Michigan had the Worst COVID Lockdowns, Yet More Deaths than Other States

From [HERE] Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer claimed the extraordinary measures she took in shutting down businesses and schools and forcing people to stay home were worth it because of the lives saved. But an analysis of the data two and a half years after the COVID-19 pandemic hit Michigan calls that claim into question.

Compared to the rest of the country and its neighboring states, Michigan endured the most restrictions on private activity while also experiencing far more COVID deaths, worse job losses, a weaker recovery, and substantial learning losses for kids.

Deaths

Michigan has significantly more COVID deaths per capita than any other state in the Midwest.

The latest numbers from the CDC show that Michigan has 39,092 deaths as of Oct. 19, 2022, which is 9th-highest in the United Statesafter controlling for population differences.

Michigan’s rate of COVID deaths per 100,000 people (391) is higher than that of Indiana (369), Ohio (342) and Illinois (314). The difference between the Wolverine State and its neighbor across the lake is the starkest: People in Michigan died of COVID-19 at a 48% higher rate than people in Wisconsin (264).

Lockdowns

Using unilateral control afforded governors for extraordinary emergencies, Whitmer imposed the broadest shutdowns on businesses in the country.

Some 32% of Michigan businesses, a higher portion than those in any other state, were subject to a government-mandated closure, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The national average was 19%. Far more businesses were closed in Michigan than in neighboring states of Indiana (15%), Wisconsin (17%) and Ohio (19.5%).

If shuttering businesses saved lives, one would expect Michigan to have a lower COVID-19 death rate than most states. It didn’t.

Jobs

Michigan is still down 94,500 jobs since COVID-19 hit, a net loss of 2.1%. That’s the 7th-worst percentage among the state, and 23 states have fully recovered the jobs they lost during the pandemic.

Schools

Whitmer did not recommend that schools return to in-person instruction until March 2021. When she made that announcement, 23% of Michigan schools were fully in person, compared with 47% in Ohio, 54% in Wisconsin, and 76% in Indiana.

Some of the largest school districts in the state offered only virtual instruction for almost an entire academic year. According to the data service Burbio, which tracked school openings throughout the pandemic, Michigan was 33rd nationally when it came to offering in-person instruction for the 2020-2021 school year.

School closures during the pandemic are generally associated with more learning loss for students. Along with most of the rest of the nation, the state and national test scores of Michigan students dropped enormously during the pandemic. Catholic schools, which were almost entirely open throughout the pandemic, saw no change in math or reading scores compared to where they were pre-pandemic. 

As for Michigan’s state standardized tests, the M-STEP, every racial group at every grade in every age group tested saw a drop in achievement compared to where students were before the pandemic.

The public school districts in Flint and Detroit were among those closed for in-person instruction the longest. Minority students saw the largest drops in test scores, with the percentage of Black third-graders meeting or exceeding math proficiency standards falling by more than one-third.

On the national test known as the NAEP, the scores of Michigan students also dropped in every category. Fourth-grade reading fell to a 30-year low. And in Detroit, students in the public school district have long scored the worst in the nation in reading and math for 4th and 8th grade students. Their test scores still dropped sharply during COVID.

Michigan’s governor used extraordinary measures to control many aspects of people’s lives during the pandemic. She shutdown nearly one-third of Michigan businesses, prevented people from traveling or seeing friends and allowed schools to stay closed to in-person learning for more than a year.

Despite all these interventions, there is little real-world evidence these actions saved lives. Indeed, Michigan has one of the highest COVID-19 deaths rates in the country, and significantly more than was seen in surrounding states.

US Government Secretly Monitored Citizens Movements and Assigned them COVID “Decree Violation” Scores During Irrational and Deadly US Lockdowns

From [HERE] Voter analytics firm PredictWise harvested location data from tens of millions of US cellphones during the initial Covid lockdown months and used this data to assign a “Covid-19 decree violation” score to the people associated with the phones.

These Covid-19 decree violation scores were calculated by analyzing nearly two billion global positioning system (GPS) pings to get “real-time, ultra-granular locations patterns.” People who were “on the go more often than their neighbors” were given a high Covid-19 decree violation score while those who mostly or always stayed at home were given a low Covid-19 decree violation score.

Not only did PredictWise use this highly sensitive location data to monitor millions of Americans’ compliance with Covid lockdown decrees but it also combined this data with follow-up surveys to assign “Covid concern” scores to the people who were being surveilled. PredictWise then used this data to help Democrats in several swing states to target more than 350,000 “Covid concerned” Republicans with Covid-related campaign ads.

In its white paper, PredictWise claims that Democrats were able to “deploy this real-time location model to open up just over 40,000 persuasion targets that normally would have fallen off” for Mark Kelly who was running for Senate at the time and has now been elected.

“PredictWise understood that there were potential pockets of voters to target with Covid-19 messaging and turned high-dimensional data covering over 100 million Americans into measures of adherence to Covid-19 restrictions during deep lockdown,” the company states in the white paper.

PredictWise doesn’t provide the exact dates when this location data was collected but its white paper does note that the data was collected during Covid lockdowns and used during Senator Kelly’s 2020 election campaign. State-level US lockdowns began on March 15, 2020 and Kelly was elected on November 4, 2020 so the data appears to have been collected during the first few months of this 11 month period. [MORE]

‘COVID Injections Don’t Prevent COVID or Stop Transmission of COVID:’ Judge Rules Vax Mandate Has No Rational Basis. Orders NYC to Give Back Pay and Reinstate Fired Unvaccinated Workers

From [HERE] On Monday, the Honorable Ralph J. Porzio – a judge appointed to the Supreme Court of the State of New York – ordered that the Petitioners’ equal rights had been violated.

He further ordered that:

• “…the terminated Petitioners are hereby reinstated to their full employment status, effective October 25, 2022, at 6 a.m.”

• “…the Petitioners are entitled to back pay in salary from the date of termination.”

This might not seem like a big deal. It certainly reads like a wrongful termination suit. But the Petitioners were former Department of Sanitation of New York employees who were fired from their work.

Did they do something wrong? Did they commit a crime? Did they fail to perform their duties? 

No. None of the above.

The state of New York terminated those employees in February of 2022 for their “failure to comply with vaccine requirements.” The issue involved the COVID-19 “vaccines” and the subsequent vaccine mandates that were imposed upon public health workers and their families. 

Sadly, this wasn’t just a New York “thing.” It happened in many other places across the country.

As we look back in the rearview mirror, these wrongful terminations were meaningless and violations of our equal rights. And that’s exactly what the judge concluded. He stated accurately that:

Being vaccinated does not prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting COVID-19. As of the day of this decision, CDC guidelines regarding quarantine and isolation are the same for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. The Petitioners should not have been terminated for choosing not to protect themselves.

Amen.

Given what’s now proven, the act of taking a COVID-19 “vaccine” doesn’t protect others - which is why any form of COVID-19 “vaccine” mandate is nonsensical. These shots are nothing more than experimental drugs with known side effects and are now proven to have limited efficacy.

Some will argue that the government and organizations didn’t know back then that the shots didn’t stop infection or transmission when they terminated employees because of their personal health decisions. That’s complete nonsense.

Many in the medical community knew about this and some were brave enough to publicly speak and write about what these drugs did and didn’t do – even if it meant losing their medical license. I have nothing but respect for them. Sadly, most in the medical community didn’t say a word.

I even wrote about these topics in The Bleeding Edge more than two years ago, explaining that the mRNA shots would simply coax our bodies into producing an antibody that would provide some level of protection against the virus if we were exposed – not durable immunity to COVID-19. 

It’s nothing like a real vaccine that exposes our bodies to an attenuated or inactive virus, which helps our bodies build sterilizing immunity to a virus or disease.

I knew these things because it was a basic scientific fact concerning how mRNA technology works. I wasn’t a genius. I just read a few scientific papers on mRNA technology and figured it out… which means a remarkable number of others in the scientific community knew it as well.

The reason why this ruling comes as such a surprise is because New York is one of the last remaining bastions of the Covidians. It’s still a place where many continue to insist on wearing masks, despite what we all now know.

In my humble opinion, all COVID-19 “vaccine” mandates should be removed.

Any corporation, non-profit, or government entity that wrongfully terminated employment because someone made a personal health choice not to take an experimental drug without any safety data to review should be offered their job back immediately, with full back pay from the date of termination. Period. 

Emails Reveal CDC Pressured FDA to Authorize COVID Boosters Without Clinical Trials

From [CHD] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) pressured U.S. regulators to clear COVID-19 boosters without clinical trial data, according to newly released emails.

CDC officials relayed to counterparts at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in early August 2021 that they wanted authorization for Moderna and Pfizer boosters as data began showing that the vaccines weren’t working as well as initially promoted.

The conversation took place on a call that was described by Dr. Phil Krause, a top FDA official, to several other FDA workers.

“Take a deep breath before reading this next paragraph. On that call, the CDC evidently stated that they will assemble all the data they are aware of on third dosing in this setting and send it to us in the hope that we will (very soon) authorize the third dose for immunocompromised as part of the EUA,” Krause wrote in the Aug. 5, 2021, email.

EUA stands for emergency use authorization.

All of the COVID-19 vaccines were authorized under emergency conditions at that time.

No boosters had been authorized and no clinical data were available for the boosters.

The emails show that “the CDC wanted the booster approved without a trial,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, wrote on Twitter.

The CDC didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Krause was responding to Doran Fink, who also works for the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, charged with evaluating vaccines.

Fink sent along a post that had been made to an infectious diseases forum regarding whether doctors should be giving additional vaccine doses to patients with compromised immune systems despite the lack of authorization.

Dr. Richard Nathan of Idaho had written that other countries, including Israel, had cleared boosters.

Nathan wrote:

“Pfizer recommends it and I trust their guidance over the turmoil at our federal agencies. With millions of doses of vaccine set to expire, you should do what you think is best for your patients.

“I can’t believe you would get pushback from anyone. Keep in mind, nearly everyone in this group is six to seven months out from the second dose of the vaccine and many have significant daily exposure to the virus.”

Fink said the post “accurately reflects more widespread thinking that I am hearing in other forums as well,” including among doctors who advise the CDC on vaccines.

“Providers are losing confidence in FDA/CDC to do the right thing for their patients,” Fink said.

Less than two weeks later, the FDA authorized boosters for certain people, including immunocompromised persons.

The agency said that “a thorough review of the available data” concluded the group “may benefit” from a third dose.

The only data cited on efficacy were from two studies, one conducted by French researchers and another by Canadian researchers. Pfizer and Moderna hadn’t completed trials.

“As we’ve previously stated, other individuals who are fully vaccinated are adequately protected and do not need an additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine at this time,” Dr. Janet Woodcock, the FDA’s top official said.

But just weeks later, Woodcock and Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC’s top official, signed onto a joint statement saying that vaccine protection was waning and that boosters “will be needed to maximize vaccine-induced protection and prolong its durability.”

In September 2021, the FDA and CDC authorized Pfizer boosters for many other Americans. The authorization was expanded to Moderna and Johnson & Johnson shots, and virtually all other Americans, later in the year.

Krause and Dr. Marion Gruber resigned from their positions because of opposition to the booster strategy.

Judicial Watch obtained the newly published emails as part of ongoing litigation against the Biden administration for not properly responding to a Freedom of Information Act request.

An earlier tranche of emails showed that Gruber was “very concerned” in late August 2021 about pressure from companies such as Pfizer over vaccine authorization.

“We need to be given time to consider their data and cannot be pushed by these companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense,” Gruber wrote to Dr. Peter Marks, a top FDA official.

“These FDA records further document top officials’ concerns about the controversial COVID-19 booster shots,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.

“That it has taken months and a federal lawsuit to uncover this critical material is a scandal.”

Study from Japan Finds COVID Injections Increase the Risk of Myocarditis - Disease that Can Cause Heart Failure, Heart Attack, Stroke and Sudden Cardiac Death

From [HERE] and [MORE] Yet another study, this time in Japan, raises concerns about mRNA COVID-19 vaccine safety signals. Recently posted in the preprint server medRxiv, co-author Rokuro Hama, director of the Japan Institute of Pharmacovigilance, a Japanese post-approval monitoring agency, reports evidence of growing concern. A sophisticated operation, this Japanese group diligently pursued its mission. They report that myocarditis mortality ratios (MMRRs) and their confidence intervals (95%) after receiving the COVID-19 vaccines compared with the general reference population over the past three years were significantly higher not only among the young adult population (highest in the 30s with MMRR of 6.69) but also in the elderly. A bombshell finding, the authors in Japan report that myocarditis risk among COVID-19 vaccinated may be four times higher than the apparent MMRRs considering healthy vaccinee effect. They declare, “Underreported post-vaccination deaths should also be considered as suggested by the extremely high myocarditis mortality odds ratio (205.60; 133.52 to 311.94 ).”

The Study

This real-world investigation compares the myocarditis mortality rate in the SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated with that in the general population in Japan. The study was based on the materials and the vital statistics disclosed by the Japanese government

This Japanese study is still in preprint involving 99,834,543 individuals aged 12 and up who had received a COVID-19 vaccine once or twice by February 2022. The authors report the reference population as those aged 10 and above from 2017 to 2019.

Findings

The authors report in medXriv that the number of myocarditis deaths meeting inclusion criteria were 38 cases. MMRR (95% 16 confidence interval) was 4.03 (0.77 to 13.60) in 20s, 6.69 (2.24 to 16.71) in 30s, 3.89 (1.48 to 8.64) 17 in 40s, respectively. SMR of myocarditis was 2.01 (1.44 to 2.80) for the overall vaccinated population, and 1.65 (1.07 to 2.55) for those 60 years or older. Estimated adMMRRs and adSMR were about 4 times higher than the MMRRs and SMR. Pooled MOR for myocarditis was 205.60 (133.52 to 311.94).

Discussion

The results of this study raise bombshell implications. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was associated with a higher risk of myocarditis death, not only in young adults but also in all age groups including the elderly. Considering the healthy vaccinee effect, the authors suggest that the risk of this serious adverse event could be four times or higher than the apparent risk of myocarditis death. Importantly they emphasize that any underreporting must also be considered. Based on this study, the risk of myocarditis following SARS-CoV-2 24 vaccination may be more serious than that reported previously. This study dovetails with other evidence that the safety of vaccines must be reconsidered. 

Swiss Study Reports that mRNA COVID Shots Cause Heart Injury. According to the Study Every Single Participant was Injured

From [HERE] A Swiss study reports that heart injuries occurred in all mRNA COVID shot recipients included in the study. Not only that, 2.8% or 1 in 27 also had myocarditis.

While some would like to blame previous virus infection for these conditions, a “control group” in Australia supported evidence that the shots were the cause. It also found “16 excess deaths per 100,000 booster doses” and “the age groups most likely to use boosters show large rises in excess mortality after boosters are rolled out.”

A study in Japan found the same thing, as did another study in Israel. Other disturbing findings included:

1. mRNA vaccines don’t stay at the injection site but instead travel throughout the body and accumulate in various organs;

2. mRNA-based Covid vaccines induce long-lasting expression of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in many organs;

3. Vaccine-induced expression of the spike protein induces autoimmune-like inflammation;

4. Vaccine-induced inflammation can cause grave organ damage, especially in vessels, sometimes with deadly outcome.

2 Black Girls Hospitalized after Pharmacist at HEB Injected Them w/an Overdose of Dangerous COVID Boosters. White HEB Pharmacist, Store Mangers and Attorneys Blowing Off Parents Questions and Concerns

According to FUNKTIONARY:

biocide – the attempted annihilation of all life, which is the intent of Doggy and CrimethInc. (See: Doggy & CrimethInc.)

vaccination – mandatory infection—typically administered by agents of Corporate State in their public schools of indoctrination camps. How can unvaccinated children endanger other children who are immunized?

Scientists at Boston University Created a Version of COVID that Has 80% Lethality in Mice. But Claim Its Not a Bioweapon Designed to Infect and Harm People

From [HERE] Story at a glance:

• Less than two months ago, scientists funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) announced they’d resurrected the Spanish flu virus through reverse genetics.

• Now, scientists at Boston University report they’ve engineered an Omicron strain of SARS-CoV-2 with an 80% lethality in mice. The new hybrid was created by extracting spike protein from the Omicron BA.1 variant of SARS-CoV-2 and attaching it to the original Wuhan Alpha strain.

• The research was funded by four grants from the NIH/NIAID, but because those funds were supposedly “earmarked” primarily for equipment, they did not clear the viral engineering portion of the experiment with the NIH. The NIH is reviewing the case to determine whether the University violated rules for enhanced potential pandemic pathogen (ePPP) research.

• Boston University denies the research qualifies as “gain of function” research as the Alpha strain’s lethality was reduced from 100% to 80%. However, the Alpha strain did gain function, namely immune escape, which it didn’t have before. The immune-evading properties came from the Omicron spike.

• The likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 assembling itself into a Wuhan Alpha strain with Omicron spike protein “in the wild” is just about nil, as the Wuhan strain has mutated out of existence already. Were it not for these madmen, we would never have had to worry about this kind of recombination.

Less than two months ago, we reported scientists funded by the NIH and Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID have resurrected the Spanish flu virus through reverse genetics.

Disturbingly, the scientists appeared frustrated by the fact that the recreated virus failed to kill the macaque species selected for the experiment, even at the highest doses tested.

They argued a more dangerous version of the Spanish flu virus must be created in order to develop better vaccines against it. This despite the fact that, until they resurrected this virus, it no longer existed in nature and posed zero threat to mankind.

It kind of reminds me of a Mary Shelley quote, the author of “Frankenstein,” who in 1818 stated:

“Frightful must it be; for supremely frightful would be the effect of any human endeavor to mock the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world.”

Massively lethal Omicron hybrid has now been engineered

Now, we come to learn that mad scientists at Boston University’s biosafety level 4 (BSL4) laboratory have engineered an Alpha/Omicron hybrid strain of SARS-CoV-2 with an 80% lethality in mice.

In the video above, John Campbell reviews this paper. He, like many others, are calling on the U.S. government to immediately close down this kind of research, and to destroy all the Frankenstein viruses already created. If they don’t exist in a lab somewhere, then they cannot escape.

Considering SARS-CoV-2 was most likely concocted in a lab, just like this hybrid, the fact that they continue tinkering with it to make it more lethal is indeed mind-bogglingly reckless.

What’s to prevent this souped-up hybrid from escaping and wiping out mankind? Sure, BSL4 labs have the tightest safety precautions, but that is no guarantee the virus won’t get out (especially if someone intentionally wants it out).

There have been plenty of lab leaks in the past, and as discussed by The Lancet COVID-19 Commission chairman Jeffrey Sachs in the video at the end of this article, evidence suggests SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a U.S.-backed research program in China.

Granted, effects on mice are not directly translatable to humans, but since SARS-CoV-2 appears particularly adapted to infecting humans, these results are certainly cause for concern.

And again, the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 somehow reassembling itself into a Wuhan strain with Omicron spike protein “in the wild” is just about nil. Why? Because the original Wuhan strain has vanished from the environment.

It has mutated out of existence already and been replaced by a series of new variants. So, the chance of the first, original strain getting mixed with one of the last — in nature, by itself — is beyond remote. Were it not for these madmen, we would never have had to worry about this kind of recombination.

Yet here we are, facing the possibility of an unimaginably deadly coronavirus — thanks to scientists who continue to act without moral compass. Just because something can be done doesn’t mean it should be done. As noted by Steve Kirsch:

“Presumably there is some benefit to creating a new strain of SARS-CoV-2 that has a case fatality rate (CFR) of 80% (up from the average 0.2% CFR for the current variants) and is highly contagious. I’m baffled as to what it is. …

“Here’s an idea how fast it could spread. Look at the slope of the purple curve … that’s Omicron. This is from a CDC paper. So expect the virus to spread everywhere in about a month. How fast will it wipe out the entire US population if released? It depends on how quickly the virus kills humans.” [MORE]

Mortality.com Data Suggests COVID Injections Have Caused a Huge Spike in Deaths in Germany

Contrary to Constant Media Lies Another Study Confirms that the Risk of Death from COVID is Almost 0% [zero percent] for the Majority of People and It Never Was Deadly to the Majority Around the World

From [HERE] A study confirmed that the risk of dying from the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is almost zero percent for the vast majority of people around the world.

According to the pre-print paper by Stanford University medical scientist Dr. John Ioannidis, COVID-19 mortality rates only range between zero percent and 0.57 percent among individuals younger than 70 years old worldwide. He looked at 36 studies plus an additional seven preliminary national estimates for his paper.

The Greek-born researcher broke down the mortality rates due to COVID-19 infection by age group:

• Zero to 19 years old – 0.0003 percent

• 20 to 29 years old – 0.003 percent

• 30 to 39 years old – 0.011 percent

• 40 to 49 years old – 0.035 percent

• 50 to 59 years old – 0.129 percent

• 60 to 69 years old – 0.501 percent

For more than two years, Ioannidis has asserted that the risk of the virus is very minimal – if not zero – and that public health protocols such as massive lockdowns, shutting down of businesses and schools, masking and vaccine mandates are really not needed. Together with the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, he has argued that the risk factor for most people is exponentially smaller than for the vulnerable, typically the elderly who already are afflicted with multiple serious illnesses, such as diabetes and heart disease

“Ioannidis insisted these people could be cared for in nursing, assisted living and private homes with early treatments while the healthy are allowed to go about their business,” independent news company WND reported.

Dr. Paul Alexander, a former adviser to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), agreed with Ioannidis in a piece on his Substack. He wrote: “Ioannidis shows us what we have been arguing for two years, to strongly protect the elderly and leave the rest of non-elderly society alone, free. No lockdowns or school closures, no mandates [and] no vaccine.” Moreover, the erstwhile HHS advisor also compiled more than 400 studiesreflecting how lockdowns, shelter-in-place policies, school closures, masks and mask mandates failed to minimize virus transmission and lessen death rates.

In a separate piece for the Brownstone Institute, Alexander stated that “restrictive policies were ineffective and devastating failures, causing immense harm, especially to the poor and vulnerable within societies.”

“We’ve known this for a very long time now, but governments continue to double down, causing misery upon people with ramifications that will likely take decades or more to repair.”

Experts proven correct: COVID-19 was never deadly to majority

Alexander pointed out that cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough and other experts have been right all along that the infection fatality rate (IFR) for the vast majority is really low, as per the studies they looked into. Ioannidis wrote in his study’s abstract that the “IFR of the virus among non-elderly people in the absence of vaccination or prior infection is important to estimate accurately, since 94 percent of the global population is younger than 70 years and 86 percent is younger than 60 years.”

The Stanford researcher echoed the Texas cardiologist’s point, suggesting early interventions for certain vulnerable age groups.

McCullough has always made it clear that both Big Pharma and Big Government should be denounced for allowing gain-of-function research and the COVID-19 vaccines, with the latter causing “the biggest medical-biological catastrophe of all time.” (Related: Prather Point: COVID-19 vaccine is the biggest medical-biological catastrophe of all time, says Dr. Peter McCullough – Brighteon.TV.)

“We had lost 250,000 Americans directly due to the virus. And since the vaccines, 750,000 people have died. The vaccines have actually prolonged the pandemic, didn’t stop the virus transmission and didn’t reduce hospitalization and death. It was all a series of false claims for an unsafe set of products,” he told Brighteon.TV host Jeffrey Prather during the Sept. 23, 2022 episode of the latter’s program “Prather Point.”

McCullough added that the widespread corruption in academic medicine, peer-reviewed literature and medical societies has suppressed introduction to early intervention methods and promoted fear in order to push the clot shots worldwide.

Another Analysis Suggests Fauci and Ralph Baric Created COVID as a Bio-Weapon pursuant to NIH Funded “gain of function” Research done to Increase the Ability of Pathogens to Infect and Harm People

From [CHD] Critics have long questioned why the National Institutes of Health (NIH) would fund experiments by University of North Carolina of Chapel Hill (UNC) professor Ralph Baric to develop a technique for hiding evidence of human tampering in laboratory-created super viruses.

Aided by some $220.5 million in National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) funding, Baric developed a so-called “Seamless Ligation” technique, which he boasted could perfectly conceal all evidence of human tampering in laboratory-created viruses. Baric nicknamed his invention the “no-see’m” method.

Now a new study, “Endonuclease fingerprint indicates a synthetic origin of SARS-CoV2,” published on the preprint server bioRxiv, shows that — apparently unbeknownst to Baric — the “seamless ligation” concealment gimmick leaves its own minute but legible signature.

Most momentously, these same researchers have discovered that damning signature in the genome of the virus that causes COVID-19.

Baric’s technique has long been controversial. “It’s the artist that doesn’t sign his name to the painting; the virologist that doesn’t put his signature into the virus to let us know whether or not it is emerging naturally or whether it is produced in a laboratory,” said Jeffrey Sachs, chair of The Lancet COVID-19 Commission, a task force that investigated the origins of COVID-19.

“All of it says, my God, there was really a big, very risky research agenda underway.”

This month, Sachs published the results of his 22-month investigation in The Lancet, including the damaging conclusion that COVID-19 was probably laboratory-generated and that the technology probably came from NIH-funded science.

Referring to Baric’s seamless ligation methodology, evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein observed:

“It’s the exact opposite of what you would do if your interest was public health. Public health scientists would be marking their enhancements with red flags — not devising ways to hide them. The only reason you would want a concealer is to advance a sinister purpose — such as illegal bioweapons development — some mischief that the scientist didn’t want traceable back to his lab.”

Baric taught his “no-see’m” method to the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s (WIV) “Bat Lady” Shi Zhengli in 2016. In return, Baric received Chinese coronaviruses collected by Shi from bats in Yunnan province. (Scientists have linked the COVID-19 genome’s pedigree to closely related bats.)

Shi and her colleagues at the Wuhan Institute subsequently demonstrated their mastery of Baric’s high-risk technique in a series of published — and highly controversial — gain-of-function experiments at the Wuhan lab. It has been even more puzzling to his critics that Baric, again with NIAID funding, chose to share this dangerous technique for weaponizing pathogens with Chinese scientists who have clear links to the Chinese military.

Experts say that the implications of this new study could be far-reaching. By pointing the finger at Baric, the study raises the possibility of potentially devastating liability for the NIAID and the University of North Carolina and other parties.

Scientists, including those close to Dr. Anthony Fauci, have repeatedly pointed out that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has genomic sequences that appear inconsistent with natural evolution: The COVID-19 virus is no longer infectious in bats, and its spiked protein feature — which is unknown in this family of coronavirus — includes numerous mutations that make it ideally infectious in humans.

The closest known coronavirus relative — a coronavirus from the Wuhan lab — is 96.2% identicalto SARS-CoV-2. The peculiar spike accounts almost completely for the entire 3.8% difference. Oddly, there are multiple novel mutations in the spike and almost none in the rest of the genome.

Natural evolution would be expected to leave mutations distributed evenly across the genome. The fact that virtually all the mutations occur on the spike led these scientists to suspect that that particular Wuhan lab coronavirus collected by Shi Zhengli is the direct progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 and that its new spike was implanted through engineering.

However, the unmistakable fingerprints of lab engineering were absent — leaving many experts wondering whether Baric’s technique was used to assemble a novel coronavirus with the engineered spike while removing the evidence of lab generation.

This new study connects the biological breadcrumbs that link federally funded research to a global pandemic. That trail leads directly to UNC and NIAID.

The authors of the study — a team of researchers from Duke University, University Clinics of Würzburg and an industry group — identified a characteristic signature in the amino acid code. That indelible artifact could only have emerged from Baric’s “no-see’m” methodology.

In an interview last spring, Baric himself confessed, that at the time the pandemic began, only two or three labs in the world were using his protocol — including his UNC lab and the WIV.

The study’s authors’ conclusions rest on the presence of unique sites in the COVID-19 virus. These sites allow special enzymes called “restriction enzymes” to cut the DNA into building blocks of unique size that then can be “stitched together in the correct order of the viral genome,” according to the study’s authors.

Essentially, Baric’s technique leaves behind unique spellings in the “genetic vocabulary.” The new words include “odd spelling choices” subtly distinguishing them from typical viral vocabulary.

The magic of Baric’s “no-see’m” technique is to invisibly weave these telltale “spelling” changes into the viral sequence between relevant genes without altering the viral protein. This is like changing the “spelling” of the word without changing its meaning; the casual listener will never notice the difference.

The research team used forensic tools to drill down on minute “spelling differences” in the SARS-CoV2 genome that betray laboratory tampering using the “no-see’m” technique.

Consider how a Brit would spell “colour,” “manoeuvre” or “paediatric.” The choice to spell a word in a certain way can reveal your nation of origin. Similarly, these nearly imperceptible changes in the viral sequence give away the laboratory origins of this virus.

In sharing his seamless ligation technique with Shi Zhengli, Baric assured that the WIV possessed all the required elements of the assembly process. EcoHealth Alliance’s infamous DEFUSE proposal describes the same techniques in detail. (submitted to The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, in 2018).

The world now has proof positive that SARS-CoV2 is an engineered laboratory creation generated with technology developed by Ralph Baric with U.S. government funding.

Prosecutors and private attorneys representing clients injured by the COVID-19 pandemic now have a smoking gun. The gun points at humanity. Forensic scientists have now successfully lifted faint but precise fingerprints from the lethal pistol’s grip and trigger. Those fingerprints belong to the NIAID and the University of North Carolina. [MORE]

Judge Orders Fauci, Other Authorities to Testify in Case where Government is Accused of Colluding with Social Media Companies to Censor Information About the Dangers of COVID Injections, "Free Speech"

From [HERE] A federal court ordered on Oct. 21 that Dr. Anthony Fauci and other top officials testify under oath at depositions in a case that has uncovered evidence of alleged federal government collusion with Big Tech companies to censor users.

The attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri and other plaintiffs allege that Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and President Joe Biden’s chief medical adviser, and other defendants colluded and coerced social media companies to “suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints and content” regarding COVID-19.

U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty went a step further than a previous ruling that forced written testimonies and ordered Fauci and other defendants to testify under oath at depositions.

“After finding documentation of a collusive relationship between the Biden Administration and social media companies to censor free speech, we immediately filed a motion to get these officials under oath,” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said in a statement.

“It is high time we shine a light on this censorship enterprise and force these officials to come clean to the American people, and this ruling will allow us to do just that. We’ll keep pressing for the truth.”

The New Civil Liberties Alliance, or NCLA, joined the lawsuit in August, representing renowned epidemiologists Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, as well as Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jill Hines.

NCLA attorney Jenin Younes said she looks forward to learning just how far the accused government officials went to push their COVID-19 “perspective.”

“For the first time, Dr. Fauci and seven other federal officials responsible for running an unlawful censorship enterprise will have to answer questions under oath about the nature and extent of their communications with tech companies,” Younes said in a statement to The Epoch Times.

Doughty also ordered the depositions of former White House press secretary Jen Psaki, White House Director of Digital Strategy Rob Flaherty, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy,  Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Director Jen Easterly and FBI Supervisory Special Agent Elvis Chan.

Fauci’s ‘self-serving blanket denials’

In his ruling, Doughty said he agreed with plaintiffs that Fauci’s previous “self-serving blanket denials” about his role in censoring views on social media couldn’t be taken at face value.

“Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci can prove he never communicated with social media platforms about censorship, there are compelling reasons that suggest Dr. Fauci has acted through intermediaries, and acted on behalf of others, in procuring the social-media censorship of credible scientific opinions,” Doughty said in his ruling.

“Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci acted indirectly or as an intermediary on behalf of others, it is still relevant to Plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion. The Court agrees.

“Lastly, Plaintiffs argue that Dr. Fauci’s credibility has been in question on matters related to supposed COVID-19 ‘misinformation’ since 2020. Specifically, Plaintiffs state that Dr. Fauci has made public statements on the efficacy of masks, the percentage of the population needed for herd immunity, NIAID’s funding of ‘gain-of-function’ virus research in Wuhan, the lab-leak theory and more.

“Plaintiffs urge that his comments on these important issues are relevant to the matter at hand and are further reasons why Dr. Fauci should be deposed. Plaintiffs assert that they should not be required to simply accept Dr. Fauci’s ‘self-serving blanket denials’ that were issued from someone other than himself at face value. The Court agrees.”

Censoring lab leak theory

The plaintiffs argued that Fauci allegedly insisted on the censorship of “speech backed by great scientific credibility and with enormous potential nationwide impact” that contradicted his views.

For example, he communicated in a long-shielded phone call with some scientists to discredit any theory that COVID-19 was the result of a “lab leak” in Wuhan, China. The scientists went on to write a paper severely reprimanding others who were open to the theory.

If the lab leak theory were true, in turn, it would mean that Fauci could be potentially implicated in funding the research on viruses that caused the COVID-19 pandemic that killed millions of people worldwide, the plaintiffs argued.

This is because he funded risky “gain-of-function” research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through intermediaries such as EcoHealth Alliance.

In late January 2020 and early February 2020, Fauci was also in touch with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in oral communications about the government’s COVID-19 response. Facebook then allegedly went on censor the lab leak theory, according to the plaintiffs.

‘Overwhelming’ need to depose officials

The court also found that Flaherty, Psaki, Andy Slavitt and other officials also have personal knowledge about the alleged censorship issues and ordered them to be deposed.

Doughty said there’s an “overwhelming” need for Flaherty to be deposed to determine whether fundamental rights to free speech were “abridged” as a result of alleged collusion between senior Biden administration officials and Big Tech.

The plaintiffs argued that Flaherty had “extensive” oral meetings with Twitter, Meta and YouTube on vaccine hesitancy and combatting misinformation related to COVID-19.

The judge said there’s a “substantive need” for the deposition of Slavitt, who served as the White House’s senior COVID-19 adviser. Doughty noted that Slavitt’s remarks on a podcast “showed he has specific knowledge as it relates” to the issues in the lawsuit.

The court order cited a series of public comments made by Psaki when she served as White House press secretary, including calling on social media platforms for consistency in banning disfavored speakers.

“Psaki has made a number of statements that are relevant to the Government’s involvement in a number of social-media platforms’ efforts to censor its users across the board for sharing information related to COVID-19,” Doughty said in his ruling.

In the 1960s when the Flu Vax was found to be ineffective Whistleblowers were Censored, Fired or Filtered Out by the Vested Interests

“The Only Reason I Voted No was that Hell No Wasn’t a Choice.' Top Pediatrician on FDA’s Vaccine Committee Rejects COVID Boosters Approved for 5-Year-Olds

From [HERE] On Wednesday, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the new COVID-19 boosters for children as young as 5 years old. The decision was followed by a recommendation from CDC Director Rochelle Walensky.

“Updated COVID-19 vaccines add Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 spike protein components to the current vaccine composition, helping to restore protection that has waned since previous vaccination and targeting recent Omicron variants that are more transmissible and immune-evading,” the CDC wrote in a statement.  

The agency added: “FDA’s authorization of updated (bivalent) COVID-19 vaccines for this younger age group, and CDC’s recommendation for use, are critical next steps forward in our country’s vaccination program—a program that has helped provide increased protection against severe COVID-19 disease and death.”

PROMINENT PEDIATRICIAN DISAGREES 

But a member of the FDA’s Vaccine Advisory Committee did not agree with the decision to approve the bivalent boosters.

Dr. Paul Offit is one of the country’s most prominent pediatricians. He serves as director of the Vaccine Education Center and professor of pediatrics in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. In addition, he is the Maurice R. Hilleman Professor of Vaccinology at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania.

“We really need much better data, I think, before we move forward on this, and I can only hope that it’s coming,” Dr. Offit said in a video that has gone viral on Twitter. “I feel very strongly about my ‘no’ vote there, in fact, the only reason I voted ‘no’ was that ‘hell no’ wasn’t a choice […] The fix was in here a little bit, maybe that’s not the right phrase, but it was something that they wanted…” he added.

“I DIDN’T SEE THE BENEFITS”

As previously reported by The Florida Standard, the bivalent boosters only rely on data from testing on eight mice. 

“I don’t think you should ever ask tens of millions of people to get a vaccine based on mouse data,” Dr. Offit stated in an interview with NBC 10 Philadelphia on August 22.

“Do the benefits of this vaccine outweigh the risks? I didn’t see the benefits,” Dr. Offit said.

The World’s 2nd-Largest PR Firms Representing Pfizer and Moderna Have Staff Embedded in the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vaccine Division

From [HERE] The world’s second-largest global relations firms representing Pfizer and Moderna has staff embedded in the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) vaccine division. 

During the 2020 pandemic, the CDC, with U.S. tax dollars, paid Weber Shandwick to “boost its health communication” during the pandemic, which involved campaigns that encouraged Americans to get vaccinated. 

The New York-based firm has been responsible for elevating Pfizer’s profile since 2003 and partnered with Moderna in June 2022 to market its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine despite being a rival to Pfizer’s. 

Weber Shandwick’s conflict of interest was brought to light in a LinkedIn post by an employee of the PR firm last year who said they were excited about starting a job at the PR firm and working with the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD). 

The NCIRD implements vaccine programs and heads the agency’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), according to an exposé newsletter by investigative journalist Paul D. Thacker.

Weber Shandwick in 2020 secured a $ 50 million contract from the U.S. Government to promote flu vaccines to the public. Responsibilities included circulating social media posts and articles promoting vaccines and sending press releases to the media. It was also involved in paid media advertising. 

A “$50 million contract allows PR firm to be ‘embedded at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta as part of the Division of Viral Diseases team,’” said Thacker in a tweet Tuesday.

According to Daily Mail, a spokesperson for Weber Shandwick told the media outlet the firm had a “thorough vetting and mitigation process to avoid conflicts.”

Craig Holman, a lobbyist on Capitol Hill for Public Citizen, criticized the CDC for its obvious conflict of interest.

“This is irresponsible of CDC to issue a PR contract to Weber Shandwick,” he told the DisInformation Chronicle on Substack. “Knowing that the firm also works for Moderna and Pfizer.”

Pfizer currently controls about 70% of the U.S, and European markets and brought in roughly $81 billion in 2021 — mostly from its COVID-19 vaccine. This year the pharmaceutical giant expects to bring in $50 billion from just its vaccine and antiviral medication Paxlovid — infamous for causing “rebound COVID.”

According to The Epoch Times, Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna last year brought in a combined estimated pre-tax profit of $1,000 a second, $65,000 a minute or $93.5 million a day. 

The companies plan to continue to rake in the profits with their endless experimental booster shots, currently recommended for everyone 12 and over. 

Plandemic: Irrational US lockdowns and Fear Driven Panic Miraculously Healed the US/China Trade Rift that had been Developing for the 2 Years Prior

From [HERE] The story of the shocking lockdowns, in the US and around the world, of Spring of 2020 is impossible to tell without the central role of China, where lockdowns began and where the virus is believed to have originated. The World Health Organization, with the UK and the US as signatories, proclaimed that China managed the virus properly in an influential reportdated February 26, 2020. 

This series of events did not occur in a vacuum. The US and China were in the thick of a fiery trade war, with nearly two years of rounds of claims and counterclaims, fines and retaliations, as well as on and off rounds of negotiations that proved fruitless. There was plenty of carnage on both sides along the way. 

Is there a way in which the two fields of battle – the trade row and the virus response – are somehow linked? Was the selling of lockdowns as a virus response its own form of trade retaliation? Many have speculated along those lines. 

And there’s another intriguing prospect raised by this stark reality: even while the US was in the thick of a cruel lockdown that crushed small business and so much of American civic life, trade with China actually began to recover, due mostly to the persuasive gifts of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. Perhaps this was not an accident.

Let’s review the series of events.

Starting in 2018, President Trump imposed tariffs on trade with China. It was an unusual approach by any postwar standard. Normally presidents past would impose tariffs on goods from any country in the name of protecting domestic industry, or perhaps target a single country on grounds of national security. 

This was different – targeting a single country on economic grounds – and it happened because Trump had a list of countries with whom the US ran a trade deficit, which he saw as proof of how “they” owed “us” money. 

So he started at the top of the list (China) and went down (Mexico, Germany, and even Canada). There is no evidence that he fully understood either what it means to have a “trade deficit” or that these policies could not force any other country to pay anything; American consumers and businesses pay the tariffs as another form of taxation to the US government. 

In any case, contrary to what Trump promised and expected, Xi Jinping retaliated and made it ever more difficult for the US to export to or import from China. Consumers and producers on both sides suffered. For a while, the consequences for China were devastating. By October 2018, imports from China to the US fell off a cliff. 

Matters became far worse with pandemic lockdowns in the US, a period during which China had opened up completely. Trump shut down travel to China on January 31, 2020, thinking that this would keep the virus out that had been in the US already six months, and continually referred to the “China virus.” A pathogen from China was something that Trump believed he needed to stop. The result was another blow to US-China trade. 

Anthony Fauci’s deputy assistant H. Clifford Lane went to China in mid-February 2020 to observe how China had supposed crushed the virus through brutal lockdowns, and, through a WHO report, urged the US to follow the same course. Trump went along at the urging of Fauci, Deborah Birx, and his son-in-law Jared Kushner, as well as vice president Mike Pence. [MORE]

Corpse Biden Extends the Manufactured COVID “Emergency,” thereby Extending the Govt's Grant of Immunity for Any Injury Caused by COVID Shots to Any “Vaccine” Maker” or Person who Administer Shots

The U.S. has extended the COVID public health emergency through Jan. 11, despite corpse Joe Biden’s recent claim that the pandemic is over. Yep “over” because it never existed in the first place.

The public health emergency, first declared in January 2020 by the Trump administration, has been renewed every 90 days since the plandemic began. [MORE]

The extension of the manufactured COVID emergency (plandemic) means that emergency use authorization immunity for fake COVID vaccines also continues.

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.)

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.”

Authorities in US and China Continue to Ignore Natural Immunity to COVID to Promote Depopulation, Genocide

From [HERE] Global giants U.S. and China still require proof of vaccination and ignore natural immunity to the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) despite multiple studies proving it is better in all respects than vaccine immunity.

In China, travelers need to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and have obtained proof of vaccination to apply for visas. The communist nation even provides easier visa application procedures with looser requirements for people who were vaccinated using Chinese-made COVID-19 vaccines.

In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) requires non-citizens and non-immigrant passengers alike arriving from a foreign country by air to present proof of vaccination. Worse yet, the CDC’s guidelines for incoming air travelers does not recognize those with natural immunity. (Related: After destroying American society, the CDC admits natural immunity works better than COVID jabs.)

“At this time all non-citizen, non-immigrant air passengers traveling to the United States, regardless of antibody status, are required to provide proof of COVID-19 vaccination,” reads the CDC’s page on COVID-19 vaccination requirements for air travelers entering the country.

Natural immunity is far superior than so-called vaccine immunity – and many countries are responding accordingly

Multiple studies since nearly the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccine rollouts in late 2020 have proven that natural immunity to COVID-19, acquired through previous infection, is far superior to any so-called immunity provided by the experimental and ineffective COVID-19 vaccines.

One such study was released in late September by the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet, one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world.

The study, conducted by researchers from Quebec and British Columbia in Canada, found: “Previous omicron BA.1 primary infection alone was the single most protective factor against BA.2 reinfection (risk reduction of 72 percent), and was associated with higher protection than pre-omicron primary infection alone (38 percent), or even than three doses of mRNA vaccine in people with no previous infection (46 percent).”

“Receiving natural immunity is better than three mRNA doses – that’s two primary doses and a booster,” commented investigative journalist Jefferey Jaxen on “The Highwire with Del Bigtree.”

In response to this study, the government of Canada has lifted COVID-19 mask, testing and ArriveCan – a digital vaccine passport – requirements for people entering the country. Air Canada, the country’s flag carrier and largest airline, welcomed the decision, saying the reduction in travel requirements is desperately needed for the benefit of travelers and the economy.

Canada is not the only country with data supporting both the strength of natural immunity and the weakness of so-called vaccine immunity.

In the United Kingdom, one study also published by The Lancet found that people with higher body mass indexes who got vaccinated with one or two doses of the COVID-19 vaccines had “a higher risk of test positivity after vaccination,” proving that the vaccines actually lowered their immunity.

In Sweden, a preprint study published in SSRN found that its results were similar to the previously mentioned U.K. study, “albeit with even more rapidly waning effectiveness.” The study found that “vaccinated individuals experienced a higher risk of infection [to the omicron variant] than those unvaccinated.”

Both Sweden and the United Kingdom have relaxed many of their requirements for travelers entering their respective countries.

“We have talked about this so much. The vaccine is helping you get infected,” commented Bigtree. “What negative efficacy means, you’re doing worse than had you not had anything at all. Which means somehow it’s better for your immune system to be more vulnerable, the exact opposite of what a product like this is supposed to be doing to you.”