SCI, year-to-year you would see the numbers of deaths — probably in one year you may be down 1% or 2%, in the next year you’re up 1% or 2% … you could predict [with] pretty good accuracy over a year and over a big footprint like ours what was probably going to happen…. 2020 comes along, COVID, game-changer, right. We’re having to do at one point of time 20% more funerals which is unheard of in a year versus, let’s say, a year or two before.

Mr. Ryan went on to note that the expectation was for the death rate in 2022 to stabilize at the level of 2019 or slightly exceed it, yet, in reality, “the third quarter of this year, we did 15% more calls than we did in the third quarter of 2019. That is not what anybody would have anticipated and that has just a very de minimis amount of COVID deaths in it.”

Keep reading

Cells Don’t Lie: Cancer is on the Rise Due To mRNA Injections

“The spike protein is a toxin,” says pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole and it is also almost certainly causing cancer in many cases. “We know that the spike protein can induce cancer pathways. It’s happening. Cancers are on the increase across the board,” says Cole. Edify Research and Consulting recently published a report on the rise of cancer due to mRNA injections.

Cole says it doesn’t matter who the manufacturer is, “they all make the spike protein.” Dr. Cole has been a pathologist for 26 years and has “never seen anything like this.” Cole examines blood and performs biopsies on tissue regularly. “Cells don’t lie, clots don’t lie, damaged organs don’t lie,” said Cole in his October 22 interview with Jan Jekielek on Epoch Times TVTrained at the Mayo Clinic, Cole practices “high-volume pathology.”  He believes he has done more biopsies than most biologists—around 500,000, a number that represents the “career of three biologists.” Cole said in an introductory video in the report:

“Lymphomas, leukemias, blood cancers [are on the rise] because that spike goes to the bone marrow. The lipid nanoparticle carries the mRNA to your dividing stem cells. Because it doesn’t stay in the arm, it can go into any cell in your body, and it turns that cell into a spike factory. It inhibits the ability of your DNA to repair itself. It binds to our mitochondria and destroys the energy of our brain cells. [It] Destroys the energy of our liver cells and destroys the energy of any cell that gets into your own immune system, attacks those cells. That spike protein causes mechanisms of cancer in many people. And I’ve been seeing that in the lab. I’ve been having it confirmed by oncologists, radiologists, radiation oncologists, and pathologists all around the world as I travel,”

In another interview with Steve Kirsch on October 16, Cole also states he is seeing people pass away 5 to 6 months after the injection. “The spike protein causes inflammation in the blood vessels, and blood vessels are in every organ of the body,” adds Cole. He contends it is the chronic inflammation in the vessels that can cause chronic disease over time, whether it is coronary disease, cancer, or other potentially fatal diseases. It is important to note that the spike protein present from natural infection clears much more quickly from the human body than does the spike protein from the mRNA injections.

Cole cites Dr. Aseem Malhotra in the UK, whose perfectly healthy father passed his cardiac exam with flying colors but died six months later of “severe coronary disease after his second shot.” Cole maintains the spike protein causes “a smoldering wildfire until the burden of the disease and the burden of the inflammation finally adds up to incompatibility with life.” He adds there is no reason death couldn’t happen even a year after the jab. “Five or six months seems to be the peak,” says Cole. “But there is no reason, based on the lack of studies, that it [death] couldn’t happen within a one-year period of time.” 

The mRNA and Cancer report from Edify Research is divided into three sections of slides which show a statistical correlation “on a specific timeline between U.S. mRNA injection rates and cancer rates.” Part 1 provides key data, graphing data sets for cancers and mRNA injection rates “graphed over time.” Data was collected from the “CDC, The Ethical Skeptic, VAERSanalysisinfo., and teammate John Beaudoin.” The graphs show a strong correlation between mRNA injection and cancers with “high confidence in findings.” The graphs are overlaid with lines for median cancer and median mRNA to minimize the effect of statistical outliers.

Keep reading

As Covid Hit, Washington Officials Traded Stocks With Exquisite Timing

In January 2020, the U.S. public was largely unaware of the threat posed by the virus spreading in China, but health officials were on high alert and girding for a crisis.

A deputy to top health official Anthony Fauci reported 10 sales of mutual funds and stocks totaling between $157,000 and $480,000 that month. Collectively, officials at another health agency, Health and Human Services, reported 60% more sales of stocks and funds in January than the average over the previous 12 months, driven by a handful of particularly active traders.

By March, agencies across the government were working on wide-reaching measures to prop the economy and markets. Then-Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao purchased more than $600,000 in two stock funds while her agency was involved in the pandemic response and her husband, Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell, was leading negotiations over a giant, market-boosting stimulus bill.

And as the government was devising a loan package aimed specifically at helping companies including Boeing Co. and General Electric Co., a Treasury Department official involved in administering the aid acquired shares of both companies.

Federal officials owned millions of dollars of stock in industries most affected by the pandemic and the government’s response. About 240 officials at health agencies and at the Pentagon, a key player in the vaccine rollout, reported owning a total of between $9 million and $28 million in stocks of drug, manufacturing and biotechnology companies that won federal contracts related to Covid-19 in 2020 and 2021, the Journal’s analysis found.

Nearly 400 officials across 50 agencies reported owning stocks in airline, resort, hotel, restaurant and cruise companies in early 2020, the review found.

By March, every major agency was drawn into the pandemic response. That month was the most active for trading by officials across the federal government, including at HHS, in the Journal’s analysis of financial disclosure forms for about 12,000 officials spanning 2016 to 2021. Federal officials reported more than 11,600 trades that month, 44% more than in any other month in the analysis.

The health agencies didn’t respond to requests for comment. A Pentagon spokeswoman said most defense personnel don’t work on matters affecting large defense contractors or affecting the finances of private companies, and said the department is “committed to preventing conflicts of interest.”

Senior federal officials are required to disclose their financial assets and transactions and those of their spouses and dependent children in annual reports.

Federal employees are barred from working on matters in which they have a significant financial stake, from trading on nonpublic information learned on the job and from taking any official action that creates an appearance of a conflict of interest.

Agency ethics officials rarely have a complete picture of what employees are working on or privy to, especially during a fast-moving, governmentwide mobilization in response to a national emergency.

Most agencies’ ethics rules focus on what kinds of stocks officials can trade, not when they can trade. And there are no restrictions on federal officials’ investing in diversified mutual funds, which were more volatile than usual early in the pandemic. Ethics officials certified that the employees identified by the Journal were in compliance with these rules.

Three days into January 2020, top U.S. health officials were alerted to an unexplained virus sickening people in China.

By late January, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention leaders were rushing to develop accurate tests, National Institutes of Health officials were taking the first steps toward developing a vaccine, and the Food and Drug Administration was racing to facilitate prevention and treatment options for the novel coronavirus.

On Jan. 24, four days after the CDC publicly reported the first confirmed U.S. Covid-19 infection, Hugh Auchincloss, principal deputy director at the NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, summed up the state of his agency in an email: “New coronavirus all the time.”

That same day, while the stock market remained lofty, Dr. Auchincloss reported selling $15,001 to $50,000 of a stock mutual fund. Days later he sold two more mutual funds and a stock, Chevron Corp., according to his financial disclosures, which give wide dollar ranges. That was just the beginning.

Dr. Auchincloss was invited to a Jan. 29 meeting of an NIH working group called the International Clinical Research Subcommittee. The top agenda item was “Wuhan coronavirus—plans for a response,” according to emails released in response to public-records requests.

On the last day of January, an email sent to Dr. Auchincloss and his boss, Dr. Fauci, signaled the severity of the threat. Public Health Service officers had been told they could be deployed, a health official wrote, and could assist with “quarantine efforts.”

Dr. Auchincloss disclosed six sales of mutual funds that day, totaling between $111,006 and $315,000 in value.

His January sales amounted to the largest number of transactions he had reported for a single month since 2018, according to his financial disclosures.

Each holding he sold fell sharply in the market downturn that soon followed, as the public and investors started paying attention to the threat posed by Covid-19.

Dr. Auchincloss, who retained some other holdings, didn’t respond to requests for comment. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases declined to make him available for an interview.

The agency said that financial disclosure reports are routinely reviewed by NIH ethics officials to ensure compliance with reporting requirements and resolve potential conflicts of interest. It declined to say whether Dr. Auchincloss made the trades himself or had a managed account.

“As a matter of employee privacy, we will not disclose the additional information requested because it is beyond the public financial disclosure reporting requirements,” the agency said.

Among officials involved in the CDC’s early pandemic response was Stephen Redd, a veteran epidemiologist serving as deputy director for Public Health Service and Implementation Science at the agency. His role involved collecting information about the state of the virus and the federal response in order to brief lawmakers.

The CDC had a clear view of the virus’s threat by the end of January, Dr. Redd later told a student interviewer in Atlanta. “It was easy to see it was going to be a really big problem,” he said.

Dr. Redd disclosed sales of between $95,004 and $250,000 in stocks and bonds in January. He reported the sale in February of $100,001 to $250,000 of bonds, along with purchases of between $2,002 and $30,000 of short-term bond funds, a low-risk investment.

Dr. Redd said he had no advance knowledge of these trades, which he said were in his wife’s retirement account and made by a financial adviser. He said he didn’t learn of them until that summer, although he was required by law to report any trades made in his or his wife’s accounts within 30 days.

He acknowledged that federal officials are “responsible for knowing” about their financial transactions. He said neither he nor his wife knew why the adviser made the trades.

Keep reading