Tag: vaccines

60% of Young People With COVID Vaccine-induced Myocarditis Showed Heart Damage 6 Months Later

Sixty percent of young people who were hospitalized with myocarditis after receiving an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine still showed signs of myocardial injury roughly six months after getting the shot, according to a new peer-reviewed study funded by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Critics said the study authors — who published their report in The Lancet on Sept. 6 — downplayed the seriousness of the study’s findings. They also noted that some authors had ties to the government and Big Pharma that may have influenced the research.

The study authors, led by Dr. Supriya S. Jain, a pediatric cardiologist and researcher at Maria Fareri Children’s Hospital in Valhalla, New York, analyzed health outcome data and biomarkers from 333 patients ages 5-30, from 38 U.S. hospitals, who were diagnosed with COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-induced myocarditis.

The researchers used late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in cardiac MRIs to determine which areas of the patients’ heart tissue were injured.

Gadolinium is a metal used to help doctors see abnormal tissues in MRI scans with more detail, according to Drugwatch. The presence of LGE is often associated with worse outcomes, such as a higher risk of heart failure or arrhythmias, according to Trial Site News in its coverage of the study.

The authors followed up with 307 of the 333 patients by analyzing their health data collected from April 2021 to November 2022. The time between vaccination and follow-up varied, with a median of 178 days.

The results revealed that LGE persisted in the cardiac MRIs of 60% of the patients at the follow-up. Jain and her co-authors called these results “reassuring,” noting that there had not been any reported cardiac-related deaths or heart transplants at the time of writing their report. They recommended “continued clinical surveillance and long-term studies.”

Keep reading

CDC wants to inject BABIES with COVID-19 shots – but they aren’t licensed for kids under 12

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) wants babies to get doses of the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine. However, no COVID-19 vaccine is licensed for children under the age of 12.

According to the public health agency’s guidance issued on Aug. 30, children as young as six months old should get injected with either two doses of the 2024-2025 Moderna COVID-19 vaccine or three doses of the 2024-2025 Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.

For the latest Moderna injection, the CDC recommends that babies get the first dose at six months and the second dose a month after the first. For the latest Pfizer shot, the agency advises that the first dose should be given at six months. The second dose should be given three weeks after the first, and the third dose should be given at least eight weeks after the second.

Following the CDC’s guidance, nine-month-old babies must have been injected with the COVID-19 vaccine to be considered “up to date” with their vaccination. But the problem is that both the latest versions of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines are not licensed for use on children under 12. This is because the Food and Drug Administration only granted emergency use authorization (EUA) for the new vaccines.

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) CEO Mary Holland remarked that the CDC is “absolutely misleading” the public by asserting that COVID-19 vaccines granted EUA are safe and effective. This is because EUA vaccines are not held to the same safety or efficacy standards as licensed vaccines.

“By law, EUA products ‘may be effective’ and they have not undergone the safety testing required to permit licensing. This is one more horrific example of the CDC putting profits before people and acting as an unethical arm of Big Pharma’s marketing operation,” she said.

“The earlier COVID-19 shots have been proven unsafe and ineffective. Now we’re asked to believe that newer versions are miraculously safe and effective?”

Keep reading

Oxford’s new COVID jab aimed to sterilize 60% – 70% of recipients, developer admits

Prof. Sir John Bell, a key figure in the development of the University of Oxford‘s Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “vaccine,” let slip the other day the fact that the school’s latest COVID injection is capable of sterilizing between 60 and 70 percent of those who take it.

In a recent interview about the new shot, Sir John, who teaches medicine at Oxford, seemed to suggest that one of the goals behind these injections is to mass sterilize the planet under the guise of protecting public health against the “COVID virus.”

“These vaccines are unlikely to completely sterilize a population,” Sir John said with seeming disappointment during the interview.

“They’re very likely to have an effect which works in a percentage, say 60 or 70 percent. We’ll have to look quite carefully, and the regulators will have to look quite carefully to make sure that it’s done what we need it to do before it gets approved.”

A clinical trial for the shot is still ongoing and Sir John says there will be a “delay” between when the results are in and when regulators give the shot the green light for public release.

Sir John was barely able to complete his sentence before the interviewer cut him off, apparently to keep him quiet from revealing any further incriminating information about the new Oxford shot.

Keep reading

DEADLY mRNA clot shots revealed to be a MILITARY PROJECT developed by NIH, not Moderna and Pfizer, as we were all led to believe

Did you know that military contractors created the experimental gene therapy injections that trick human cells into producing billions of toxic spike prions in the blood? Did you know that NIH owns 50 percent of the patents for the mRNA vaccines that Moderna and Pfizer pushed out on the populace? Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is blowing the whistle on the whole operation, and should Trump win the presidency this fall, look for the crooks and criminals responsible for this plandemic tragedy to serve hard time in federal prison for it. In fact, Pfizer and Moderna were “paid to put their stamps on those vaccines as if they came from the pharmaceutical industry,” according to RFK Jr., because it was a military project from the very beginning.

Why would the military be involved in developing heart-crippling biological weapons of mass destruction that were distributed and injected into 270 million Americans?

There is a long history of the Communist Chinese Party (CCP) employing their People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to create biowarfare weapons, and now it appears that they partnered with National Institutes of Health (NIH) to use gain-of-function research to create Covid-19, create deadly vaccines to “prevent” it and its spread. Then, the CCP colluded with NIH and pretended that the pharmaceutical industry created the jabs to “save” everyone, even though the spike protein injections are military-grade biological weapons of mass destruction, designed to kill humans and were created for that reason by the military.

Never forget the United States used small pox virus as a biological weapon to wipe out the indigenous Native Americans, so if you’re thinking this coverage of mRNA jabs as biological weapons used by the U.S. military and Big Pharma against Americans is too far-fetched, think again.

Keep reading

Doctors who advise a healthy child to get a 2024 fall booster are committing malpractice

It’s easy to hide behind, “the experts said to do it.” You can point to Peter Marks at FDA or Mandy Cohen at CDC and say they told me to do it. But these people and these agencies have repeatedly displayed that they aren’t capable of good medical advice.

Peter Marks famously demoted Phil Krause at FDA to rush full biological licensing agreement (BLA) for covid vaccines so Biden could ram unethical mandates. Mandy Cohen supported the CDC policy of toddler masking, an illogical idea that punished young kids for no purpose.

Ultimately, however we all own our actions. If you are a doctor, you can’t blame others for the advice you give patients. You have to evaluate the evidence and do what you think is best.

This fall, the US is once again a major global outlier by recommending COVID19 boosters to little children, even those who have already and repeatedly had COVID19. In this essay I am going to argue not only that doctors should not advise parents to give their kids the booster, and not only that the FDA should not have approved it, and the CDC not recommended it: I am going to argue the strongest thesis of all: It is malpractice for a doctor to recommend the booster to children. Consider the case.

Keep reading

The Public is No Longer Listening to Scientific ‘Experts’ and their Covid Vax Propaganda, Making them Upset

The Gateway Pundit explains that scientific ‘experts’ are upset that Covid vax propaganda is not working any more.

Emphases are mine.

Infectious disease experts are upset that four years on from the coronavirus pandemic, members of the public are no longer listening to their “recommendations” regarding vaccines and other supposed prevention methods against COVID-19.

According to a report from the leftist The Guardian newspaper, infectious disease experts are complaining that COVID-19 is still a massive threat to the public and people need to continue taking booster vaccines at every opportunity.

The report states:

Infectious disease experts say many people are not taking the latest Covid-19 wave in the US seriously enough and are not getting vaccinated or using antiviral drugs when sick, despite a summer wave that was larger and came earlier than anticipated.

Epidemiologists are saying that while symptoms of this wave are more mild than earlier strains, the virus remains a threat – particularly for older adults and people with underlying health conditions.

In response, public health officials are urging people to get a booster now – unless they recently had Covid, in which case they should wait three to four months – and to take a rapid test when sick. And if they have Covid, they should ask their doctors about antiviral treatments.

For the benefit of newcomers, if you have Covid, your God-given immune system produced antibodies against it; that’s why you don’t need a shot.

The rapid test and the PCR test don’t diagnose anything. They are laden with false positives – don’t do a PCR test because you could die from it!

Keep reading

Bill Gates Wants AI-Based Real-Time Censorship for Vaccine “Misinformation”

Microsoft founder Bill Gates continues with his crusade, as part of the mission of the Gates Foundation, to not only proliferate the use of vaccines but find new justifications to in effect, force them onto those skeptical or unwilling.

One of the methods Gates has clearly identified as helpful in achieving this goal is hitching his “vaccine wagon” to the massive, ongoing scaremongering campaign and narrative around “misinformation” and “AI.”

Gates spoke for CNBC to reveal he may be a vaccine absolutist – but not a free-speech one. He also didn’t sound convinced that America’s Constitution and its speech protections are the right way to go when he brought up the need for “boundaries” allowing some new “rules.”

Gates’ argument incorporates all the main talking points against free speech: misinformation, incorrect information (aka, fake news), violence, and online harassment. And, he sneaked in vaccines in there, while making a case for “rules” in the US as well.

“We should have free speech, but if you’re inciting violence, if you’re causing people not to take vaccines, where are those boundaries that even the US should have rules? And then if you have rules, what is it?” Gates is quoted as saying.

Keep reading

Unlawful Discrimination

In the wake of governmental actions during the pandemic, much of the public discourse has focused on individuals who suffered physical or financial injury due to vaccine-related mandates. However, a lesser-explored but equally significant group is those who resisted these mandates for personal, medical, or ethical reasons. As highlighted in the article, “Government Negligence in Pandemic Response,” there were potential breaches of duty by the government in rolling out unproven or harmful treatments, but there are additional implications for those who were indirectly harmed by resisting pandemic policies. This article explores the legal avenues these individuals might pursue, focusing on unlawful discrimination, economic losses, and the broader concept of public authority misuse.

The Legal Foundation for Claims

While individuals who experienced vaccine-related injuries may have clearer paths to compensation, those who resisted mandates may also have endured substantial harm—such as loss of income, restrictions on freedom of movement, and social exclusion. Their legal recourse could vary significantly based on the context, jurisdiction, and the specific nature of their resistance. Below, we explore key areas where legal claims may arise.

1. Loss of Income

One of the most direct and widespread effects of resisting pandemic mandates was loss of income. Many individuals faced termination, suspension, or reduced employment opportunities due to their refusal to comply with vaccine mandates. Employment-related claims often center around wrongful dismissal, constructive dismissal, or discrimination in the workplace. However, the pandemic created a new legal frontier, raising questions such as whether vaccine mandates violated constitutional rights or unfairly discriminated against those who refused compliance.

Potential Violations of Constitutional Rights

In many jurisdictions, the right to work and the right to make personal medical decisions are fundamental legal principles. Mandates requiring medical interventions, such as vaccination, could be challenged as potential violations of bodily autonomy or personal choice. For example, individuals who refused vaccination for personal or religious reasons may argue that they were coerced into choosing between their job and their bodily autonomy. This argument could gain traction in contexts where courts have recognized an individual’s right to refuse medical treatment, provided that such refusal does not pose a direct and imminent threat to others.

Possible Discrimination Based on Medical Choice

A particularly contentious issue is whether being terminated for refusing vaccination constitutes discrimination. While personal medical choices are not universally recognized as a protected category under anti-discrimination laws, some legal arguments might focus on whether pandemic mandates created new grounds for exclusion or inequality. This could be compared to other forms of discrimination, such as those based on religious beliefs or personal health conditions. Some individuals may explore claims arguing that vaccine mandates disproportionately impacted them based on philosophical beliefs, religious values, or even pre-existing medical conditions that precluded vaccination.

Keep reading

Real-Time Self-Assembly of Stereomicroscopically Visible Artificial Constructions in Incubated Specimens of mRNA Products Mainly from Pfizer and Moderna: A Comprehensive Longitudinal Study

In the early days of the push to her dearth’s population into the COVID-19 global “vaccine”experiment, a small number of medical doctors and independent researchers began raising concerns about the observed ineffectiveness, even negative impact,of the modified-RNA injectables(Beattie, 2021; Hughes, 2022; Santiago, 2022; Nyström and Hammarström, 2022).In addition to questions raised about their ingredients, the irreported mode of defending the body focused on inducing serum-neutralizing antibody IgG production instead of generating more effective secretory antibodies (IgA). The latter in the respiratory mucosa have always served as the principal line of natural defense against viral respiratory infections. Given the possibility that new variants of SARS-CoV-2 could be rapidly induced by billions of injections being promoted by authorities worldwide, increasing numbers of deaths were attributed to strains of SARS-CoV-2and severe sequelae (Lyons-Weiler, 2020; Vojdani & Kharrazian, 2020; Vojdani et al., 2021)leading to many deaths in population centers around the world(Beattie, 2021). Official Korean Government reports as of December 2022, for example, showed approximately 2,600 deaths and more than 18,000 other acute sequelae from the COVID-19 injectables. The contradiction between claims of efficacy and material evidence of harm is inescapable: South Korea could claim one of the highest vaccination rates in the world (88% jabbed at least 3 times) while effectively, thereafter, also exhibiting the highest infection rate (89%) in April 2022when flu season and respiratory colds are at a minimum. These facts alone are signs that the injectables provided no protection and were not preventing COVID-19. The reverse was the case. The injectables were neither safe nor effective. These figures alone should motivate physicians and medical researchers to reconsider the maxim that “correlation does not equal causation”. In some instances, it does (Beattie, 2021, 2024).Here,we show observable real-time correlations between causes and effects in the living cells of human beings as they react to the toxicity of COVID-19 injectables.We also show microscopic evidence of self-assembling structures appearing in various media in which the fluid from COVID-19 injectables, particularly, Pfizer and Moderna products, were incubated for up to 12months or more.In the wake of the mass vaccination program,by as early as March 2021and over the following months, significant increases in excess deaths of “unknown” causes and severe sequelae —blood clots, inexplicable haemorrhaging, multiple organ damage (and failure), sudden spikes (cardiotoxins) in heart disease, blood cancers including leukemia and lymphoma, a range of other “turbo” cancers, miscarriages, neurological and autoimmune disorders, to name a few, have appeared in patients(Nyström and Hammarström, 2022; Santiago & Oller, 2023; Perez et al., 2023; Mead et al., 2024a1).These observations spurred our interest in examining the larger picture both in society and in the laboratory where clearer images of the injectable contents themselves could be subjected to careful analysis under the microscope. This report of our results was aided by the independent research of a cohort known as Korea Veritas Doctors (KoVeDoc) with whom we shared injectables manufactured by Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca,and Novavax. All of these were widely used throughout South Korea. These products appeared to cause a range of negative health effects in patients: advanced stages of aggressive breast cancer,dysfunctional uterine bleeding, spontaneous abortion, sudden increases in heart disease (dyspnea and palpitations), pneumothorax disease, multiple skin diseases, and rapid onset of aggravated autoimmune conditions.

Keep reading

VA whistleblower exposes the official VA medical claims data showing the COVID shots are a healthcare disaster

Yesterday, I received the official VA health claims data for the last 20 years from Sonny Fleeman, a signatory of the Declaration of Military Accountability and a member of Feds For Freedom.

In this video, Sonny explains how Veterans can get compensated for their injuries.

In this article, I’ll be releasing the data for the very first time so you can see for yourself whether you think the shots were helpful or harmful.

I’ll also show you conditions that were elevated by 50% or more from 2020 rates and I’ll go into detail on a few of them.

The VA is ignoring all these safety signals and not warning veterans about the possibility the shots could be unsafe. Instead, the VA is blindly trusting the CDC and ignoring their own data. They should be held accountable because by refusing to look at their own data, they are killing people. Too bad nobody in Congress will bring this data to their attention.

Keep reading