Tag: vaccines

Organ-Specific Harms from the COVID Vaccines and Ingredients

I wrote the most thoroughly researched book to date on the mechanisms of harms to multiple bodily organs and systems following the COVID vaccines, especially the mRNA vaccines. That is in its 3rd edition, Neither Safe Nor Effective: The Evidence Against the COVID Vaccines, in which I cite over 1,000 studies from the peer-reviewed published medical literature. https://www.amazon.com/Neither-Safe-Nor-Effective-Evidence/dp/B0F1ZJGYKG

I have to admit that it is hard to follow these studies on either e-book or print format. So I summarized some of the largest studies involving the major organ systems affected, in the following tables. The 4th column in each of the tables below directs the reader to either the PMC number or a link to the study on PubMed in the footnotes following the tables. “PMC 1234567” for example should go directly to that study from a Google search. The last two columns in the tables below list the page and endnote in my print book, for another way of arriving at the same studies.

Keep reading

Lawyer Suing Gates & Bourla for Covid VAX Injuries Arrested and Imprisoned in Netherlands

In a stunning expression of the Globalist-Fascist takeover of the Netherlands, the Netherlands police have arrested Arno van Kessel, the lead attorney suing Bill Gates, Albert Bourla, Mark Rutte et al. for COVID-19 vaccine injuries.

The civil process was scheduled to begin on July 9; Mr. van Kessel was arrested in a Gestapo-reminiscent early morning raid by paramilitary police on June 11, where he was reportedly blindfolded, bound, and taken into detention, where he remains almost two months later.

Readers will note my tardiness in reporting this stunning story. The reason is because both the European and the American press have completely ignored both the civil trial against Gates, Bourla, Rutte et al. and van Kessel’s arrest.

I knew nothing about van Kessel’s arrest until last night, when my co-author, Dr. Peter McCullough, forwarded to me a report by INFOWARS journalist, Adan Salazar. Once again, the so-called “conspiracy theorist” Alex Jones has proven to be one of the first guys to report the shocking reality of what is going on.

Salazar’s report prompted me to do a Google Netherlands search with the key words Arno van Kessel gearresteerd — that is, “Arno van Kessel arrested”—and I got one search result for a June 27 report in an independent online journal called Der Andere Krant (The Other Newspaper). The following is an English translation.

Arno van Kessel will be held in custody for an additional ninety days because the Public Prosecution Service continues to designate him as a “suspect in an investigation into a criminal network,” yet without presenting any evidence. This means the Leeuwarden lawyer will definitely not be present at the public hearing on July 9th in the Leeuwarden District Court, where the first substantive hearing in the internationally high-profile case against, among others, the State of the Netherlands, Mark Rutte, and Bill Gates is scheduled. His partner, Peter Stassen, is on his own, but says he will “appear fully equipped.”

In early June, this newspaper reported that there was finally some progress in the internationally high-profile lawsuit by Leeuwarden lawyer Arno van Kessel https://deanderekrant.nl/nieuw-hoofdstuk-in-rechtszaak-tegen-bill-gates-en-mark-rutte/and his Eindhoven colleague Peter Stassen. In 2023, the legal duo announced they would file legal proceedings against Bill Gates, Mark Rutte, and the Dutch State, among others. On behalf of their clients, they want to force the judge to issue a clear ruling on the question: was the COVID-19 mRNA injection a vaccine for the benefit of the population’s health, or a bioweapon? Van Kessel said: “It’s one or the other, and there’s no in between.”

The Northern Netherlands District Court, Leeuwarden location, announced in early June 2025 – finally – that the first substantive hearing of the case is scheduled for July 9th. On Wednesday morning, June 11th, there was a completely unexpected turn of events. Arno van Kessel was dragged from his bed early in the morning by a special intervention team with a considerable display of force. The lawyer, his daughter, and his wife were even briefly held at gunpoint.

A day later, the police published a report on the website politie.nl linking Van Kessel to “a criminal network.” According to a press release issued by the Public Prosecution Service, eight people were arrested that morning for “adhering to anti-institutional ideology and possibly intending to use violence.” One of them was quickly released, while the other seven were held in restricted custody for two weeks, meaning the suspects were not allowed any contact with the outside world. Van Kessel – as was announced last week – was being held in a cell in Vught.

In recent weeks, several stories have appeared in the mainstream media about a network of so-called sovereigns. These “anti-institutionalists” may have been planning something related to the NATO summit. Weapons and explosives may have been found, but any hard evidence or substantiation remains lacking to this day. The suggestion that Van Kessel is also part of a dangerous criminal group has been raised. The charges have since been partially withdrawn. The AD newspaper reported last week that the Public Prosecution Service has been unable to substantiate a plan to disrupt the NATO summit. “We have investigated whether there is an imminent threat. This has not been proven.”

On Thursday, June 26, the Public Prosecution Service released more news after a long silence. One suspect has been released, but “six suspects in the investigation into a criminal network, in which a large proportion of the arrested suspects espouse anti-institutional ideology and may have the intention to use violence, will remain in custody for an additional 90 days,” the Public Prosecution Service announced. Van Kessel is one of those suspects who will remain in custody for another 90 days. The Public Prosecution Service states that it needs more time for the investigation and that “given the state of the investigation, it is not possible to respond substantively to questions about the progress, suspicions, and findings,” according to the Public Prosecution Service.

Keep reading

House probes whether EU, Biden administration pushed Spotify to censor podcasters including Joe Rogan, Steve Bannon

The House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday launched an investigation into whether the EU and Biden administration pressured Spotify to censor free speech, The Post has learned.

Censorship has been a point of tension for Spotify, which has faced heated backlash for flagging COVID-19 information from podcaster Joe Rogan and banning Steve Bannon from the platform.

“More relevantly, it’s the pressure we are seeing the EU put on companies to censor more,” a source familiar with the probe told The Post.

In a letter sent to Spotify CEO Daniel Ek, US Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) slammed recent laws from the EU and UK that require social media platforms – even those based in the US – to censor “disinformation” and “harmful content” or face massive fines.

“These foreign laws, regulations, and judicial orders may limit or restrict Americans’ access to constitutionally protected speech in the United States. Indeed, that appears to be their very purpose,” Jordan wrote in a copy of the letter obtained by The Post.

Keep reading

New bill dismantles vaccine liability shield, seeks justice for the injured

For nearly four decades, vaccine manufacturers have operated with near-total legal immunity, shielded from accountability when their products injure or kill. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986—sold as a way to ensure vaccine availability—has instead become a corporate protection racket, denying justice to thousands of families while allowing pharmaceutical giants to profit without consequence. Now, a bold new bill, H.R. 4668—the End the Vaccine Carveout Act—introduced by Rep. Paul Gosar, seeks to dismantle this corrupt system, restoring the right of injured individuals to sue vaccine manufacturers directly. If passed, this legislation could finally force the industry to answer for its failures, remove dangerous products from the market, and compensate those who have suffered in silence for far too long.

Key points:

  • The 1986 NCVIA granted vaccine manufacturers blanket immunity from lawsuits, funneling injury claims into a flawed federal compensation program (VICP) that rejects nearly half of all cases.
  • The VICP operates as a “kangaroo court,” with strict criteria that prevent most families from receiving justice, while manufacturers face zero financial or legal consequences.
  • COVID-19 vaccines were further shielded under the PREP Act, preventing victims from suing—but H.R. 4668 would remove this protection.
  • The bill eliminates the statute of limitations for filing claims, allowing retroactive cases and giving families long denied justice a chance at restitution.
  • Vaccine manufacturers have avoided rigorous safety testing, relying on short-term studies and non-inert placebos, while enjoying guaranteed profits from government-mandated schedules.

The 1986 betrayal: How Congress sold out families to protect Big Pharma

The origins of the NCVIA trace back to the early 1980s, when lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers—particularly over the DTP (diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis) vaccine—began piling up. Parents of children left with seizures, brain damage, and even death were winning multi-million-dollar settlements, threatening the financial stability of pharmaceutical companies. Instead of demanding safer vaccines, Congress caved to industry pressure, passing a law that stripped families of their right to sue.

Under the NCVIA, all injury claims were redirected to the VICP—a system critics call a “kangaroo court” where the deck is stacked against victims. The burden of proof is impossibly high, the definitions of “vaccine injury” are arbitrarily narrow, and the process drags on for years. Even when families win, compensation is often a pittance compared to the lifelong medical costs of caring for an injured child. Meanwhile, manufacturers continue raking in billions, shielded from any real accountability.

A rigged system: How the VICP denies justice

The VICP is not a court—it’s a bureaucratic maze designed to protect the industry. Unlike civil lawsuits, where discovery processes and jury trials expose corporate misconduct, the VICP operates behind closed doors. Cases are decided by a “Special Master,” not a judge, and plaintiffs are barred from presenting key evidence. Worse, the program is funded by a 75-cent excise tax on each vaccine dose—meaning the public, not the manufacturers, foots the bill for injuries.

Consider the case of Hannah Poling, a child who developed autism and encephalopathy after receiving nine vaccines in a single day. Though the government conceded her injuries were vaccine-related, her family spent years fighting for compensation. Thousands of others aren’t so lucky—their claims dismissed outright because their child’s condition isn’t on the VICP’s narrowly defined “injury table.”

COVID-19 vaccines: The ultimate liability scam

The PREP Act, passed in 2005, expanded Big Pharma’s liability shield to include “countermeasures” during public health emergencies—like COVID-19 vaccines. This meant that even as reports of heart inflammation, blood clots, and neurological damage surged, victims had no legal recourse. H.R. 4668 would strip COVID-19 vaccines of this special protection, allowing injured individuals to sue manufacturers directly.

Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson have made billions while dodging accountability. Internal documents reveal they knew about risks—like myocarditis in young males—yet downplayed them. Under the current system, they face zero consequences. But if H.R. 4668 passes, the floodgates could open, forcing these companies to answer for their negligence in real courts, before real juries.

Keep reading

Defense Department Continues Ignoring Harms to Readiness by Pushing Flu Shots Contrary to Large Body of Evidence

After the tyrannical enforcement of the now-rescinded 2021 COVID-19 shot mandate, now determined to be “unlawful as implemented,” skepticism of all vaccines has clearly increased throughout the military community.

Sadly, some service members are facing punitive actions for objecting to the flu shot, having argued it is ineffective and detrimental to not only their health, but also their religious convictions. An anonymous Marine officer and Air Force Major Brennan Schilperoort share a similar moral and religious objection to the shot, while also suffering adverse effects from a previous injection. Additionally, both officers have also shown natural immunity.

Rather than recognizing their Constitutionally protected religious rights to substantiate their objection, the military has decided to separate both individuals from service. Although Maj. Schilperoort’s pay was restored by the Air Force, it must be noted Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is aware of their situation, but has thus far remained silent on the issue of separation over the flu shot.

The Gateway Pundit spoke to independent journalist Jeremy Hammond, whose articles about the flu shot have elicited high praise from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

For Hammond, “The coerced vaccination of military service members is yet another unfortunate example of how the government systematically violates individuals’ right to informed consent.” He explained, “This policy exists despite scientific evidence indicating that getting an annual flu shot can actually increase the risk of influenza illness.”

A Cleveland Clinic study of their 54,402 employees during the 2024-2025 flu season found the flu shot was not effective in preventing the transmission of the respiratory illness. Results of the study can be found at MedRxiv, pronounced “med-archive,” an online platform used to share “preprints” in the medical, clinical, and health science fields.

The manuscript is a preprint, meaning it has not been peer-reviewed. Thus, “it reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice,” according to the site.

While some might question the validity and reliability of the research as a result, preprints are also known to allow for quicker dissemination of research, provide opportunities for feedback from the scientific community, or could simply be considered an early version of the research manuscript.

With these parameters in place to consider, the study found “in an analysis adjusted for age, sex, clinical nursing job, and employment location, the risk of influenza was significantly higher for the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated state, yielding a calculated vaccine effectiveness of −26.9%” [emphasis added]. Therefore, based on this data, it can be stated vaccinated individuals were 27 percent more likely to get the flu.

Keep reading

Landmark Stanford Study Finds COVID Jabs ‘Saved Far Fewer Lives Than First Thought’

A major study by Stanford University and Italian researchers has found that the COVID-19 vaccine saved far fewer lives than originally thought.

The World Health Organization previously asserted that the jabs prevented as many as 14.4 million deaths in their first year, with some estimates going as high as 20 million.

Yet according to this latest study, the actual number of lives saved globally throughout the entire pandemic is likely closer to 2.5 million.

The data suggests that the vast majority of those spared were elderly, with roughly 90% of prevented deaths occurring among individuals over 60.

Among younger groups, the numbers were strikingly low: just 299 lives saved worldwide among people under 20, and 1,808 in the 20 to 30 age bracket.

The study also quantified the number of vaccinations needed to save a single life.

Across all ages, an average of 5,400 doses were required per life saved. For those under 30, that figure soared to 100,000 jabs.

Researchers also questioned the rationale behind blanket vaccine mandates, particularly for low-risk populations, and criticised the excessive drive to vaccinate all individuals regardless of age or vulnerability.

Keep reading

Calls Grow For Journal To Retract Danish Study After Corrected Data Show Link Between Aluminum And Vaccines

The authors of a recent Danish study widely reported on by mainstream media claimed they found no link between the aluminum in vaccines and autism.

However, corrected data added after the study’s original July 15 publication date show the authors got it wrong — in fact, the data in the study of 1.2 million children clearly indicate a link between aluminum in vaccines and autism, according to scientists with Children’s Health Defense (CHD) who reviewed the study and the corrected data.

On July 17, the Annals of Internal Medicine, which published the Danish study, added a disclaimer stating that it “included an incorrect version of the Supplementary Material at the time of initial publication.”

The updated materials are available with the link to the study at “Correction: Aluminum-Adsorbed Vaccines and Chronic Diseases in Childhood.”

CHD Senior Research Scientist Karl Jablonowski broke the news of the buried autism link on Monday’s episode of “Good Morning, CHD.” Today, Jablonowski told The Defender:

“According to the corrected data, nearly 10 (9.7) of every 10,000 children who were vaccinated with a higher dose of aluminum (compared to a moderate dose) developed a neurodevelopmental disorder — mostly autism — between ages 2 and 5.”

Keep reading

U.S. To Eliminate Mercury-Based Preservative From All Flu Vaccines

The Department of Health and Human Services announced Wednesday that it will fully eliminate thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative, from flu vaccines, following a formal recommendation by a federal advisory panel.

The move marks a significant shift in vaccine policy after years of mounting concern over mercury exposure, particularly in children. 

Last month, the ACIP voted to limit flu vaccines to only those free of thimerosal. The mercury-containing preservative, largely phased out of childhood vaccines by 2001, still lingers in some multi-dose flu shots. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., on Tuesday signed the advisory board’s recommendations, the department said Wednesday. –Just the News

“After more than two decades of delay, this action fulfills a long-overdue promise to protect our most vulnerable populations from unnecessary mercury exposure,” Kennedy said in a statement. “Injecting any amount of mercury into children when safe, mercury-free alternatives exist defies common sense and public health responsibility. Today, we put safety first.”

Kennedy added: “With the U.S. now removing mercury from all vaccines, we urge global health authorities to follow this prudent example for the protection of children worldwide.”

Thimerosal, first introduced in the 1930s to prevent microbial contamination in multi-dose vaccine vials, was largely removed from childhood immunizations by 2001. However, it remained in some adult flu shots and doses provided through multi-use vials, which have been favored for their efficiency in mass vaccination settings.

The renewed push to remove thimerosal gained traction in the late 1990s, after the FDA Modernization Act of 1997 mandated a review of mercury in medical products. In recent decades, growing public and scientific scrutiny of cumulative mercury exposure – particularly among infants and pregnant women – has led to calls for reform.

According to HHS, 96 percent of flu vaccines for the 2024–2025 season are already thimerosal-free, meaning the transition to single-dose, preservative-free vials is unlikely to disrupt supply. Vaccine manufacturers have assured the agency that they can meet demand for both adult vaccinations and the Vaccines for Children program.

Keep reading

New York Teachers Fired for Refusing COVID Vaccines Take Case to U.S. Supreme Court

A group of 19 teachers who sued the city of New York after they were denied religious exemptions from COVID-19 vaccine mandates are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review lower court rulings, which they allege unconstitutionally favored some religious beliefs over others.

In a petition filed Monday, the teachers allege that New York City granted religious exemptions only to people who belonged to religions whose leaders had not publicly endorsed COVID-19 vaccination.

The city denied requests by teachers who applied for exemptions based on personal religious beliefs that contradicted their religious leaders’ official support of the vaccines, the appeal said.

Michael Kane, a plaintiff in the case and founder of Teachers for Choice, said:

“What New York City did was so egregious. To allow this to stand sets a horrendous precedent for my children and grandchildren. The discrimination was so intense and constitutionally shoddy it must not be permitted.”

According to Kane, most of the teachers are “still out of work or doing odd jobs, making half their previous income.”

Although New York City Mayor Eric Adams rescinded the mandate in February 2023, the city didn’t rehire the teachers.

The case stems from two lawsuits filed in 2021 challenging New York City’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate and its denials of the religious exemption requests: Kane v. de Blasio and Keil v. City of New York. Children’s Health Defense is supporting the combined lawsuit.

Several lower courts, including the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in November 2024, ruled against the teachers.

The New York City Department of Education, its Chancellor, Melissa Aviles-Ramos, and New York City Health Commissioner Ashwin Vasan are among the defendants named in the combined lawsuit.

Keep reading

Govt. Researchers: Flu Shots Not Effective in Elderly, After All

Dr. Reichert: “We realized we had incendiary material.”

Dr. Reichert said the researchers thought their study would prove flu vaccinations helped.

Dr. Reichert: “We were trying to do something mainstream. That’s for sure.”

Sharyl: “Were you surprised?”

Dr. Reichert: “Astonished.”

Sharyl: “Did you check the data a couple of times to make sure?”

Dr. Reichert: “Well, even more than that. We’ve looked at other countries now and the same is true.”

An important and definitive “mainstream” government study done nearly two decades ago got little attention because the science came down on the wrong side.

It found that after decades and billions of dollars spent promoting flu shots for the elderly, the mass vaccination program did not result in saving lives. In fact, the death rate among the elderly increased substantially.

The authors of the study admitted a pro-vaccine bias going into the study. Here was the history as described to me: Public health experts long assumed flu shots were effective in the elderly. But, paradoxically, all the best studies done on the question failed to demonstrate a benefit. Instead of considering that they, the experts, could be wrong–instead of believing the scientific data–the public health experts assumed the studies were wrong. After all, flu shots have to work, right?

So the NIH launched an effort to do “the” definitive study that would actually prove, for the first time, once and for all, that flu shots were beneficial to the elderly. The government would gather some of the brightest scientific minds for the research, and adjust for all kinds of factors that could be masking that presumed benefit.

Keep reading