India Top Ct Rules the Right to Bodily Integrity Includes the Right to Refuse COVID Shots. Finds No Basis for Discriminatory Treatment of Unvaxed b/c They Don’t Pose Any Greater Risk to Spread COVID

/

From [HERE] The Supreme Court of India Monday held that the right to bodily integrity of a person includes the right to refuse vaccination under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

The present writ petition was filed by Dr. Jacob Puliyel, a former member of the National Technical Advisory Group of Immunization. The petition challenged the constitutional validity of the vaccine mandates imposed by states like Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. The petitioner also raised issues of non-disclosure of vaccine trial data, improper collection and reporting of Adverse Events Following Immunisation (AEFIs) and vaccination of children.

The petitioner’s [low budget] case was limited however as it appeared to rest on scientific and newspaper articles as opposed to actual in court expert testimony directly from the doctors and researches themselves.

The Government also contended the ambit of judicial review on the present matter, and the court clarified that it can decide an issue if:

  • It violates articles of the Constitution;

  • It dehors the provisions of the Act and the regulations;

  • The delegatee has acted beyond its power of delegation; or

  • If the executive policy is contrary to the statutory or a larger policy.

The government has the authority to impose limits on individual rights in the name of public health, but those restrictions must fulfill the court’s three-part legality, genuine necessity and proportionality test established in the Puttaswamy decision.

The court found that mandatory vaccination imposed by various state governments and other authorities in the consideration of the COVID-19 pandemic is “not proportionate” because no sufficient evidence has been presented on the record to establish that the risk of COVID-19 virus transmission from unvaccinated people is higher than from vaccinated people. The court found it undisputed that

“an unvaccinated person does not pose a greater risk than a vaccinated person in terms of transmission of the infection.”

It also stated,

“neither the Union of India nor the State Governments have produced any material before this Court to justify the discriminatory treatment of unvaccinated individuals in public places by imposition of vaccine mandates.”

The court further ordered the Government to publish reports on AEFIs from the general public and physicians on a publicly accessible basis without jeopardising the privacy of those who report adverse events. Lastly, on the issue of vaccination of children, the court held that it won’t second guess the opinion provided by the experts and vaccination shall continue as per global standards and practices.

CDC finds majority of Americans have natural immunity against COVID

/

From [HERE] A new CDC study shows that the record number of infections during the Omicron wave gave many Americans infection-induced immunity. Between December 2021 and February 2022, the estimated percentage of the U.S. population with infection-induced antibodies increased from 34% to 58% across all age groups. The largest increases were in children and adolescents (see figure below).

Here are the details from the CDC report:

During December 2021–February 2022, overall U.S. seroprevalence increased from 33.5% (95% CI = 33.1–34.0) to 57.7% (95% CI = 57.1–58.3). 

Over the same period, seroprevalence increased from 44.2% (95% CI = 42.8–45.8) to 75.2% (95% CI = 73.6–76.8) among children aged 0–11 years and from 45.6% (95% CI = 44.4–46.9) to 74.2% (95% CI = 72.8–75.5) among persons aged 12–17 years. [Note the very high levels reached for children.]

Seroprevalence increased from 36.5% (95% CI = 35.7–37.4) to 63.7% (95% CI = 62.5–64.8) among adults aged 18–49 years, 28.8% (95% CI = 27.9–29.8) to 49.8% (95% CI = 48.5–51.3) among those aged 50–64 years, and from 19.1% (95% CI = 18.4–19.8) to 33.2% (95% CI = 32.2–34.3) among those aged ≥65 years.

Look at the figure below to more clearly see how the natural immunity increased for different age groups. [MORE]

James Clyburn and Maxine Waters are Among the Congressional Puppeticians Pressuring the FDA to Inject Infants and Children with Experimental, Deadly COVID Treatments

/

From [HERE] There is probably no other single issue in American politics today that unites both Democrats and Republicans more than the topic of vaccines, and especially the topic of COVID-19 experimental “vaccines” and issuing as many emergency use authorizations (EUAs) as possible to inject as many people as possible with these deadly shots.

You cannot hold a political office at the federal level today if you are anti-vaccine. Being pro-vaccine and supporting Big Pharma is a requirement for both Democrats and Republicans who want to be elected, and it is the one issue that both previous U.S. President Donald Trump and current U.S. President Joe Biden agree on today.

A group of pro-child abuse and pro-attempted murder of babies and young children members of Congress are now pressuring the FDA to approve COVID-19 vaccines for babies and young children under the age of 5.

They are the members of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, originally setup in April of 2020 under then President Donald Trump, and they are upset that the FDA has not issued an EUA for babies and children under the age of 5 so that parents can attempt to murder and abuse their children with one of these deadly shots.

Fierce Pharma reports:

Even though most people in the U.S. have been eligible for COVID-19 vaccines and boosters for quite some time, children under 5 still don’t have vaccine options. Now, lawmakers are asking the FDA to lay out its plans in this age group⁠—and address a perceived delay for Moderna’s product.

Yesterday, Congress’s Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis sent a letter (PDF) to FDA Commissioner Robert Califf, M.D., requesting a briefing on the status of COVID-19 vaccines for the under 5 age group.

The letter comes after U.S. chief medical adviser Anthony Fauci, M.D., indicated on CNN that the FDA is considering holding off on reviewing Moderna’s vaccine candidate in order to authorize it at the same time as Pfizer’s to “not confuse people” with a staggered rollout, the lawmakers wrote. That could lead to a potential delay of several weeks for Moderna’s shot, they said.

Moderna reportedly plans to submit its vaccine for the under-5 age group by the end of April. Pfizer, for its part, is prepping a filing for June, the lawmakers wrote.

Congress is hopeful that the FDA briefing requested would provide scientific rationale for the potential Moderna delay. (Full article.)

These members of Congress are complicit with the criminal act of attempted murder against the nation’s babies and children, and I encourage everyone who reads this to contact them and let them know that they will be held accountable for their actions, if not in this life, then when they die and meet their Creator.

England’s National Health Service Data Shows that Only 5,115 People Died Solely Due to COVID. The Remaining 109k Deaths Occurred to Persons who Had Fatal Pre-existing Conditions such as Heart Disease

/

From [HERE] The UK Government claims over 160,000 people have died of Covid-19 in England since March 2020, and they have used these claimed deaths to frighten people into compliance with ridiculous rules for the past two years. 

But reports published by England’s National Health Service (NHS) reveal that as of 20th April 2022, just 5,115 people have died of Covid-19 in England since the alleged pandemic began. 

And the same reports also reveal that Covid-19 deaths have increased by 176% compared to the number of alleged deaths that occurred prior to the first Covid-19 injection being administered in England. Is this what we would expect to see if the jabs are 95% effective at preventing death? 

The NHS has been publishing a weekly report on the number of Covid-19 deaths to have occurred in England’s hospitals since the beginning of the alleged Covid-19 pandemic. 

Heres the table taken from the ‘COVID-19 total deaths – weekly summaries’ report published 21st April 2022 – 

Source

The report shows us that the NHS claim 114,721 people have died in hospitals in England after testing positive for Covid-19 since March 2020. But what’s suprising here is the extremely low number of people who had no pre-existing conditions and have died of Covid-19 alone. 

Of the 114,721 deaths just 5,115 have been solely attributed to Covid-19, and 109,606 deaths have occurred among people suffering with pre-existing conditions such as chronic kidney disease, chronic pulmonary disease, and heart disease among several others. 

This equates to just 4.45% of all alleged Covid-19 deaths since March 2020 being solely due to Covid-19. Yet the UK Government claims over 150,000 people have died of Covid-19 in England within 28 days of a positive test since March 2020. 

However, there is something else that is unusual about these figures that can only be realised once we look at the numbers in a historical report.

The first Covid-19 injection was administered in England on the 9th December 2020, and as we will all know through endless propaganda, it was claimed to be 95% effective at preventing infection, hospitalisation and death. 

The claim that it was 95% effective at preventing infection is both deeply troubling and hilarious when you look at the Covid-19 case rates in England at the moment. Official data from the UK Health Security Agency shows the Covid-19 case-rates per 100,000 are highest among the triple vaccinated in all age groups. 

The data actually shows Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness against infection has fallen to minus-391% among triple jabbed 60-69-year-olds, and between minus-298% and minus-324% among those aged 30 to 59.

All other age groups have also suffered a significant drop in vaccine effectiveness with figures showingall triple vaccinated adults now between 3 and 5 times more likely to be infected with Covid-19 than unvaccinated adults. [MORE]

Economics Professor at Michigan State University Estimates that COVID Injections Have Killed at Least 300,000 Americans

/

How Many People Died from the Covid-19 Inoculation? An Estimate Based on a Survey of the United States Population (Working Paper)

By Mark Skidmore

Mark Skidmore is Professor of Economics at Michigan State University where he holds the Morris Chair in State and Local Government Finance and Policy. His research focuses on topics in public finance, regional economics, and the economics of natural disasters. Mark created the Lighthouse Economics website and blog to share economic research and information relevant for navigating tumultuous times.

Executive Summary

From [HERE] This paper examines potential fatalities and injuries from the Covid-19 inoculation using an online “Covid-19 Health Experiences Survey” administered to a representative sample of the US population. The sample is composed of 3,000 respondents balanced on age, gender, and income to the extent possible. The survey was administered in December 2021, collecting information regarding respondents’ experiences with the Covid-19 illness and the Covid-19 inoculations as well as Covid-19 health experiences within respondents’ social circles. The survey also collected respondent economic and demographic information. Using these data, I find the following:

Covid-19 inoculation-related fatalities:

  • Assuming that all the respondents who know somebody who they believe died from the inoculation actually died from the inoculation, estimated fatalities are about 308,000.

  • Subtracting out those who may have died regardless of inoculation yields an estimated 294,000 inoculation-induced fatalities. This is an initial first pass estimate—more evaluation is needed.

Factors associated with being inoculated:                        

  • The likelihood of being inoculated is significantly less for those who identify themselves as African American, Hispanic, and Asian, and Republican or Independent. Democrats, Caucasians, and more the highly educated are more likely to be inoculated.

  • Those who indicated that they obtain information about Covid-19 from alternative news sources were less likely to be inoculated. Those who obtain information from mainstream news and official government source are more likely to be inoculated.

  • Knowing someone who experienced a significant health problem from the Covid-19 illness increased the likelihood of being inoculated.

  • Knowing someone who had been injured by the Covid-19 inoculation substantially reduced the likelihood of being inoculated.

The official position of the US government is that the Covid-19 inoculations have resulted in nine fatalities (CDC, 2022).  The experiences shared by hundreds of respondents in this survey suggests that many people died or were injured following inoculation.  Which data are more believable—nine fatalities or as many as 300,000 fatalities?  Surveys have limitations in assessing the impacts of health interventions.  However, this type of evaluation offers an important point of triangulation. The experiences of people captured in surveys generally should be consistent with official government data.  In the case of Covid-19 inoculations, there is a tremendous divergence which should be cause for further inquiry.  My hope is that this research will motivate a full and transparent examination by independent health and medical scholars to ascertain the degree of harm being caused by the Covid-19 inoculations.

The full paper can be accessed at: How Many People Died from the Covid-19 Inoculations? An Estimate Based on a Survey of the United States Population

American Airlines Pilot who Went Into Cardiac Arrest Minutes after Landing Plane says COVID Injection Caused His Heart to Stop

/

From [HERE] An American Airlines pilot suffered cardiac arrest minutes after landing his plane. Thankfully he survived, and he fully believes the Covid-19 injection he was forced to get by his employers is to blame. 

Steve Kirsch sat down for an interview with Josh Yoder of US Freedom Flyers about American Airlines Captain Bob Snow. Snow had a cardiac arrest minutes after landing the plane. He nearly died.

According to Snow, it’s pretty clear that his cardiac arrest was due to the experimental COVID vaccine that American Airlines forced him to take to keep his job.

Key points in the video interview below include:

  1. How Snow knows it was the vaccine and not just “bad luck”

  2. American Airlines never called Snow in the hospital even though it was their fault he took the vaccine and almost died. You’d think he’d get a call from the CEO. Instead, the only thing they did was fly his family to the hospital to meet with him.

  3. We need to be testing every vaccinated pilot with EKG, D-dimer, troponin, and cardiac MRIs to assess their health. This is for their health and for the safety of the flying public. The airlines and/or FAA should be requiring this. Myocarditis can be subclinical so pilots may not know they are injured.

  4. The airlines are NOT doing the screenings required to assess pilot health and passenger safety. Presumably, this is because doing those screenings would: 1) reveal to the public how unsafe the vaccines are and increase vaccine hesitancy, and 2) disqualify too many pilots. Yoder estimates that 30% of the pilots may need to be disqualified due to heart conditions caused by the vaccine. Therefore, the most likely outcome is that the airlines will pretend this incident never happened and the CDC will claim without evidence that there is no link to the vaccine like they usually do. The press will give them a pass on this and not ask any hard questions.

  5. When a plane goes down and people are killed, it’s OK for the airlines because the insurance companies will pay and everyone will pretend it was just a freak accident that couldn’t have been avoided.

Wisconsin Family Launches Billboard Campaign that Claims Hospital COVID Treatment Protocols Killed Their Daughter Grace

/

From [HERE] On October 13, 2021, Grace Schara passed away at Ascension’s St. Elizabeth’s Hospital in Wisconsin.  Her parents say the doctors and hospital killed Grace by their insistence to follow ineffective COVID treatment protocols.

On Oct. 13, 2021, at 7:27 pm, beautiful Grace Schara—an inquisitive young woman with Down-Syndrome—died a tragic and preventable death at a Wisconsin hospital. Rather than using treatments proven to combat COVID-19, Ascension’s St. Elizabeth’s Hospital followed the U.S. government’s ineffective COVID-19 treatment protocols, for which they reap significant financial rewards. On the final day of Grace’s life, as her doctor assured her parents she was doing well, Dr. Gavin Shokar also “unilaterally labeled Grace a DNR and ordered a lethal combination of IV sedatives and narcotics”—a fatal combination of the drugs Precedex, Lorazepam, and Morphine—which were administered over an incredibly short period of time. Notably, all three drugs are manufactured by mRNA “vaccine” maker and pharmaceutical giant Pfizer.

The Schara family is still speaking out about their daughter’s tragic death. The family of Grace Shara is now running over a dozen billboards in the FOX Valley area.

From the press release:

Grace was admitted to St. Elizabeth’s for Covid-19 respiratory issues, but was recovering before a doctor began giving sedatives to her.

Dr. Gavin Shokar, MD, apparently found it so likely she would die from his administration of Precedex – a powerful sedative used in surgery – that he wrote his own do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order on her a mere eight minutes after giving her the maximum dose. When Grace was still alive Shokar then combined Precedex with Lorazepam (another powerful sedative) and a Morphine push within minutes of one another on Grace’s last day to finish her off. A 14-year ICU nurse, Hollee McInnis, delivered the lethal dosage.

“Each of these medicines, on their own, have an increased risk of serious or life-threatening breathing problems and cardiac arrest,” said a doctor familiar with Grace’s case. “There’s an additive effect when used in combination. To use them like they did in a person with a diagnosis of acute respiratory distress is beyond believable as to intention,” she said.

A DNR order is legally required to be discussed with family and consented to in writing, neither of which occurred in Grace’s case. Grace was not given a DNR bracelet, which is required by law. In fact, family members were never told Grace had a DNR designation until her last breaths, when doctors and nurses did nothing to help her, despite the family telling them Grace didn’t have a DNR. Apathetic medical staff allowed Grace to die as her sister at her bedside helplessly begged them to revive her, while her parents – who were not allowed in her room – watched her die via FaceTime.

Remdesivir = Run Death is Near: FDA Rubber-Stamps Remdesivir for Infants w/o Evidence of Safety. Experimental Drug Used To Treat COVID in Hospitals Causes Liver/Heart/Kidney Failure and Kills Adults

/

From [CHD] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Monday approved the use of the antiviral therapy, remdesivir, to treat COVID-19 in infants four weeks and older.

Dr. Patrizia Cavazzoni, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in a press release:

“As COVID-19 can cause severe illness in children, some of whom do not currently have a vaccination option, there continues to be a need for safe and effective COVID-19 treatment options for this population.

“Today’s approval of the first COVID-19 therapeutic for this population demonstrates the agency’s commitment to that need.”

According to the press release, the FDA’s decision to approve the therapy, marketed under the name Veklury, is supported by a clinical study conducted on infants 4 weeks and older weighing a minimum of 6.6 pounds.

The study is underway and will not be completed until February 2023. There are no published results.

However, Gilead Sciences, maker of remdesivir and sponsor of the study, provided the following details in a company press release:

  • A total of 53 hospitalized pediatric patients were enrolled in the clinical study.

  • 72% suffered adverse events.

  • 21% suffered serious adverse events determined to be unrelated to the drug.

  • Three children died from either underlying conditions or COVID-19.

Nevertheless, Gilead Science assured that “no new safety signals were apparent for patients treated with Veklury.”

The study was of single-arm, open-label design.

A single-arm study has no control group, making it impossible to compare its effectiveness against standard of care.

Open-label means participants and investigators were aware they were receiving the drug, making it impossible to separate placebo from drug effect.

Studies show little or no benefit

Beyond the absence of any publicly available data on the efficacy and safety of this drug in humans of this age, available studies on older subjects indicate remdesivir offers no more than a meager benefit to those who survive its use.

In fact, this is why the World Health Organization (WHO) in November 2020 recommended against the use of remdesivir to treat COVID-19. The WHO only recently (April 22, 2022) updated its recommendation to support the drug’s use in patients who are at high risk for hospitalization.

Nevertheless, the FDA explains its long-standing support of remdesivir use in adults here, citing six studies that had the greatest impact on the agency’s position.

Here is a summary of the findings of each study from the FDA’s webpage:

  1. ACTT-1 Trial: Time to clinical recovery was shortened from 15 days to 10 through the use of remdesivir. There was no difference in mortality. The drug was no better than placebo when administered to patients who required high-flow oxygen, non-invasive respiratory support, mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at baseline. A benefit was seen only in patients who required low levels of supplemental oxygen.

  2. Discovery Trial: There was no clinical benefit of remdesivir in hospitalized patients who were symptomatic for >7 days and who required supplemental oxygen. There was no difference in mortality between remdesivir and standard of care. Investigators judged three of 429 participants who received remdesivir died from the drug.

  3. WHO Solidarity Trial: Remdesivir did not decrease in-hospital mortality or the need for mechanical ventilation compared to standard of care. Four hundred and forty patients in this study were also enrolled in the Discovery trial above.

  4. Journal of the American Medical Association (moderate disease): After 10 days of treatment with remdesivir, clinical status was not significantly different from standard of care.

  5. New England Journal of Medicine (severe disease): No difference between five and 10 days of remdesivir treatment. No placebo group, thus “the magnitude of benefit cannot be determined.”

  6. PINETREE study: Three consecutive days of IV remdesivir resulted in an 87% relative reduction in the risk of hospitalization or death when compared to placebo.

As demonstrated, the first five studies used to justify the FDA’s approval of remdesivir showed little, if any, benefit to hospitalized patients with moderate or severe disease.

This is in contrast to the sufficiently proven benefit of off-label use of the previously licensed medications hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.

Only the PINETREE study investigated the benefit of remdesivir for outpatient use. In that study, the drug provided a substantial benefit in preventing hospitalization when given in three separate doses over three days.

However, only eight individuals under the age of 18 were enrolled in the study, and none were younger than 12.

The primary endpoint, a composite of COVID-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause, did not occur in the under-18 group.

In other words, the study — funded by Gilead Sciences — showed the drug offered no benefit in this cohort.

Nevertheless, in reporting on the FDA’s approval of remdesivir for infants and young children, CNN found someone to support the FDA’s decision.

CNN wrote:

“The FDA’s approval of remdesivir for young children is ‘great,’ said Dr. Daniel Griffin, an instructor in clinical medicine and associate research scientist in the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics at Columbia University.”

Safety ‘not established’ in pediatric patients

Not only is there scant evidence that remdesivir is an effective treatment for COVID-19, the drug’s safety is debatable.

With regard to its use in infants, even the FDA must acknowledge nobody knows how safe it is.

After all, the manufacturer’s label states:

“The safety and effectiveness of VEKLURY (remdesivir) have not been established in pediatric patients younger than 12 years of age or weighing less than 40 kg.”

With regard to pharmacokinetics (where the drug distributes in the body) the label states:

“The pharmacokinetics of VEKLURY in pediatric patients have not been evaluated.”

An indictment of the drug regulatory process

Let’s reflect on what the director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research saidregarding the approval of remdesivir for treating COVID-19 in infants 4 weeks and older :

“As COVID-19 can cause severe illness in children, some of whom do not currently have a vaccination option, there continues to be a need for safe and effective COVID-19 treatment options for this population. Today’s approval of the first COVID-19 therapeutic for this population demonstrates the agency’s commitment to that need.”

To summarize:

  • Some children do not have a vaccination option.

  • They need a safe and effective treatment.

  • The FDA meets that need by approving a drug with no safety and efficacy record in children.

Safety and efficacy apparently can be conveniently established by fiat, not evidence.

In the end, the FDA’s approval of remdesivir is not an assurance of the drug’s safety and efficacy but an indication the agency is no longer interested in protecting the public from potentially harmful and ineffective therapies — or, in other words, in doing its job.

There will undoubtedly be doctors like Griffin who welcome this approval.

However, I don’t believe every pediatrician will accept the FDA’s guidance so readily.

It’s not easy to place an intravenous line to administer remdesivir in the tiny vein of an irritable baby coming from home with a positive rapid test. And then do it again the next day. And the day after that.

At some point, clinicians’ sensibilities will be challenged enough to compel them to actually examine how the FDA arrived at its conclusions.

Guidelines are meaningless if doctors choose not to abide by them.

Following the Science or the Bullshit? Numerous Studies Worldwide Demonstrate Children have Zero Risk of Death from COVID and the Risks from Experimental, Deadly COVID Shots Outweigh Any Benefit

/

C​​hildren have virtually zero risk of serious complications from COVID. From [HERE] A large study conducted in Germany posted on medRxiv showed zero deaths for children ages 5-11 and a case fatality rate of three per million in all children without comorbidities.

A Johns Hopkins study monitoring 48,000 children diagnosed with COVID showed a zero mortality rate in children under 18 without comorbidities.

A study in Nature Medicine demonstrated that children under 18 with no comorbidities had virtually no risk of death.

Data from England and Wales, published by the UK Office of National Statistics on January 17, 2022, revealed that throughout 2020 and 2021, only one child under the age of five, without comorbidities, had died from COVID in the two countries, whose total population is 60 million.

According to The Lancet, the infection fatality rate (IFR) from coronavirus in all children age seven and younger is 0.0023%. Nearly all fatalities in this age group had one or more underlying health conditions. With the emergence of the Omicron variant, the IFR is even lower.

The medical literature also shows that healthy children are more easily able to heal from this virus than adults and therefore do not need this vaccine.

A study in Nature Communications from April suggests children’s bodies clear the virus more easily than adults.

A study in Nature Immunology, published in December, demonstrated how children efficiently mount effective, robust and sustained immune responses.

In addition, most children already have had COVID and have fully recovered. Recent studies show waning effectiveness of the COVID vaccine in children 5–11 years old after the first few weeks.

It’s time to follow the science. The risks demonstrably outweigh the benefits of COVID vaccination in young children.

While the CDC says that myocarditis is a mild disease, cardiologists know otherwise. CDC’s own preliminary data, reported at the February 4, 2022 ACIP meeting, revealed that nearly half of the young people diagnosed with myocarditis still had symptoms three months later, and 39% had their activity restricted by their physician. We know this serious adverse event frequently occurs in teenagers. But no one knows how often it occurs in younger children. This is of major concern for babies and younger children.

A study published in Clinical Infectious Diseasesout of Hong Kong showed 1 out of every 2,700 12- to 17-year-old boys were diagnosed with myocarditis following the 2nd dose of Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine, or 37 per 100,000 vaccinated.

A study from Kaiser posted on medRxiv found the same rate of myocarditis in 12- to 17-year-old American boys, 1 in 2,700.

VAERS Data

VAERS COVID-19 vaccine data from Dec. 14, 2020, to March 25, 2022 shows:

The science was never on their side.

Pfizer’s application for EUA of two doses of its vaccine failed in clinical trials as it did not produce antibodies in children 2 to 5 years old. They were forced to withdraw the application in February 2022 and will now apply to the FDA for a three-dose series once more data is available in early April. Take part in our “Protect the Children: Don’t Break our Hearts” campaign to stop the FDA’s approval.

Pfizer was ordered by a U.S. District Judge to release the data submitted to FDA from its clinical trials in support of a COVID-19 vaccine license. Prior to the ruling, the FDA planned to suppress the data for the next 75 years which the agency claimed was necessary, in part, because of its “limited resources.”

This denied the American people access to the information that would have allowed them to make a decision based on informed consent. Pfizer released a 38-page report including an Appendix: “LIST OF ADVERSE EVENTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST,” that lists 1,291 different adverse events.

This is one of the most dangerous vaccines in the history of the U.S. vaccination program and we at Children’s Health Defense have called upon the FDA to remove it from the marketplace. Also, we ask that Congress overturn the Emergency Powers Act that allows Federal officials to take away the rights of citizens, repeal the Vaccine Injury Compensation Act and the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program that provides immunity to vaccine manufacturers.

Vax is Causing Death: A Study of 200 Countries Shows Since the Vaccine Rollout COVID Deaths Have Increased by 42% and Overall Deaths from All Causes is Higher, Excess Death Rate is Up 33% Worldwide

/

From [JOEL SMALLEY]

Expectations

COVID death rates and cumulative excess mortality rates should begin to trend lower after the initial COVID outbreaks due to1: 

  1. Deaths being brought forward from later periods; 

  2. Depleted vulnerable population;

  3. Greater protective herd immunity;

  4. Attenuation of the virus;

  5. Better treatments (more early treatment with neutraceuticals, ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, less mechanical ventilation2).

The Vaccine Hypothesis

The vaccine is claimed to be substantially effective in reducing COVID mortality (by the policy-makers but not the vaccine manufacturers) and also to be safe. If these claims are true, we should expect even fewer deaths than expected above due to significantly lower COVID deaths and insignificant vaccine deaths, i.e. lower all-cause excess mortality over all.

To be certain, we should also expect to see a negative correlation between the vaccination rate and the COVID death rate, i.e. the more a country is vaccinated, the greater the decrease in COVID death rate should be observed.

Empirical Results

The COVID death rate is higher after mass vaccinations.

There is a discernible reduction in the rate of COVID deaths in just 38 out of the 202 countries studied (19%). Therefore, in the vast majority of countries, both the rate and the number of COVID deaths after vaccination programs is higher than before.

In fact, the COVID death rate (deaths per million per day world average) rises from 1.4 to 2.0 after mass vaccinations begin, an increase of 42%. Confounders be damned!

Pay close attention to Australia, Brazil, Brunei, Cambodia, Cayman Islands, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Estonia, Faroe Islands, Fiji, Finland, Greece, Greenland, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Isle of Man, Japan, Laos, Latvia, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Nepal, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Seychelles, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, Timor, Turks and Caicos, UAE, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam, and Wallis and Fortuna to see what happens when you aggressively vaccinate a naïve population, especially in the middle of an outbreak.

All-cause excess mortality rates are higher after mass vaccinations.

In 69% of the countries that report all-cause mortality (70 out of 101), the rate of cumulative excess mortality is higher after COVID vaccination programs. In not one single country is cumulative excess mortality lower than it was at the time mass vaccination programs began.

In fact, the excess death rate (deaths per million per day world average) rises from 3.1 to 4.1 after mass vaccinations begin, an increase of 33%.

The rate of increase in COVID mortality appears to be positively correlated with the vaccination rate. In other words, those countries that have lower vaccination rates (e.g. numerous African countries) also have lower increases in COVID mortality. Conversely, those countries that vaccinated early and aggressively (e.g. Europe, North America and Israel) have suffered comparatively worse.

Incidentally, it also seems that those countries with lower vaccination rates also had lower COVID mortality rates prior to vaccination campaigns, possibly indicative of having fewer interventions.

Nevertheless, the rate of increase in the COVID death rate after mass vaccinations is also positively correlated with the vaccination rate.

Multiple linear regression confirms the results. Analysis of the COVID death rate after vaccinations as a function of vaccinated population and COVID death rate before vaccinations reveals statistically significant positive correlation with both variables (p= 3.6% and 0.0% respectively) and explains almost 40% of the variability.

In other words, the COVID death rate after mass vaccination continues in the same manner as it did before but is exacerbated in proportion to the rate in which the population is vaccinated. This is, of course, the exact opposite of what you would expect if the vaccine were effective in reducing COVID mortality.

Observing each of the 202 countries in the study, the following patterns are apparent:

  1. The COVID death rate continues in much the same rate after mass vaccination as before;

  2. The COVID death rate increases after mass vaccination or emerges where prior to mass vaccination, it was insignificant or completely absent;

  3. The COVID death rate decelerates where there the population vaccination rate is low.

Conclusion

The Safe and Effective™ vaccine hypothesis is rejected.

In fact, according to the evidence, the more obvious conclusion is that the COVID vaccine has caused more death, not less, so much more in fact, that it has actually wiped out the expected natural declines and caused yet more death still.

The signal is significant in terms of temporal proximity and consistency across countries regardless of geography and demographics.

Applying the Bradford Hill criteria3:

  1. Strength of association - vaccinated (richer) countries have relatively more COVID death than less vaccinated (poorer) countries.

  2. Consistency across countries and continents.

  3. Specificity - the vaccine kills people.

  4. Temporality is observed in a significant number of countries, especially those vaccinating aggressively in the middle of outbreaks.

  5. Biological gradient - there is an evident positive correlation between vaccination rate and COVID death rate and increase in COVID death rate.

  6. Biological plausibility - the 2-week period of immunosuppression immediately post injection has been very widely observed and reported, as have the plethora of fatal adverse events. The evidence suggesting that variants are spawned due to unnatural selection is also growing4.

  7. Coherence - we get the same information from analyses of vaccine adverse event reporting systems, hospital records, national surveillance systems, even the vaccine trial data itself (albeit hidden in the data appendices)5, and other independent mortality analyses with different methods6.

  8. Experiment - the entire world has been subjected to a massive clinical trial without consent. Fortunately, different countries had different rates of vaccine uptake so comparative study has been possible to demonstrate causality, especially between countries with similar geographic and demographic qualities.

  9. Analogy - Marek’s chickens (1970)7.

This is a global public health failure of truly unprecedented and epic proportions.

Iowa and Mass Courts Rule that ‘Business Interruption Insurance’ Doesn't Cover COVID Loss from Government Shelter in Place Orders that Quarantined All Healthy People During Plandemic

/

From [HERE] The top state courts in Iowa and Massachusetts have ruled that restaurants can’t recover COVID-19 shutdown losses from "business interruption" policies.

The Iowa Supreme Court ruled April 22 (here and here), while the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled April 21 (here), report Reuters and Law.com.

The Associated Press and the Des Moines Register also have coverage of the Iowa ruling, while Law360 also has coverage of the Massachusetts ruling.

The Iowa court ruled against the Wakonda Club and Jesse’s Embers, both located in Des Moines, Iowa. They claimed losses under business-interruption insurance after Gov. Kim Reynolds’ orders caused them to close in March 2020 and then limit operations.

The restaurants’ business-interruption insurance had covered a direct physical loss or damage to property. The Iowa Supreme Court said the shutdown didn’t constitute such a loss.

“The mere loss of use of property, without more, does not meet the requirement for a direct physical loss of property,” the Iowa Supreme Court said.

The Iowa Supreme Court said its decision was based on Iowa law, but it noted that every other federal appeals court that has ruled on similar policy language has ruled for insurers.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled against Coppa, Toro and Little Donkey restaurants in Boston and Cambridge, Massachusetts. The case also involved insurance policies that cover a direct physical loss or damage to property.

“We conclude that ‘direct physical loss of or damage to’ property requires some ‘distinct, demonstrable, physical alteration of the property,’” the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court said.

Two restaurants had shut down in-person dining and a third closed for business following a March 2020 order by Gov. Charles Baker. All three allowed limited in-person dining in June 2020 when Baker modified his order.

While the Public Was Distracted by “Cover Stories” a Court Ordered Release of FDA Docs Revealed that Pfizer's COVID Shot Caused 1,291 Different Adverse Events During Clinical Trials

/

From [CHD] and [HERE] and [HERE] An estimated 10,000-page set of documents released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), as ordered by U.S. District Judge Mark T. Pittman, allows the public to access data Pfizer submitted to FDA from its clinical trials in support of a COVID-19 vaccine license. Prior to Judge Pittman’s ruling, the FDA planned to suppress the data for the next 75 years which the agency claimed was necessary, in part, because of its “limited resources.”

A 38-page report included in the documents features an Appendix, “LIST OF ADVERSE EVENTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST,” that lists 1,291 different adverse events following vaccination. The list includes acute kidney injury, acute flaccid myelitis, anti-sperm antibody positive, brain stem embolism, brain stem thrombosis, cardiac arrest, cardiac failure, cardiac ventricular thrombosis, cardiogenic shock, central nervous system vasculitis, death neonatal, deep vein thrombosis, encephalitis brain stem, encephalitis hemorrhagic, frontal lobe epilepsy, foaming at mouth, epileptic psychosis, facial paralysis, fetal distress syndrome, gastrointestinal amyloidosis, generalized tonic-clonic seizure, Hashimoto’s encephalopathy, hepatic vascular thrombosis, herpes zoster reactivation, immune-mediated hepatitis, interstitial lung disease, jugular vein embolism, juvenile myoclonic epilepsy, liver injury, low birth weight, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, myocarditis, neonatal seizure, pancreatitis, pneumonia, stillbirth, tachycardia, temporal lobe epilepsy, testicular autoimmunity, thrombotic cerebral infarction, Type 1 diabetes mellitus, venous thrombosis neonatal, and vertebral artery thrombosis among 1,246 other medical conditions following vaccination.

“At least now we know why the FDA and Pfizer wanted to keep this data under wraps for 75 years,” said Children’s Health Defense (CHD) president and general counsel Mary Holland. “The clinical trial data released so far should put an immediate end to the Pfizer COVID vaccines. The potential for serious harm is very clear, and those injured by the vaccines are prohibited from suing Pfizer for damages.”


Pfizer hired about 600 additional full-time employees to process adverse event reports during the three months following theEmergency Use Authorization (EUA) of its COVID-19 vaccine, newly released documents reveal.

According to the documents, Pfizer said, "More are joining each month with an expected total of more than 1,800 additional resources by the end of June 2021."

The information was contained in a 10,000-page document cache released April 1 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and made public as part of a court-ordered disclosure schedule stemming from an expedited Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

The latest revelations appeared in a document, "Cumulative analysis of post-authorization adverse event reports" of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, highlighting such adverse events identified through Feb. 28, 2021.

The document was previously released in November 2021, but was partially redacted. The redactions included the number of employees Pfizer hired and/or was planning to hire.

According to the unredacted document released April 1:

"Pfizer has also taken a multiple actions [sic] to help alleviate the large increase of adverse event reports. This includes significant technology enhancements, and process and workflow solutions, as well as increasing the number of data entry and case processing colleagues.

"To date, Pfizer has onboarded approximately 600 additional full-time employees (FTEs).

"More are joining each month with an expected total of more than 1,800 additional resources by the end of June 2021."

The unredacted version also revealed the number of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine doses shipped worldwide between December 2020 and February 2021:

"It is estimated that approximately 126,212,580 doses of BNT162b2 [the Pfizer EUA vaccine] were shipped worldwide from the receipt of the first temporary authorisation for emergency supply on 01 December 2020 through 28 February 2021."

The number of shipped doses previously was redacted.

Remarking upon this newly revealed information, Brian Hooker, chief scientific officer of Children's Health Defense, told The Defender:

"The rollout of the Pfizer vaccine has led to an unprecedented number of adverse events reported — 158,000 adverse events in the first two-plus months of the rollout means that the rate of reported AE [adverse events] was approximately 1:1000, with many of the AEs graded as serious. This is based on a denominator of 125,000,000 vaccines distributed.

"It is no wonder that an army of 1,800 individuals was needed to process all of the information."

Hooker noted the total number (1,205,755) of COVID vaccine adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System between Dec. 14, 2020 and March 25, 2022, now eclipses the total number (930,952) of adverse events reported in the 32-year history of the database.

Dr. Madhava Setty, a board-certified anesthesiologist and senior science editor for The Defender, previously reported on the same Pfizer document, before the unredacted version was released.

"In that piece, I alluded to Pfizer's admission that they needed more staff to process all of the adverse events being reported to them," Setty said.

"It seems this document has now been updated. 600 FTEs [full-time employees]! ... I wonder how many extra people the CDC [U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Protection] has hired? Given how they are operating, I would say zero."

Pfizer downplayed adverse reactions in request for full FDA license

The April 1 document release also included "request for priority review" — the documentation Pfizer in May 2021 submitted to the FDA for full licensure of its Comirnaty COVID vaccine.

In this document, Pfizer described its vaccine as fulfilling an "unmet medical need," claiming:

"Mass immunization with a safe and effective vaccine against COVID-19 can dramatically alter the trajectory of the pandemic.

"According to policy briefing by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation published on 31 March 2021, COVID-19 remains a leading cause of death in the US with up to 100,000 additional deaths projected in the US between March and July 2021, many of which can likely be prevented with COVID-19 vaccination."

Comment: No, COVID-19 was not a "leading cause of death" at any point. The official death toll from COVID-19 was massively inflated in most Western countries:

And now that the COVID-19 fear-campaign has almost run its course... we are seeing governments and health agencies backtrack on their "official" numbers:


Pfizer expressed "concerns" about lifting COVID-related measures, such as lockdowns, on the basis that the lifting of such restrictions would "counteract the impacts of this vaccination effort."

The documentstates:

"Vaccination against COVID-19 began with EUA/conditional approvals in December 2020, in a phased rollout defined by national/regional guidance.

However, there continue to be concerning trends that may counteract the impacts of this vaccination effort, including: [L]imitations in access to obtaining a vaccine due to infrastructure challenges (ie, clinic and appointment capacity and systems)[I]ncreasing viral transmission fueled by relaxed compliance with mitigations as the pandemic surpasses the 1-year mark (ie, masks, physical distancing, limiting travel)[I]ncreasing circulation of emerging variants of concern (which are currently driving continued spread of viral infection in Europe despite extensive mitigation mandates)."

Pfizerjustifiedits request for full licensure of its COVID vaccine on the following basis:

"A vaccine program must be implemented expediently and rapidly expanded to have a significant impact on the pandemic course.

"Licensure of BNT162b2 is likely to enhance vaccine uptake by facilitating supply of vaccine from Pfizer/BioNTech directly to pharmacies and healthcare providers/facilities.

"The greatest impact of BNT162b2 licensure may be direct supply to healthcare providers who serve vulnerable populations such as elderly patients and those who live in rural and underserved communities (ie, individuals who might be unable to navigate the challenges of securing vaccine access using the systems in place for EUA).

"Expansion of vaccine via licensure would ultimately improve the prospect of achieving population herd immunity to bring the pandemic under control."

Comment: It is in Pfizer's interest to maintain the facade that COVID-19 poses an on-going threat to public health. After all, the only thing they care about is selling more vaccines.

The same document glossed over the adverse effects for which the company previously admitted it hired a significant number of new employees to process, claiming:

"Based on Phase 1 data from the FIH Study BNT162-01, BNT162b1 and BNT162b2 [various vaccines tested during the trial period] were safe and well-tolerated in healthy adults 18 to 55 years of age, with no unanticipated safety findings.

"Phase 2/3 safety data were generally concordant with safety data in Phase 1 of the study, both overall and with regard to younger and older participants."

This is despite hard figures regarding adverse reactions provided later in the document:

"Through 28 February 2021 (data lock point aligned with Pharmacovigilance Plan), there were a total of 42,086 case reports (25,379 medically confirmed and 16,707 non-medically confirmed) containing 158,893 events. Cases were received from 63 countries.

"Consistent with what was seen in Phase 2/3 of Study C4591001, most reported AEs were in System Organ Classes (SOCs) with reactogenicity events: general disorders and administration site conditions (51,335), nervous system disorders (25,957), musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders (17,283), and gastrointestinal disorders (14,096).

"Post-authorization data have also informed the addition of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to the experience of reactogenicity to the product labeling." [MORE]

The U.S. government has already purchased 50 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine intended for children under five years of age to be delivered by April 30, 2022 although the FDA has yet to grant an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for this age group. The risk of serious injury or death from COVID to healthy children is practically nil and so far, the vaccine is not effectivewhen used in young children.

“It would be criminal to expose infants and young children to this extremely risky product,” said Holland. “VAERS data show the catastrophic health impacts the vaccine is having on millions of people, yet Pfizer and other vaccine makers are raking in billions of dollars with no fear of being held accountable for injuries and deaths from their vaccines.”

The FDA’s attempt to suppress these data in support of the pharmaceutical industry’s bottom line isn’t a new phenomenon in this country’s public health system. For more information on pharmaceutical corruption and the tight relationship the industry has with government regulatory agencies, read The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health by CHD Chair and lead counsel Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

The Following List of Vaccine Makers, Providers and Hospitals Stand-behind Their COVID Shots and Have Waived Government Granted Immunity from Liability for Injuries or Death Caused: NONE

/

From [HERE] The Secretary of the United States Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), Alex M. Azar III, has granted the companies selling and those involved in virtually any other activity related to any COVID-19 vaccine immunity from liability for any injuries caused by these products. Prior to his current position, Secretary Azar was a senior executive for a major pharmaceutical company, Eli Lilly and Company, from 2007 to 2017.

Secretary Azar has issued a “Declaration pursuant to section 319F-3 of the Public Health Service Act to provide liability immunity for activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID-19.” (85 FR 15198.) It provides that those that “prescribe, administer, deliver, distribute or dispense” and the “manufacturers [and] distributors” of “any vaccine, used to treat, … prevent or mitigate COVID-19” shall enjoy “[l]iablity immunity ,” including, “from suit and liability under Federal and State law with respect to all claims for loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual of a [COVID-19 vaccine].” (Id.; 42 U.S.C. § 247d-6d.)

An integral driver of consumer safety is the potential and actual liability companies face if their product causes harm. To assure consumers that a pharmaceutical company stands behind the safety of its vaccine product, ICAN makes a public request that each pharmaceutical company formally declaration that it waives the immunity from liability granted by HHS for injuries caused by COVID-19 vaccine.

Waiving this immunity will provide the standard and minimal level of product safety assurance consumers expect. If a company will not bear the risk of having to pay for injuries caused by its product, it should be understandable that consumers will not want to bear the risk of being injected with that product.

The following a list of the pharmaceutical companies that have, to-date, publicly announced that they will stand-behind their product and waive immunity from liability for injuries caused by their COVID-19 vaccine:

NONE

The above stated regulations are the implementing regs for the actual statutory immunity provide for COVID injections. As explained by attorney Aaron Siri,

The federal government has given complete immunity to Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J for any injury caused by their Covid-19 vaccines.  That’s right: you cannot sue them if you are injured by their Covid-19 vaccine.  (See Note 1 to read the law yourself.)  So, while their product may not give you immunity, Pfizer and Moderna are guaranteed immunity.  Said immunity also shields doctors, hospitals and any other persons who administer or coerce people to take deadly COVID injections.

And it gets even worse.  These companies are even immune for – hold your breath – willful misconduct.  That may sound crazy, but it is shockingly true.  You can only sue them for willful misconduct if the federal government first sues them for such conduct.  (See Note 2 below to read the law yourself.)  And what are the odds the federal government will do so after wildly promoting the vaccine?  About as likely as the FDA ever admitting they promoted a vaccine that caused widespread harm. [MORE]

Note 1. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 247d-6d the federal government “Declaration pursuant to section 319F-3 of the Public Health Service Act to provide liability immunity for activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID-19” provides that “manufacturers” of “any vaccine, used to treat, … prevent or mitigate COVID-19” shall enjoy “[l]iablity immunity ,” including, “from suit and liability under Federal and State law with respect to all claims for loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual of a [COVID-19 vaccine].”

Note 2.  Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 247d-6d(c)(5) “If an act or omission by a manufacturer or distributor with respect to a covered countermeasure, which act or omission is alleged under subsection (e)(3)(A) to constitute willful misconduct, … such act or omission shall not constitute ‘willful misconduct’ … if—(i)neither the Secretary nor the Attorney General has initiated an enforcement action with respect to such act or omission; or (ii)such an enforcement action has been initiated and the action has been terminated or finally resolved without a covered remedy.”