Expert Asks FDA, “How many have to die before you pull the plug?” FDA Panel Recommends Pfizer Injection for Young Kids Despite Evidence Vax is Unnecessary and Risk of Injury is Greater than COVID Risk

PROTECTING KIDS AGAINST WHAT? From [CHD] and [MORE] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) advisory committee today endorsed Pfizer’s COVID vaccine for children ages 5 to 11, despite strong objections raised during the meeting by multiple scientists and physicians.

The vote passed with 17 supporting it and one abstention.

Before the shots can be rolled out, the FDA will have to formally authorize the vaccine, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) must also weigh in with its own recommendations — but the Biden administration’s announcement last week that it has already ordered 68 million doses of the pediatric vaccine suggests Pfizer’s request will sail through.

During today’s meeting, the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Committee (VRBPAC) heard evidence from Pfizer and regulators, and listened to concerns from numerous experts.

According to the FDA website, as of Oct. 25, the agency had received 139,470 comments from the public prior to today’s meeting — a number federal officials described as strikingly high.

As he opened the meeting, Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), said, “I want to acknowledge the fact that there are strong feelings that have clearly been expressed by members of the public both for and against” authorization.

Marks stressed the only question before the experts was whether shots should be allowed, not whether to mandate them, the New York Times reported.

The dose for younger children would be one-third the strength given to people 12 and older, with two shots given three weeks apart.

Based on CDC data presented during the meeting, among children 5 to <12 years of age, there have been approximately 1.8 million confirmed and reported COVID cases since the beginning of the pandemic, and only 143 COVID-related deaths in the U.S. through Oct. 14.

In this same age group, there were 8,622 COVID-related hospitalizations through Sept 18.

“This translates to cumulative incidence rates of approximately 6,000 and 30 per 100,000 for confirmed COVID cases and COVID-related hospitalizations, respectively, among children 5 to <12 years of age,” Pfizer’s application said.

Children with underlying medical conditions, such as asthma, diabetes and obesity, made up two-thirds of severe COVID cases.

Pfizer provided safety data on two study cohorts of children ages 5 to 11, both of roughly equal size. The first group was followed only for about two months, the second for only two-and-a-half weeks.

The two-month cohort included 2,268 children ages 5 to 11. Of the 2,268 children, 1,518 received the vaccine and 750 received a placebo. Each received two shots spaced three weeks apart.

Pfizer’s study found its vaccine was about 91% effective against symptomatic COVID in children, based on 16 cases of COVID in the placebo group and three cases in the vaccinated group over the brief follow-up period.

Most side effects occurred within a couple of days and included pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, muscle pains and chills, Pfizer said.

According to Pfizer, the number of participants in the current clinical development program was “too small to detect any potential risks of myocarditis associated with vaccination.”

Long-term safety of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine “to evaluate long-term sequelae of post-vaccination myocarditis/pericarditis” in participants 5 to <12 years of age will not be studied until after the vaccine is authorized for children,” Pfizer’s application noted.

Pfizer data insufficient, kids’ risk of vaccine injury greater than COVID risk, experts say

Experts raised concerns over the lack of safety and efficacy data presented by Pfizer for use of its COVID vaccine in younger children, and they pointed to increasing safety signals based on reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

They also questioned the need to vaccinate children — whose risk of dying from COVID is “almost nil” — at all.

According to Dr. Meryl Nass, member of the Children’s Health Defense Scientific Advisory Panel, Pfizer once again did not use all of the children who participated in the trial in their safety study.

“Three thousand children received Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, but only 750 children were selectively included in the company’s safety analysis,” Nass said. “Studies in the 5-11 age group are essentially the same as the 12-15 group — in other words, equally brief and unsatisfying, with inadequate safety data and efficacy data, with no strong support for why this type of immuno-bridging analysis is sufficient.”

Nass said, “All serious adverse events were considered unrelated to the vaccine.”

During the meeting and in its FDA application, Pfizer argued children should be vaccinated to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission, yet the company did not assess asymptomatic transmission.

Dr. Ofer Levy, a VRBPAC member, asked for evidence that Pfizer’s vaccine prevents transmission.

Dr. William Gruber, senior vice president of Pfizer Vaccine Clinical Research and Development, said they did not assess whether the vaccine prevents transmission, but said there is evidence the vaccine prevents transmission in adults.

When questioned further, Gruber was unable to cite specific evidence to back his assertion.

Steve Kirsch, founder of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, asked the panel how they could do a risk-benefit analysis with Pfizer’s COVID vaccine if they did not know the CDC’s VAERS under-reporting factor (URF).

Kirsch asked:

“How can you do a risk-benefit of analysis of COVID vaccines if you don’t know the URF? This is extremely, extremely important. You have been assuming it has been one. It is not one. Using a URF of 41, which is calculated using CDC methodology, we find over 300,000 excess deaths in VAERS. If the vaccine didn’t kill these people, what did?”

“How many Americans have to die before you pull the plug?” Kirsch asked.

Kirsch also questioned the panel on why Maddie de Garay’s severe adverse reaction to the Pfizer vaccine, which left her paralyzed, was not reported by the company to the FDA.

Dr. Jessica Rose, viral immunologist and biologist, told the panel EUA of biological agents requires the existence of an emergency and the nonexistence of alternate treatment.

“There is no emergency and COVID-19 is exceedingly treatable,” Rose said.

In a peer-reviewed study co-authored by Rose, myocarditis rates were significantly higher in people 13 to 23 years old within eight weeks of the COVID vaccine rollout.

In 12- to15-year-olds, Rose said, reported cases of myocarditis were 19 times higher than background rates.

“In an act of censorship, this paper has been temporarily removed and it has now been killed without criticism of the work,” Rose said, noting the timing of the removal was strange.

Rose said tens of thousands of reports have been submitted to VAERS for children ages 0 to 18.

Rose explained:

“In this age group, 60 children have died — 23 of them were less than 2 years old. It is disturbing to note that “product administered to patient of inappropriate age was filed 5,510 times in this age group. Two children were inappropriately injected, presumably by a trained medical professional, and subsequently died.”

Dr. Josh Guetzkow, a senior lecturer at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, said expanding the EUA to children is unnecessary, premature and will do more harm than good.

Guetzkow said there is no emergency for children, especially healthy ones whose risk of severe illness and death is “almost nil.”

Guetzkow said kids with pre-existing conditions and prior COVID infections were not included in Pfizer’s study, so including them in the EUA is negligence.

“Pfizer’s trial is woefully underpowered to detect specific safety concerns, such as myocarditis, just like the adolescent study was, and if they weren’t able to detect an unexpected safety concern there, they wouldn’t be able to here,” Guetzkow said.

Guetzkow said:

“In Pfizer’s study, only .5% of controls were dropped due to important protocol violations, versus 3% in the treatment group. The odds of that happening by chance are 1 in 10,000. This deviation is poorly explained with no ITT analysis. The study is not double-blind and may be subject to bias. Most VSD safety monitoring programs have not reported results, why not wait?”

Guetzkow said, “from CDC reports, we can expect that for every 18 child hospitalizations prevented, at least 43 will end up in the hospital for all causes following vaccination,” yet, the “FDA’s risk-benefit analysis only counts myocarditis hospitalization.”

“Why ignore the V-safe data, and shouldn’t FDA verify Pfizer’s efficacy and immunobridging analysis first?” he asked.

Guetzkow said VAERS shows alarming safety signals, which cannot be attributed to increased vaccination, simulated reporting or COVID infections.

“We calculated the ratio of adverse events reported per million Pfizer vaccinations to reports per million flu vaccinations among teenagers to see what to expect in children. Serious events are reported 51% more often for Pfizer, deaths 47 times, life-threatening conditions 49 times,” Guetzkow said.

Guetzkow asked the panel to look at the data on COVID vaccines compared to flu vaccines. Pointing to the data on reproductive organs, Guetzkow asked, “why would we expect children to take these risks to protect adults?”

There are more than 900 types of adverse events reported after Pfizer vaccination that have never been reported after flu vaccines, including 11 cases of multisystem-inflammatory syndrome (MS-C) that occurred without previous history of COVID infection, Guetzkow said.

He added that if the panel was considering authorizing Pfizer’s COVID vaccine to prevent MS-C — as Pfizer’s application suggested as one of the reasons they should — the panel should reconsider.

During another part of the meeting, Julia Barnes-Weise, director of the Global Healthcare Innovation Alliance Accelerator, said pharmaceutical companies have concerns.

“One of them is, especially for a not-yet-approved vaccine, that they could be held liable for any injury that that vaccine seems to have caused,” Barnes-Weise said.

In a preliminary analysis last week, FDA reviewers said protection would “clearly outweigh” the risk of a very rare side effect in almost all scenarios of the pandemic, PBS News Hour reported.

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) said yesterday it would take legal action against the FDA if it granted EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for children 5- to 11- years old.

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi: 'COVID Vaccines are Killing People Not Protecting Them. Governments, Dependent Media and Pharmaceutical Companies are Complicit in Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity'

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi is a Thai-German microbiologist who has been speaking out against the COVID-19 hysteria since the beginning of the crisis. He was a post-doctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics in Freiburg and at The Protein Laboratory in Copenhagen. Dr. Bhakdi joined the Institute of Medical Microbiology at Giessen University and named chair of Medical Microbiology at the University of Mainz. Dr. Bhakdi has published over three hundred articles in the fields of immunology, bacteriology, virology, and parasitology, for which he has received numerous awards and the Order of Merit of Rhineland-Palatinate. [MORE]

YOU ARE BEING LIED TO BY GOVERNMENTS, CORPORATIONS AND THEIR MEDIA AND YOU ARE BEING EXPERIMENTED ON [but enjoy your illusions]. From [EvidenceNotFear] COVID-19 is a disease defined by symptoms and not a virus. It’s therefore not transmitted nor can you test for it using nasal or throat testing kits. SARS-CoV-2 is the coronavirus that prompted the worldwide pandemic response.

In at least 80% of cases, the virus produces either no symptoms or a mild cold-like illness. For most of the population, the infection fatality rate for COVID-19 is 0.15%-0.2%. This brings it close to seasonal flu which is around 0.1%-0.2%.

The vast majority of us have no risk of dying from COVID-19. Studies show that 99.94% survive COVID-19 and will be resistant for a long time. The QCovid risk calculator from Oxford University can be used to calculate your risk of death or hospitalisation.

The people at risk from COVID-19 are clearly defined and should be protected with targeted measures. Children are not susceptible to it nor do they transmit the virus.

However, COVID-19 can be deadly for older and vulnerable people so it’s important to protect them. This will help eliminate hospital overcrowding. Nevertheless, the average age of someone who dies from COVID-19 is around 82 years. This is higher than the average life expectancy in the UK which is around 81 years.

Lockdowns will prevent population immunity and prolong the problem. Isolating the vulnerable and allowing the remaining population to practice safe distancing has been a historically proven way of dealing with flu-like viruses.

Fear instilled by panic and hysteria in the media is causing more people to die. Many are refusing to seek medical care because they are afraid to leave their homes. Others have not received proper medical care because of new procedures put in place.

There is no strong medical evidence that face masks prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19. This is even stated in government guidelines for businesses.

COVID-19 style social distancing has little to do with the historically proven practice of isolating sick people. There is no scientific evidence that these measures prevent the spread of the disease.

Over 7,800 Doctors, Scientists Accuse COVID Policymakers of ‘Crimes Against Humanity’

From [HERE] Since The Defender on Monday first reported on the Physicians Declaration, the number of signatories has grown from 4,600 to more than 7,800 as of 8 a.m. ET, Thursday, Sept. 30.

An international group of physicians and scientists signed a declaration Friday accusing COVID-19 policy-makers of “crimes against humanity” for preventing the use of life saving treatments on their patients.

As of Monday morning, the Physicians Declaration had garnered more than 4,600 signatures. The signers accused policymakers of forcing a “one-size-fits-all” treatment strategy, resulting in “needless illness and death,” rather than “upholding fundamental concepts of the individualized.”

According to Global COVID Summit, the declaration was created by physicians and scientists during the Rome COVID Summit. The signatories are professionals, many of whom are on the front lines of treating COVID patients.

The Global COVID Summit reported:

“Though the declaration’s signatories are diverse in their specialties, treatment philosophies and medical opinions, they have risen up to take a collective stand against authoritarian measures by corporations, medical associations, and governments and their respective agencies. The objective of the declaration is to reclaim their leadership role in conquering this pandemic.”

The Declaration states:

“The Physicians’ Declaration was first read at the Rome COVID Summit, catalyzing an explosion of active support from medical scientists and physicians around the globe. These professionals were not expecting career threats, character assassination, papers and research censored, social accounts blocked, search results manipulated, clinical trials and patient observations banned, and their professional history and accomplishments altered or omitted in academic and mainstream media.

“Thousands have died from COVID as a result of being denied life-saving early treatment. The Declaration is a battle cry from physicians who are daily fighting for the right to treat their patients, and the right of patients to receive those treatments — without fear of interference, retribution or censorship by government, pharmacies, pharmaceutical corporations, and big tech.”

The signatories created a “doctors- and scientists-only” COVID information platform so citizens can make informed decisions for their families “without interruption, manipulation, politicization or profiteering from external forces outside of the doctor-patient relationship.”

Prominent Doctor Says Studies Prove People Have Already Developed Immunity to COVID, Vaccines Have No Benefit and are Dangerous b/c They Cause the Body to Attack Its Own Cells Which Can Cause Death

From [EvidenceNotFear]

Sucharit Bhakdi was born in Washington, DC, and educated at schools in Switzerland, Egypt, and Thailand. He studied medicine at the University of Bonn in Germany, where he received his MD in 1970. He was a post-doctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics in Freiburg from 1972 to 1976, and at The Protein Laboratory in Copenhagen from 1976 to 1977. He joined the Institute of Medical Microbiology at Giessen University in 1977 and was appointed associate professor in 1982. He was named chair of Medical Microbiology at the University of Mainz in 1990, where he remained until his retirement in 2012. Dr. Bhakdi has published over three hundred articles in the fields of immunology, bacteriology, virology, and parasitology, for which he has received numerous awards and the Order of Merit of Rhineland-Palatinate. Sucharit Bhakdi and his wife, Karina Reiss, live with their three-year-old son, Jonathan Atsadjan, in a small village near the city of Kiel. [MORE]

Contrary to Blight House Propaganda, Harvard Study Finds Covid-19 Surged Most Among Vaxxed Communities

From [HERE] Countries with a higher percentage of fully vaccinated people have higher rates of Covid-19 cases, a study by Harvard researchers claims.

The study, titled, “Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2,947 counties in the United States,” was published late last month at the National Institutes of Health website and the peer-reviewed European Journal of Epidemiology.

On its face, the study purports rises in Covid cases are unrelated to vaccination rates, however, data presented in the study gives the exact opposite impression.

For example, the study claims, “At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days.”

However, it goes on to say, “In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.”

“Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days,” the study authors state.

“The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal,” the study notes, going on to demonstrate a meaningful association.

“Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated.”

The study goes on to illustrate the correlational relationship between vaccines and Covid rates in US counties. [MORE]

Is it Voodoo or a Lack of Dependent Media Propaganda that is Preventing COVID From Spreading in Haiti? Only 649 Total Deaths in a Country of 11 Million People Not Wearing Masks, Less than 1% Vaxed

According to "FUNKTIONARY:

mass media - "Massa' Media. Massa's media plus + Mass Hypnosis = Mindless Masses. 2) The "Mess" Media. 3) wholesale re-tale--retelling the whole tale (propaganda) exactly as you're told, consistently and relentlessly. How can you possibly relate when you are framed by the very debate wherein you are an unwilling spectator? Let's be perfectly cleat on this. There's no counter-option or outlet to vent when you're under the controlled thoughtform of mass-think manufactured consent. "Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one." -A.J. Liebling. (See: Media, T.V., Mass, Alienation, Spectacle Society, NEWS, ABCTV, Propaganda, Legislation & The New God Economy)

Dependent Media - Establishment (dependent) media is both unwilling and incapable of reporting events truthfully, accurately or without extreme bias. News coverage is just that - covering up (masking) and distorting the events and those wielding power behind the events (those reported and deliberately unreported). News coverage has simply become “disinfotaiment” with the sole purpose of perception and knowledge containment as well as reality concealment. You report in the interests of those who are paying you to do so. (see MEDIA, NBC & NEWS).

No Dependent Media in Haiti, No COVID Hoax; Haiti to Send Back Expiring US Moderna Vaccines. From [HERE] Haiti, which has one of the lowest Covid-19 vaccination rates in the Western Hemisphere, will be returning thousands of unused doses donated by the U.S. to keep them from expiring. 

According to the NY Times Haiti, where the August earthquake killed at least 2,200 people, has fully inoculated less than 1 percent of its population. [MORE] In a country of roughly 11 million people, there have been an astoundingly low 649 deaths due to Covid-19 since the pandemic began. In December 2020 there had been a reported 234 deaths. The country has only reported 22,731 cases.

The COVAX Facility, which provides free and subsidized vaccines to the poorest nations, confirmed in an emailed statement Wednesday that the doses returned by Haiti will be redeployed elsewhere to “minimize any potential wastage.”

“Hundreds of thousands” of doses expiring in November will be sent to COVAX with the understanding that Haiti will receive a new batch in the future, Le Nouvelliste newspaper reported, citing health ministry officials. The exact number of vaccines being sent back was not confirmed by the government or the COVAX facility.

The U.S. donated 500,000 doses of the Moderna Inc vaccine to Haiti in July through COVAX -- an abbreviation for COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access. According to Haiti’s health ministry, fewer than 66,800 doses have been administered and only 20,354 people in the Caribbean nation of 11.4 million are fully vaccinated. 

Lots of Problems in Haiti but COVID Isn’t 1 of Them: Doctor says Hospitals are Not Overrun w/COVID Patients in Crowded, Poor, Unvaccinated Country Not Practicing Social Distancing or Wearing Masks

Prior to the earthquake in December 2020 the Miami Herald reported: In Haiti, they are acting like COVID-19 doesn’t exist. Mask-wearing is an exception and not the norm; bands are playing to sold-out crowds; and Kanaval, the three-day pre-Lenten debauchery-encouraging street party is back on for February. . .

Across the border in the neighboring Dominican Republic, with roughly the same population, the pandemic has killed almost ten times the number, 2,364. Jet off to Miami-Dade County, home to one of the larger Haitian communities in the United States, and the death toll is even higher: 4,002 in a population of 2.7 million.

What’s going on? Nobody is sure. “We don’t have a large quantity of people who are in bad shape,” said Dr. Sophia Cherestal Wooley, deputy medical coordinator for Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières in Port-au-Prince. “They don’t get sick to the point that they need to be hospitalized and we don’t have the same quantity of people who have died here like in the Dominican Republic.

Shortly after the first imported case of COVID-19 was confirmed in Haiti on March 19, epidemiologists raised alarms. Taking into account Haiti’s weak health system, crowded living conditions and the population’s skepticism about the virus, they feared that the country, which has seen so much tragedy, would be overwhelmed by COVID-19 infections. At best, there would be 2,000 deaths, the models predicted. At worst, around 20,000. Even the Pan American Health Organization, citing a surge of Haitians crossing the border from the Dominican Republic to escape a spike there and the country’s ongoing political and humanitarian crises, voiced concerns about a pending crisis.

But fears that the deadly pandemic could unleash civil unrest and an even deeper humanitarian crisis have so far not proven accurate. “Today Haiti has been mildly affected compared to other countries in the region,” Dr. Sylvain Aldighieri, incident manager at the Pan American Health Organization, said. “But the collateral effects, the socioeconomics, health and nutritional are considerable.” Still, the low number of deaths is especially surprising because of the government’s own chaotic response and lax enforcement of its own rules.

Ministry of Health surveillance data show that Haiti experienced a first peak at the end of May into early June, and hospitalizations, while rising at one point, never reached critical levels. [MORE]

Contrary to Cult Logic that Billionaires and Global Pharmaceutical Corporations are Only Motivated by Good, Pfizer, Moderna are Projected to Rake in Combined $93 Billion in 2022 COVID Vax Sales

From [HERE] Vaccine makers Pfizer and Moderna are projected to generate combined sales of $93.2 billion in 2022 nearly twice the amount they’re expected to rake in this year, said Airfinity, a health data analytics group.

Airfinity put total market sales for COVID vaccines in 2022 at $124 billion, according to the Financial Times.

Pfizer vaccine sales are predicted to reach $54.5 billion in 2022, and Moderna’s will hit $38.7 billion. The estimates blow the earlier figures — $23.6 billion for Pfizer and $20 billion for Moderna — out of the water.

“The numbers are unprecedented,” Rasmus Beck Hansen, CEO of Airfinity, told the Financial Times.

Sales of the mRNA shots will continue to rise in 2022 due to boosters and countries stockpiling to ward off variants, Airfinity said.

Pfizer will generate 64% of its sales, and Moderna 75% of its sales, from high-income countries in 2022, the analysts predicted.

In April, Pfizer predicted 2021 COVID vaccine sales of $26 billion. After second-quarter results were reported, Pfizer upped the figure to $33.5 billion. Bernstein analyst Ronny Gal said the company could ring up an additional $10 billion in vaccine sales in 2021.

Gal wrote:

“The numbers are going to be much higher. The guidance of $33.5B reflects contracts signed to today which reflect total commitment to sell 2.1 million doses (at average price of $15.95). Pfizer notes they expect to manufacture 3 million doses. Presumably much of those will be sold as well, albeit at lower average price as consumption shifts to emerging markets. This is probably another $10 billion.”

“The second quarter was remarkable in a number of ways,” Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said. “Most visibly, the speed and efficiency of our efforts with BioNTech to help vaccinate the world against COVID-19 have been unprecedented, with now more than a billion doses of BNT162b2 having been delivered globally.”

On a conference call, Bourla said that while “it’s very early to speak” about the company’s sales expectations for next year, he put Pfizer’s 2022 production capacity at 4 billion doses.

According to ActionAid International — a global federation working for a world free of poverty and injustice — Moderna, Pfizer and BioNTech are reaping “astronomical and unconscionable profits” due to their monopolies of mRNA COVID vaccines.

Moderna and BioNTech are reporting 69% profit margins, with Moderna and Pfizer paying little in taxes, the People’s Vaccine Alliance said Sept. 15.

Thanks to patent monopolies for COVID vaccines — development of which was supported by $100 billion in public funding from taxpayers in the U.S., Germany and other countries — the three corporations earned more than $26 billion in revenue in the first half of the year, at least two-thirds of it as pure profit for Moderna and BioNTech.

The Alliance also estimated the three corporations are over-charging, pricing their vaccines by as much as $41 billion above the estimated cost of production.

“Big Pharma’s business model — receive billions in public investments, charge exorbitant prices for life-saving medicines, pay little tax — is gold dust for wealthy investors and corporate executives but devastating for global public health,” said Robbie Silverman, private sector engagement manager for Oxfam.

Silverman said pharmaceutical companies are prioritizing their own profits by enforcing their monopolies and selling their  vaccines to the highest bidder. “Enough is enough — we must start putting people before profits,” Silverman said.

According to an analysis by the People’s Vaccine Alliance, based on work by MRNA scientists at Imperial college, Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech have charged up to 24 times the potential cost of production for their vaccines.

Analysis of production techniques for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, which were developed only thanks to $8.3 billion of public funding, suggest these same vaccines could be made for as little as $1.20 a dose.

Vaxx Deadidency: Are We Witnessing Organized Mass Murder? In New Report a Fraud Expert Says the Number of Deaths and Serious Injuries Due to COVID Injections is 5X higher than what CDC has Reported

From [HERE] A new detailed analysis called the Vaccine Death Report implies that we may be witnessing the “greatest organized mass murder in the history of our world.”

Investigative journalist David John Sorensen and world renowned 'Physician of Presidents' and nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize Dr. Vladimir Zelenko combined their knowledge to reveal something devastating to the world: the scientific data overwhelmingly shows how millions may have died from the covid injections, and hundreds of millions are suffering crippling side effects, that often permanently disable the victims for life. The Vaccine Death Report provides all the data, along with hundreds of references, for further investigation.

The report states “the purpose of this report is to document how all over the world millions of people have died, and hundreds of millions of serious adverse events have occurred, after injections with the experimental mRNA gene therapy. We also reveal the real risk of an unprecedented genocide.”

The full report is [HERE] BW has reproduced the following excerpts below:

COMPLICITY

The data suggests that we may currently be witnessing the greatest organized mass murder in the history of our world. The severity of this situation compels us to ask this critical question: will we rise to the defense of billions of innocent people? Or will we permit personal profit over justice, and be complicit? Networks of lawyers all over the world are preparing class-action lawsuits to prosecute all who are serving this criminal agenda. To all who have been complicit so far, we say: There is still time to turn and choose the side of truth. Please make the right choice.

AT LEAST 5 TIMES MORE DEATHS

CDC WHISTLEBLOWER SIGNS SWORN AFFIDAVIT

VAERS data from the American CDC shows that as of September 17, 2021, already 726,963 people suffered adverse events, including stroke, heart failure, blood clots, brain disorders, convulsions, seizures, inflammations of brain & spinal cord, life-threatening allergic reactions, autoimmune diseases, arthritis, miscarriage, infertility, rapid-onset muscle weakness, deafness, blindness, narcolepsy, and cataplexy. Besides the astronomical number of severe side effects, the CDC reports that almost 15,386 people died as a result of receiving the experimental injections. However, a CDC healthcare fraud detection expert named Jane Doe investigated this and came to the shocking discovery that the number of deaths is at least five times higher than what the CDC is admitting. In fact, in her initial communications to professor in medicine Dr. Peter McCullough, this whistleblower said that the number of deaths is ten times higher. The CDC health fraud detection expert signed an affidavit, in which she stated her findings. She carefully chose the wordings '...under-reported by a conservative factor of at least five', but as she revealed initially, the factor could also be ten. Here is an excerpt of the affidavit: 1

'I have, over the last 25 years, developed over 100 distinct healthcare fraud detection algorithms. ... When the COVID-19 vaccine clearly became associated with patient death and harm, I was inclined to investigate the matter. It is my professional estimate that VAERS (the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database, while extremely useful, is under-reported by a conservative factor of at least 5. ... and have assessed that the deaths occurring within 3 days of vaccination are higher than those reported in VAERS by a factor of at least 5.'

The CDC is also vastly underreporting other adverse events, like severe allergic reactions (anaphylaxis). The Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) reported that a study showed how the actual number of anaphylaxis is 50 to 120 times higher than claimed by the CDC.2, 3 On top of that, a private researcher took a close look at the VAERS database, and tried looking up specific case-ID’s. He ound countless examples where the original death records were deleted, and in some cases, the numbers have been switched for milder reactions. He says:

'What the analysis of all the case numbers is telling us right now is that there’s approximately 150,000 cases that are missing, that were there, that are no longer there. The question is, are they all deaths?' 4

How severely criminal the CDC is, was also revealed a few years ago, when researchers investigated the link between vaccines and autism. They found that there indeed is a direct connection. So what did the CDC do? All the researchers came together and a large dustbin was placed in the middle of the room. In it they threw all the documents that showed the link between autism and vaccinations. Thus, the evidence was destroyed. Subsequently, a so-called 'scientific' article was published in Pediatric, stating that vaccinations do not cause autism. However, a leading scientist within the CDC, William Thompson, exposed this crime. He publicly admitted:

'I was involved in misleading millions of people about the possible negative side effects of vaccines. We lied about the scientific findings.' 5

The worst example of criminal methodology used to hide vaccine deaths is the fact that the CDC doesn't consider a person vaccinated until two weeks after their second injection. This means that anyone who dies during the many weeks before or the two weeks after the second injection, are considered unvaccinated deaths, and are therefore not counted as vaccine deaths. By doing this, they can ignore the vast majority of deaths following the injection. This is the nr 1 method used in nations worldwide to hide the countless numbers of vaccine deaths. 6,7

VACCINE DEATHS SUMMARY

IT IS FAR WORSE THAN WE THINK

  • VAERS published 726,963 adverse events, including 15,386 deaths as of September 17, 2021

  • CDC fraud expert says that number of deaths is at least five times, and possibly ten times higher

  • A whistleblower from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service (CMS) revealed how almost 50,000 people died from the injections. They represent only 20% of the U.S. population, meaning that if this data is applied to the entire population 250,000 have died 150,000 reports have been rejected or scrubbed by the VAERS system

  • The actual number of anaphylaxis is 50 to 120 times higher than claimed by the CDC

  • Everyone who dies before two weeks after the second injection, is not considered a vaccine death, which causes the majority of early vaccine deaths to be ignored

  • Moderna received over 300,000 reports of adverse events in only three months-tim

  • The Lazarus Report shows that only 1% of adverse events is being reported by the public The majority of the population is not aware of the existence of systems where they can report vaccine adverse events

  • Aggressive censorship and propaganda told the public that adverse events are rare, causing people to not understand how their health problems stem from past injections

  • The shaming and blaming of medical professionals who say anything against the vaccines, cause many in the medical community to avoid reporting adverse events

  • The fear of being held accountable after administering an injection that killed or disabled patients, further prevents medical personnel from reporting it

  • Having accepted financial incentives to promote, and administer the covid vaccines, also stops medical personnel from reporting adverse events

  • Profit driven vaccine manufacturers have every reason not to report the destruction their untested experimental products are causing

  • 200,000+ Facebook users comment about vaccine deaths and serious injuries

Latino Denver Cop Crippled after Being Forced to Take Pfizer Shot to Keep His Job. Prior to the Injection he was Healthy, Now He Can't Walk

In a very emotional interview, Denver police officer Jose Manriquez, appearing on Fox News along with his attorney, explains how he reluctantly took the Pfizer COVID-19 shot in order to keep his job, and now can no longer walk by himself. He is a 34-year-old father of four and military veteran who had recovered from COVID-19, and was allegedly in good health prior to receiving the Pfizer shot. [MORE]

colo cop covid .jpg

The Vested Interests Manipulate COVID Deaths by Pretending that Dying w/COVID is the Same as Dying from COVID. Deaths from heart attack, car accident, etc Counted IF they test positive pre/postmortem

IMG_20200810_172330.jpg

The CDC and mainstream news have manipulated numbers and minds since Covid hit the U.S. They refer to the CDC as the “experts” but the only thing they are experts at is manipulating numbers.

The CDC task force and health department officials have all stated they are including anyone who dies from a heart attack, stroke, car accident, gunshot wound, kidney failure, or any other cause of death, as a “Covid death” IF they test positive with Covid pre or postmortem. Unfortunately, all most people here is that over half a million Americans have died FROM this virus. Imagine how the above percentages would drastically change, if the real numbers were published.

The HardTruth states, If it really was a pandemic the governments would not have to lie or inflate the death figures to make the people believe that more people are dying of covid than they really were.  You wouldn’t have to say for instance that someone who has been battling cancer for 6 years and then died didn’t die of cancer but died of Covid because they tested positive (PCR Test does not test for Covid) for Covid within 28 days.  Does that mean if you tested positive for covid and then 25 days later you fall down the stairs and die you would go into the covid death statistics?

Clearly they are inflating the covid deaths to create fear amongst the public, so that they will accept the draconian lockdowns and restrictions which is all aimed at the endgame of you taking the covid vaccine so that they can bring in covid vaccine passports for any human activity.

Dr. Vernon Coleman - “Some pathologists have decreed that dead patients who have the coronavirus must now be cremated without examination. I’ve seen a briefing which states: `If a death is believed to be due to confirmed COVID-19 infection there is unlikely to be any need for a post-mortem examination to be conducted and the Medical Certificate of Cause of Death should be issued’. The key word here is surely `believed’.  Knowing that nowhere near enough people are dying of the coronavirus to justify the oppressive new measures they’ve introduced, the authorities are quietly making sure that most of the people who die are classified as coronavirus deaths. Indeed, there is some evidence that people are being classified as coronavirus victims without ever having been tested. It seems that Britain is doing what the Italians did – if a patient has the virus and they die then they died of the virus. But I suspect we’re going one step further. If someone who dies is thought to have had the virus, or might have had the virus, then they are coronavirus victims and their death is added to the total. The lack of testing makes this easy.  Today, it is clear that the cure, not the problem, is causing the crisis.  Right at the beginning of the coronavirus affair I pointed out that according to the World Health Organization, the ordinary flu kills between 250,000 and 600,000 people a year – most of them in the winter months. I said that if the coronavirus hadn’t killed between 100,000 and 150,000 people around the world by the middle of April then it would be clear that it was not as dangerous as we had been told and, indeed, not as dangerous as the flu.  Well, the authorities are claiming that the death rate from the corona has now reached 100,000.  So is the coronavirus as deadly as the mathematicians and the politicians said it was?  No – because they have fiddled the figures.  Today, anyone who has the coronavirus, or is thought to have it even though they have not been tested, will be put down as having died of the coronavirus. Time and time again, the authorities report that someone died `with’ the disease. Not `of’ the disease. And yet those patients are put down as having died as a result of the coronavirus.  So, if you fall downstairs and break your neck, but you had a cough before you died, then you will be classified as a coronavirus death. If you had a heart attack but were thought to have the coronavirus then you officially died of the coronavirus rather than the heart attack. A lack of widespread testing makes this possible. And post mortems have been abandoned for many patients.  In my second video I explained why the Italian figures for coronavirus deaths cannot be trusted – indeed, 88% of those who officially died of the coronavirus almost certainly died of something else. The evidence for that is on my website. And in the UK, Imperial College (which originally forecast the coronavirus would kill 500,000 people in the UK) has apparently admitted that two thirds of the people who have been listed as having died of the coronavirus would have died anyway – of something else.  I have no doubt that the figures have been distorted in the same way in other countries.  So, using figures from UK and Italy, the total worldwide number of deaths from the coronavirus is, at most, probably between a quarter and a third of the alleged current total – that is it may be between 25,000 and 33,000 but is probably considerably lower.  And that makes the coronavirus far less deadly than a mild strain of the flu. It is certainly absurd to compare it to the plague as has frequently been done by hysterical commentators. The plague killed 40% of the population when it swept through Europe. And to compare the coronavirus to the Second World War is an insult to those soldiers and civilians who lived through those terrible years” –Dr. Vernon Coleman – Author of over 100 books which have, together, sold over two million copies in the UK alone. He has contributed articles and stories to hundreds of other publications including The Sunday Times, Observer, Guardian, Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph, Daily Express, Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday. http://www.vernoncoleman.com/main.htm

Here in the video below it is admitted that if you attend hospital with a broken leg and you get a positive test for Covid while in hospital you go down as an official covid case, even though you have no symptoms of Covid. If rushed to hospital with heart attack and then come up positive test with covid while in hospital and then you die in hospital you go down in the stats as a covid death, even though you have no symptoms of covid.  That is called fraud and deception and that is how they get the covid deaths and cases high and then they lock the country down on these statistics. 100,000+ U.K covid deaths? I don't think so. [MORE]

Princeton/Johns Hopkins Phd/MD's Study Concludes: 'Vaccines Don't Stop or Slow People from Carrying COVID and Transmitting it to Others. Thus, Mandates are Unjustified and Baseless'

VAX HOAX.jpg

Nina Pierpont (MD, PhD) published a paper on September 9th, entitled “Covid-19 Vaccine Mandates Are Now Pointless: Covid-19 vaccines do not keep people from catching the prevailing Delta variant and passing it to others.” It analyzes 3 major studies published in August 2021 which together demonstrate the COVID injections do not prevent infection or transmission of Covid-19. As such, she concludes that vaccine mandates are unjustified and baseless.

Dr. Pierpoint is a graduate of Yale University (BA in biology), with a MA and PhD from Princeton University in population biology/evolutionary biology/ecology, and the MD degree from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. She has been a Clinical Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at Columbia University’s College of Physicians & Surgeons. She is currently in private practice in upstate New York, specializing in behavioral medicine.

The paper states the following:

“Executive Summary:

1) Excellent scientific research papers published or posted in August 2021 clearly demonstrate that current vaccines do not prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

2) Vaccines aim to achieve two ends:

a. To protect the vaccinated person against the illness.
b. To keep people from carrying the infection and transmitting it to others.

i. If enough people are vaccinated or otherwise become immune, it is hoped that the disease will stop circulating. We call this herd immunity.

ii. On the way to herd immunity, there is an assumption that people who are immunized can form safe clusters or groups within which no one is carrying or transmitting the virus.

3) Unfortunately, this last assumption (2.b.ii) is no longer true under the new variant of SARS-CoV- 2, Delta (B.1.617.2), which now accounts for essentially all cases worldwide.

4) Delta is more infectious than the Alpha strain (B.1.1.7) that prevailed in the UK from January to May 2021 (and in the US from March to June 2021), meaning that Delta is passed more readily person-to-person than the previous dominant strain.

a. Infectiousness is a correlate of high viral load (see section 5, below).
b. From its origin in India, Delta has soared to nearly complete domination of COVID-19 viral strains everywhere in a matter of months, because it spreads so easily and infects both vaccinated and unvaccinated people.

5) New research in multiple settings shows that Delta produces very high viral loads (meaning, the density of virus on a nasopharyngeal swab as interpreted from PCR cycle threshold numbers).

a. Viral loads are much higher in people infected with Delta than they were in people infected with Alpha.
b. Viral loads with Delta are equally high whether the person has been vaccinated or not.

c. Viral load is an indicator of infectiousness. [13,14] The more virus one has in the nose and mouth, the more likely it is to be in this individual's respiratory droplets and secretions, and to spread to others.

6) Due to evolution of the virus itself, all the currently licensed vaccines (all based on the original Wuhan strain spike protein sequence) have lost their ability to accomplish vaccine purpose 2(b), above, "To keep people from carrying the infection and transmitting it to others."

7) Vaccine mandates are thus stripped of their justification, since to vaccinate an individual no longer stops or even slows his ability to acquire and transmit the virus to others.

8) Under Delta, natural immunity is much more protective than vaccination. All severities of COVID-19 illness produce healthy levels of natural immunity.

The Documentary Evidence:

Here are three studies whose findings and data support the above statements:

The first is by the Massachusetts Department of Health and the CDC, published August 6, 2021
in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. An outbreak of COVID-19 occurred in Provincetown, Massachusetts in July 2021 during two weeks of heavily attended indoor and outdoor public gatherings. The study focuses on the 469 cases among Massachusetts residents who were in attendance. [1] All successfully gene-sequenced isolates (120) were the Delta variant.

346 of the cases in Massachusetts residents (74%) occurred in fully vaccinated people who had received a 2-dose course of the BioNTech/Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, or a single dose of the

Johnson & Johnson. Vaccine coverage at this time among all Massachusetts residents was 69%. This suggests that vaccinated people became infected just as frequently as unvaccinated people in this outbreak.

We do not know the vaccination percentage among actual festival attendees who were Massachusetts residents, but we can assume given the demographics of the festival that it was the state average (69%) or higher. We also do not know the total number of Massachusetts residents who attended. Both of these numbers would be needed to determine actual values for vaccine efficacy in this outbreak.

However, we cannot brush the high percentage of vaccinated people in the infected sample under the carpet quite as easily as the authors do, when they say, “As population-level vaccination coverage increases, vaccinated persons are likely to represent a larger proportion of COVID-19 cases” (p. 1061). This is true, but we would still, if vaccine is protective, find vaccinated cases to be underrepresented in an illness sample compared to the number vaccinated in the whole population of attendees. As best we can tell at this festival, vaccination was not protective against infection, because the proportion of vaccinated in the sample (74%) is in the same numeric range as the proportion vaccinated, 69% or above.

Among the 346 cases who were already vaccinated, 79% were symptomatic, reporting cough, headache, sore throat, muscle aches, and fever. Four of these vaccinated, infected individuals (1.2%) were hospitalized. No one died. The remainder of the vaccinated cases did not report symptoms.

Among the 123 cases who were unvaccinated or partially vaccinated, one was hospitalized (0.8%) and no one died. Percentage with symptoms was not reported.

Vaccinated and unvaccinated cases were found to have very similar viral loads (in a sample of 127 and 84 cases, respectively). This means the PCR tests showed that vaccinated and unvaccinated infected people were carrying similar amounts of virus in their upper respiratory tracts at diagnosis and were thus equally infectious.

(B) The next study, released August 10, 2021, examines the Delta viral load phenomenon in far more detail, and shows clearly that vaccinated people can become infected and pass the infection to other vaccinated people. The Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Ho Chi Minh City in southern Vietnam has about 900 staff members, including an Oxford University Clinical Research Unit. The entire hospital staff was vaccinated with the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine two-dose series in March and April 2021, and then enrolled in a post-vaccination study. Thus, a great deal of detailed information was available when the outbreak struck. [2]

The entire hospital staff was PCR negative for SARS-CoV-2 in mid-May 2021. The index case (first known case in a cluster) became mildly ill on June 11 and had a positive PCR with a high viral load. The whole staff was then re-tested. 52 additional cases were identified immediately. Ten more had high viral loads, a number being staff who shared an office with the index case. All the additional cases at first had no symptoms.

The hospital was then locked down. Over the next two weeks, 16 additional cases were identified in subsequent PCR surveys. 62 of the 69 PCR-positive cases participated in this study of the outbreak.

Forty-seven (76% of the 62 subjects) developed respiratory symptoms, three with pneumonia on chest x-ray and one requiring three days of nasal cannula oxygen (this is the least intensive form of oxygen therapy). Everyone recovered fully.

Peak viral loads in this fully vaccinated, infected group were, on average, 250 times higher than peak viral loads with older variants early in the pandemic (March-April 2020), when no one was

vaccinated. This is a means of comparing the biology of the variants themselves: the Delta virus has gained the ability to replicate itself enormously in the upper respiratory tract, regardless of

vaccination, thereby making itself more infectious.

In the current outbreak, viral loads (and thus infectiousness) peaked in the 2-3 days both before and after symptoms began.

All sequenced isolates were the Delta variant. The genetic sequences from hospital staff were more similar to each other than they were to contemporaneous isolates from the city at large or from more distant parts of the country. This means it is likely that the virus spread among the (fully vaccinated) hospital staff from a single infected (and vaccinated) staff member who brought it from the outside. Given the dynamics of symptoms and positivity among the staff, it is clear that asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic staff members, as well as symptomatic, were infecting others.

PCR tests continued to be positive up to 33 days after diagnosis (averaging 21 days). Case- control comparisons showed that staff members with lower titers of neutralizing antibodies after vaccination and at diagnosis were more likely to become infected. However, there was no correlation between vaccine-induced antibody levels at diagnosis and viral loads or the development of respiratory symptoms.

The third study is an analysis of ongoing population-wide SARS-CoV-2 monitoring in the UK, whose primary purpose is following changes in vaccine efficacy. In the UK study, the PCR tests are done on members of randomly selected households across the UK, following a predetermined schedule that ignores symptoms, vaccination, and prior infection. The current analysis was released on August 24, 2021 and summarized in commentary in the British Medical Journal on August 19, 2021. [3, 4]

The study includes measures of viral load or "burden" under Alpha and Delta predominance. While Alpha was the dominant UK strain (January to mid-May 2022), vaccination or prior COVID- 19 disease strongly reduced viral load compared to unvaccinated people who had never had COVI D-19.

The sample size was large and random, obtained as described above. 12,287 new PCR-positives were found in the Alpha-dominant period, of which 88% were unvaccinated and had no evidence of prior infection. Only 0.5% of new positive tests were from fully vaccinated people, and 0.6% from people with prior COVID-19 infection. Since it was a large, random sample and vaccination percentages increased dramatically in the UK across this time period, we can safely
say that vaccination and prior infection were very protective against becoming infected with the Alpha variant. Virtually all the new infections occurred in unvaccinated people.

After mid-June 2021, when greater than 92% of PCR positives in the UK were Delta, the differences in viral load between vaccinated, unvaccinated, and people with past COVID-19 disease nearly vanished. Viral loads in all three groups were much higher than with Alpha, indicating increased infectiousness. More vaccinated people were now showing symptoms when they became positive, also correlated with viral load.

During the Delta-dominant period, the sample was 1939 new positive PCR tests. Of these, 17% (326) were from unvaccinated people without prior COVID-19 disease, 1% (20) were unvaccinated with evidence of prior disease, and 82% (1593) were fully vaccinated. This is approximately the percentage of the UK population who were vaccinated by August 18, 2021- when 75-83% of UK residents were fully vaccinated and 84-89% had received at least one dose. [5]

Like the Massachusetts study reviewed above, this suggests that the new Delta variant infects vaccinated and unvaccinated people with equal probability. To go from 0.5% of randomly sampled new infections in vaccinated people (under Alpha) to 82% (under Delta) in several months, as the population is becoming more and more vaccinated--these are extraordinary numbers.

If vaccination is still effective in preventing infection, we would expect the proportion of infections in a random population sample to be less than the proportion of the population

vaccinated. If 82% of randomly obtained positive tests occur in vaccinated people, and about 82% of people are vaccinated, then vaccination is not reducing the likelihood of infection at all.

Efficacy at preventing infection has become zero.

The UK study addresses vaccine efficacy in much more complex ways than the straightforward numbers I present here. The authors conclude that both of the earlier UK-approved vaccines (BioNTech/Pfizer and Oxford-AstraZeneca) have lost some efficacy against Delta compared to Alpha. But both vaccines, they maintain, remain substantially effective at keeping people from becoming infected with the Delta strain, in the range of 67 to 80%. If this is the case, why was 82% of their random sample of new positive PCR tests from vaccinated people?

If a vaccine reduces the risk of becoming infected by two-thirds (67%), we would expect the proportion of vaccinated in the positive sample to be less than the proportion of vaccinated in the population. Say we start with 1000 people in the country, of whom we will randomly sample 100. The country is 80% vaccinated. This means that in our sample of 100 we have 80 vaccinated and 20 unvaccinated people. Let's say that the virus has infected 10% of the people across the sampling period, or 10 total cases. If 8 of the infected are among the vaccinated, and 2 in the unvaccinated (80% and 20% of the positives, matching the ratio of vaccinated and unvaccinated in the population), the vaccine has made no difference in whether one can get infected (0% efficacy). If the vaccine is 67% effective, the cases in the vaccinated group would be reduced by 2/3 to 2.67 cases, and the total cases would be only 4.67 cases (2.67 vaccinated and 2 unvaccinated). This means that only 2.67/4.67 or 57% of the cases would be in the vaccinated group, and 43% in the unvaccinated. (We can go back to 10% overall being positive just using ratios, yielding 5.7 cases among the vaccinated and 4.3 among the unvaccinated.)

This is why the proportion vaccinated in the infected sample, very close to the proportions vaccinated in the total population, are incompatible with the efficacy numbers generated by the authors. It appears to me--as in the Massachusetts study--that the vaccine is not decreasing susceptibility to infection at all, and is in reality somewhere between slightly (insignificantly) decreasing susceptibility and slightly increasing susceptibility to the Delta variant.

The U K study is clear that viral load (and thus infectiousness to others) is much greater with Delta than with Alpha, and that, with Delta, viral load and infectiousness are equal in vaccinated and unvaccinated infected people.” [MORE]

[Heart Attack, Stroke, COPD, Diabetes, Any Condition = COVID to Hospitals] Whistleblower says Medical Profiteers Purposefully Misclassify Patients Based on PCR Tests and People are Dying from Vaccine

Abrien Aguirre is a board certified occupational therapist in Hawaii and made the claim in an interview with Hawaii Free Speech News.

“I’ve seen 32 elderly people pass away immediately after taking the Moderna vaccine. None of that is being talked about on the news. It doesn’t fit their narrative.

“I’ve seen more patients die from the vaccine than from Covid,” he said.

The health care worker works for the largest skilled nursing facility in Oahu, Hawaii and has worked on three separate Covid-19 wards with elderly patients. 

“The people moved to the Covid unit, didn’t have Covid. They tested positive with the PCR test, but most of them were asymptomatic and only suffering from their pre-existing conditions.

“People with other terminal conditions were listed as Covid deaths, a billing department in a nursing facility had therapists change its medical diagnosis codes from conditions such as pulmonary disorder to Covid to get higher reimbursements.”

whistleblower hawaii.jpg

Aguirre also claimed that in some instances people were listed as having Covid-19 who had not even tested positive for the alleged virus. 

“It’s just fraud on every level. My advice to people – If your elderly are sick, your grandmother, your great grandmother, your mum, don’t send them to a skilled nursing facility,

“They’re not going to receive adequate care. Treatment is going to be withheld from them, they’re going to be forced to wear a mask all day, and social distance. They’re going to become depressed and want to commit suicide. Because that is what I am seeing in our facilities.” [MORE]

Renowned IP Underwriter and Analyst Provides Patent Documentation that COVID was Created by NIAID (US Gov) and that the "Vaccine" is an Injected Biological Weapon, Patented Prior to the 2020 Outbreak

david martin .jpg

Dr. David E. Martin is the Founder and Chairman of M·CAM Inc., an international leader in innovation finance, trade, and intangible asset finance. M.CAM is a Virginia-based company that underwrites lending on intellectual property, earning a fee from the lender, usually a bank, and in most cases the right to sell on the IP if the company defaults. [MORE] Martin is the developer of the first innovation-based quantitative index of public equities and is the Managing Partner of the Purple Bridge Funds. He is the creator of the world’s first quantitative public equity index – the CNBC IQ100 powered by M·CAM. He is also a respected financial analyst. [MORE]

In the video above Attorney Reiner Fuellmich interviews Dr David Martin for the German Corona Investigative Committee. [MORE] He has provided citations for all the references he uses in the video which are also documented [HERE] and [HERE]. Other references, such patent information, are verifiable [HERE] and [HERE] and [HERE].

A full transcript of the interview is below:

Our firm has been the world’s largest underwriter of intangible assets used in finance in 168 countries, so in the majority of the countries around the world. Our underwriting systems include the entire corpus of all patents, patent applications, federal grants procurement records, e-government records, etc. We have the ability to not only track what is happening and who is involved in what’s happening but we monitor a series of thematic interests for a variety of organizations and individuals as well as for our own commercial use, because as you probably know we maintain three Global Equity indices which are the the top performing large-cap and mid-cap equity indices worldwide. So our business is to monitor the innovation that’s happening around the world and specifically to monitor the economics of that innovation, the degree to which financial interests are being served, corporate interests are being dislocated etc. So our business is the business of innovation and its finance.

As you know we have reviewed the over 4,000 patents that have been issued around SARS Coronavirus and we have done a very comprehensive review of the financing of all of the manipulations of coronavirus which gave rise to SARS as a subclade of the beta coronavirus family. We took the reported gene sequence which was reportedly indicated as such by the ICTV (the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses) of the World Health Organization. We took the actual genetic sequences that were reportedly novel and reviewed those against the patent records that were available as of the spring of 2020. And what we found are over 120 patented pieces of evidence to suggest that the declaration of a novel coronavirus was actually entirely a fallacy. There was no novel coronavirus. There are countless very subtle modifications of coronavirus sequences that have been uploaded but there was no single identified novel coronavirus at all. As a matter of fact, we found records in the patent records of sequences attributed to novelty going to patents that were sought as early as 1999. So not only was this not a novel anything, it’s actually not been novel for over two decades.

Up until 1999 the topic of coronavirus was uniquely applied to veterinary sciences. The first vaccine ever patented for coronavirus was actually sought by Pfizer. The application for the first vaccine for Coronavirus which was specifically a Spike protein — so the exact same thing that allegedly we have rushed into invention — the first application was filed January 28th 2000 — 21 years ago. So the idea that we mysteriously stumbled on the way to intervene on vaccines is not only ludicrous, it is incredulous because Timothy Miller, Sharon Klepfer, Albert Paul Reed, and Elaine Jones on January 28th 2000 filed what ultimately was issued as U.S. patent 637-2224, which was the spike protein virus vaccine for the canine coronavirus, which is actually one of the multiple forms of coronavirus. But as I said the early work up until 1999 was largely focused in the area of vaccines for animals. The two animals receiving the most attention were probably Ralph Baric’s work on rabbits, and the rabbit cardiomyopathy that was associated with significant problems among rabbit breeders; and then canine coronavirus in Pfizer’s work to identify how to develop a spike protein. [These] target candidates give rise to the obvious evidence that says that neither the coronavirus concept of vaccine nor the principle of the coronavirus itself as a pathogen of interest with respect to the spike protein’s behavior is anything novel at all. As matter fact it’s 22 years old on based on patent files.

COVID PATENTS1.jpg

What’s more problematic and what is actually the most egregious problem is that Anthony Fauci and NIAID (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) found the malleability of coronavirus to be a potential candidate for HIV vaccines, and so this is actually not a natural progression of a zoonotic modification of coronavirus. As a matter of fact, very specifically in 1999 Anthony Fauci funded research at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill specifically to create — this comes directly from a patent application filed on April 19th, 2002 — you heard the date correctly, 2002 — where NIAID built an infectious replication-defective coronavirus specifically targeted for human lung epithelium. In other words we [U.S. NIAID] made SARS and we patented it on April 19th, 2002 before there was ever any alleged outbreak in Asia. Which [outbreak] as you know followed that by several months, that patent issued as US patent 727-9327. That patent clearly lays out in very specific gene sequencing the fact that we knew that the ACE-2 receptor, the ACE-2 binding domain for the s-1 spike protein and other elements of what we have come to know as this scourge pathogen, was not only engineered but could be synthetically modified in the laboratory using nothing more than gene sequencing technologies, taking computer code and turning it into a pathogen or an intermediate of the pathogen. And that technology was funded exclusively in the early days as a means by which we could actually harness coronavirus as a vector to distribute HIV vaccine.

My organization was asked to monitor biological and chemical weapons treaty violations in the very early days of 2000. You’ll remember the anthrax events in September of 2001. And we were part of an investigation that gave rise to the Congressional inquiry into not only the anthrax origins but also into what was unusual behavior around Bayer’s ciprofloxacin drug, which was a drug used as a potential treatment for Anthrax poisoning. And throughout the fall of 2001 we began monitoring an enormous number of bacterial and viral pathogens that were being patented through NIH, NIAID, and the US Armed Services Infectious Disease Program, and a number of other agencies internationally that collaborated with them. And our concern was that coronavirus was being seen as not only a potential manipulable agent for potential uses as a vaccine vector, but it was also very clearly being considered as a biological weapon candidate. So our first public reporting on this took place, prior to the SARS outbreak in the latter part of 2001. So you can imagine how disappointed I am to be sitting here twenty years later having 20 years earlier pointed out that there was a problem looming on the horizon with respect to coronavirus. But after the alleged outbreak — and I will always say alleged outbreak — because I think it’s important for us to understand that coronavirus as a circulating pathogen inside of the viral model that we have is actually not new to the human condition and is not new to the last two decades. It’s actually been part of the sequence of proteins that that circulates for quite a long time.

in PHOTO LEGEND HANK AARON WHO DIED 2 WEEKS AFTER GETTING INJECTED WITH A PLAY VACCINE. ACCORDING TO FUNKTIONARY:  vaccinated - infected with poisons. (See: Antibiotics)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?

in PHOTO LEGEND HANK AARON WHO DIED 2 WEEKS AFTER GETTING INJECTED WITH A PLAY VACCINE. ACCORDING TO FUNKTIONARY: vaccinated - infected with poisons. (See: Antibiotics)

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?

But the alleged outbreak [of SARS-1] that took place in China in 2002 going into 2003 gave rise to a very problematic April 2003 filing by the United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention. And this topic is of critical importance to get the nuance very precise, because in addition to filing the entire gene sequence on what became SARS coronavirus, which is actually a violation of 35 U.S. Code Section 101 — you cannot patent a naturally occurring substance. The 35 U.S. Code Section 101 violation, what is patent number 7220852, now that patent also had a series of derivative patents associated with it. These patent applications were broken apart because they were of multiple patentable subject matter. These include U.S. Patent 465-9270-3p which is actually a very interesting designation, U.S. Patent 7776521. These patents not only covered the gene sequence of SARS coronavirus but also covered the means of detecting it using RT-PCR. Now the reason why that’s a problem is, if you actually both own the patent on the gene itself and you own the patent on its detection, you have a cutting-edge advantage to being able to control 100% of the provenance of not only the virus itself but also its detection — meaning you have entire scientific and message control. And this patent sought by the CDC was allegedly justified by their public relations team as being sought so that everyone would be free to be able to research coronavirus. The only problem with that statement is it’s a lie. And the reason why it’s a lie is because the Patent Office not once but twice rejected the patent on the gene sequence as unpatentable because the sequence was already in the public domain. In other words prior to CDC’s filing for a patent the Patent Office found 99.9% identity with the already existing coronavirus recorded in the public domain.

And over the rejection of the Patent Examiner and after having to pay an appeal fine in 2006 and 2007, the CDC over[came] the Patent Office’s rejection of their patent, and ultimately in 2007 got the patent on SARS Coronavirus. So every public statement that CDC has made that said that this was in the public interest is falsifiable by their own paid bribe to the Patent Office. And to make matters worse, they paid an additional fee to keep their application private. Last time I checked, if you’re trying to make information available for the public to research, you would not pay a fee to keep the information private. I wish I could have made up anything I just said, but all of that is available in the public patent archive record which any member of the public can review. The United States Patent Office has not only the evidence but the actual documents which I have in my possession now.

This is critically important because fact-checkers have repeatedly stated that the novel coronavirus designated as SARS-CoV-2 is in fact distinct from the CDC patent. And here is both the genetic and the patent problem. If you look at the gene sequence that is filed by CDC in 2003, again in 2005, and then again in 2006, what you find is identity in somewhere between 89 to 99% of the sequence overlaps that have been identified in what’s called the novel subclade of SARS-CoV-2. What we know is that the core designation of SARS coronavirus which is actually the clade of the beta coronavirus family, and the subclade that has been called SARS-CoV 2, have to overlap from a taxonomy point of view. You cannot have SARS designation on a thing without it first being SARS. So the disingenuous fact-checking that has been done, saying that somehow or another CDC has nothing to do with this particular patent or this particular pathogen, is beyond both the literal credibility of the published sequences, and it’s also beyond credulity when it comes to the ICTV taxonomy, because it very clearly states that this is in fact a subclade of the clade called SARS coronavirus.

COVID PATENTS 2.jpg

Now what’s important is on the 28th of April — and listen to the date very carefully because this date is problematic — 3 days after CDC filed the patent on the SARS coronavirus in 2003, 3 days later Sequoia Pharmaceuticals — a company that was set up in Maryland — Sequoia Pharmaceuticals on the 28th of April 2003 filed a patent on antiviral agents of treatment and control of infections by coronavirus. CDC filed three days earlier and then the treatment was available 3 days later. Just hold that thought for a second. Sequoia Pharmaceuticals and ultimately [Ablig] Pharmaceuticals became rolled into the proprietary Holdings of Pfizer, [Crysel], and Johnson & Johnson, So ask yourself a simple question: How would one have a patent on a treatment for a thing that had been invented three days earlier? The patent in question, the April 28th 2003 patent 715-1163, issued to Sequoia Pharmaceuticals has another problem. The problem is it was issued and published before the CDC patent on coronavirus was actually allowed. So the degree to which the information could have been known by any means other than insider information between those parties is zero. It is not physically possible for you to patent a thing that treats a thing that had not been published. Because CDC had paid to keep it secret. This, my friends, is the definition of criminal conspiracy, racketeering, and collusion. This is not a theory, this is evidence. You cannot have information in the future inform a treatment for a thing that did not exist. It is a RICO case and the RICO pattern which was established in April of 2003 for the first coronavirus was played out to exactly the same schedule when we see SARS-CoV show up, when we have Moderna getting the spike protein sequence by phone from the Vaccine Research Center at NIAID prior to the definition of the novel subclade. How do you treat a thing before you actually have the thing?

Before you actually have the thing on the 5th of June 2008 — which is an important date because it is actually around the time when DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Program in the United States, actively took an interest in coronavirus as a biological weapon — June 5th 2008 [Ablig], which as you know is now part of Sanofi, filed the series of patents that specifically targeted what we’ve been told is the novel feature of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and you heard what I just said, this is the 5th of June 2008 they found the specific sequence they targeted, what was called the poly-basic cleavage site for SARS-CoV the novel spike protein in the ACE-2 receptor binding domain which is allegedly novel, to SARS-CoV-2, and all of that was patented on the 5th of June 2008. And those patents in sequence were issued between November 24th of 2015 which was U.S. Patent 919-3780, so that one came out after the gain-of-function moratorium. That one came after the MERS outbreak in the Middle East but what you find is that then in 2016, 2017, 2019 a series of patents all covering not only the RNA strands but also the subcomponents of the gene strands were all issued to [Ablig] and Sanofi and then we have Rubius Therapeutics, we have Children’s Medical Corporation, we have countless others that include Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Protein Science Corporation, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, University of Iowa, University of Hong Kong, Chinese National Human Genome Center in Shanghai, all identifying in patent filings that ranged from 2008 until 2017 every attribute that was allegedly uniquely published by the single reference publication. The novel coronavirus reveals quote ‘natural insertions at the S1, S2 cleavage site of the spike protein and possible recombinant origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the paper that has routinely been used to identify the novel virus.

Unfortunately if you actually take what they report to be novel, you find 73 patents issued between 2008 and 2019 which have the elements that were allegedly novel in SARS-CoV-2 specifically as it relates to the poly-basic cleavage site ACE-2 receptor binding domain, and the spike protein, so the clinically novel components of the clinically unique, clinically contagious virus [were already in those 73 patents]. There was no outbreak of SARS because we had engineered all of the elements of that, and by 2016 the paper that was funded during the gain-of-function moratorium that said that the SARS coronavirus was poised for human emergence — written by none other than Ralph Baric — was not only poised for human emergence, but it was patented for commercial exploitation. A statement made in 2015 by [Eco-Health Alliance Director] Peter Daszak reported in the National Academies of Science Press publication February 12th 2016, and I’m quoting ‘We need to increase public understanding of the need for medical countermeasures such as a pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process‘ end quote. Let me repeat the quote: ‘We need to increase public understanding of the need for medical countermeasures such as a pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process‘ end quote.

COVID PATENTS 3.jpg

There wasn’t a lab leak. This was an intentional by weaponization of spike proteins to inject into people to get them addicted to a pan-coronavirus vaccine. This has nothing to do with a pathogen that was released, and every study that has ever been launched to try to verify a lab leak is a red herring. And there’s really nothing that is new in this, zero. These patents on everything clinically novel, 73, [were] all issued before 2019. To prove that this was actually not a release of anything, because patent 727-9327, the patent on the recombinant nature of that lung targeting coronavirus, was transferred mysteriously from the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill to the National Institutes of Health in 2018. Now here’s the problem with that under the Bayh-Dole Act, the U.S. Government already has what’s called a march-in right provision. That means if the U.S. Government has paid for research they are entitled to benefit from that research at their demand or at their whim. So explain why in 2017 and 2018 suddenly the National Institutes of Health have to take ownership of the patent that they already had rights to, held by the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. And how did they need to file a Certificate of Correction to make sure that it was legally enforceable because there was a typographical error in the grant reference in the first filing so they needed to make sure that not only did they get it right but they needed to make sure every typographical error contained in the patent was corrected on the single patent to develop the Vaccine Research Institute’s mandate which was shared between the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill in November of 2019 and Moderna in November of 2019, when UNC Chapel Hill and NIAID and Moderna began the sequencing of a spike protein vaccine a month before an outbreak ever happened, you have all the evidence.

The script for this was written first January 6th 2004, in Bioterrorism, Emerging Infectious Diseases, Antimicrobial Therapeutics, and Immune Modulators. Moderna introduced the notion of what they called The New Normal which became the branded campaign that was adopted by the World Health Organization, the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board which was the Board upon which the Chinese Director of Center for Disease Control, Elias of the Gates Foundation, and Anthony Fauci sat together on that Board of Directors. But the the first introduction of The New Normal Campaign, which was about getting people to accept a universal pan-influenza pan-coronavirus vaccine, was actually adopted January 6th 2004 so it’s it’s been around quite quite a long time.

Moderna knew that it was going to be placed in the front of the line with respect to the development of a vaccine in March of 2019, and this is a very important date because in March of 2019, for reasons that are not transparent, they suddenly amended a series of rejected patent filings, which is a very bizarre behavior, but they amended a number of patent filings specifically to make reference to a deliberate or accidental release of coronavirus. So in March 2019 [with] the amended failed patent applications, [they] begin the process of a coronavirus vaccine development. And they began dealing with a very significant problem that they had which was they relied on technology that they did not own. Two Canadian companies Arbutus Pharmaceuticals and Acuitas Pharmaceuticals actually own the patent on the lipid nanoparticle envelope that’s required to deliver the injection of the mRNA fragment. And those patents have been issued both in Canada and in the U.S. and then around the world. Moderna knew that they did not own the rights and began trying to negotiate with Arbutus and Acuitas to make the lipid nanoparticle patented technology available to be put into a vaccine. And we know, before that in November they entered into a research and cooperative research and development agreement with UNC Chapel Hill with respect to getting the spike protein to put inside of the lipid nanoparticle so that they actually had a candidate vaccine before we had a pathogen allegedly that was running around. What makes that story most problematic beyond the self-evident nature of it is that we know that from 2016 until 2019 at every one of the NIAID advisory Council Board meetings, Anthony Fauci lamented the fact that he could not find a way to get people to accept the universal influenza vaccine, which was his favorite target — he was trying to get the population to engage in this process.

And what becomes very evident with Peter Daszak (Eco-Health Alliance), UNC Chapel Hill and others and then most specifically by March of 2019 in the amended patent filings by Moderna, we see that there is an epiphany that says what if there was an accidental or an intentional release of respiratory pathogen. And what makes that particular phrase problematic is it is exactly recited in the book A World At Risk which is the scenario that was put together by the World Health Organization in September of 2019. So months before there’s an alleged pathogen, [this book from WHO] says that we need to have a coordinated global experience of a respiratory pathogen release which by September 2020 must put in place a universal capacity for public relations management, crowd control, and the acceptance of a universal vaccine mandate. That was September of 2019 and the language of an intentional release of a respiratory pathogen was written into the scenario that quote ‘must be completed by September 2020‘.

The ACE-2 receptor was already described in the patents before 2019. Specifically the ACE-2 receptor targeting mechanism for SARS coronavirus is in publications going back to 2008, in the weaponization conferences that took place in Slovenia in Europe, all across Europe, and all across the DARPA infrastructure. We’ve known about that since 2013 and its isolation and amplification, add to this 70 amendments that merge the two. The failed [Moderna] patent applications were essentially revitalized in March of 2019, to include the ‘deliberate release of a respiratory pathogen‘ language. Their [patenting] process is similar to other pharmaceutical companies where they ever-green applications and continually modify applications to enjoy the earliest priority dates available. But that’s why you have to go back and look at the amendment of the application records to find out when the actual amendment language is put in place. Any assertion that this pathogen is somehow unique or novel falls apart on the actual gene sequences which are published in the patent record and then more egregiously falls apart in the fact that we have Peter Daszak himself stating that we have to create public hype to get the public to accept the medical countermeasure of a pan-coronavirus vaccine. And what makes that most ludicrous is the fact that as we know World Health Organization had declared coronavirus kind of a dead letter — they said that that we had eradicated coronavirus as a concern. So why having eradicated it in 2007 and 2008, why did we start spending billions of dollars globally on a vaccine for a thing that had been eradicated by declaration in 2008? That falls into the zone of incredulity, to say the least.

The entirety of the evidence then is that this is a tool — the coronavirus and the vaccines, this is a tool and the interest of DARPA in creating a biological weapon out of this. This is a tool for everything else that latches onto this, including population control. This was seen as a highly malleable bio-weapon. There is no question that by 2005 it was unquestionably a weapon of choice. Unfortunately very well-meaning people get trapped into conversations about whether we’re having a vaccine for a virus. The fact of the matter is we’re not. We are injecting a spike protein mRNA secret mRNA sequence which is a computer simulation; it’s not derived from nature, it’s a computer simulation of a sequence which has been known and patented for years. And what we know is that that sequence is reported across phone conversations that took place between Moderna and the [NIH] Vaccine Research Center. The story that this is somehow prophylactic or preventative flies in the face of 100% of the evidence because the evidence makes it abundantly clear that there has been no effort by any pharmaceutical company to combat the virus. This is about getting people injected with the known-to-be-harmful spike protein. So the cover story is that if you get an expression of a spike protein you’re going to have some sort of general symptomatic relief but the fact of the matter is there has never been an intent to vaccinate a population as defined by the vaccination universe [namely, to prevent infection].

When Anthony Fauci tried desperately to get some of his quote ‘synthetic RNA vaccines’ [for HIV] published he had his own patents rejected by the Patent Office, and I want to read what the patent office told him when NIAID’s own Anthony Fauci thought that he could get an mRNA-like vaccine patented as a vaccine. And here’s the quote: ‘These arguments are persuasive to the extent that an antigenic peptide stimulates an immune response that may produce antibodies that bind to a specific peptide or protein, but it is not persuasive in regards to a vaccine.‘ This is the Patent Office. The immune response produced by a vaccine must be more than merely some immune response, it must also be protective as noted in the Patent Office action. ‘The art recognizes the term vaccine to be a compound which prevents infection. Applicant has not demonstrated that the instantly claimed vaccine meets even the lower standards set forth in the specification let alone the standard definition for being operative. In regards therefore claims five, seven, and nine are not operative.‘ As the anti-HIV vaccine which is what he was working on is not patentable utility. So Anthony Fauci himself was told by the Patent Office themselves that what he was proposing as a vaccine does not meet the patentable standard, the legal standard, or the clinical standard.

This is the problem going back to the very beginning of what’s alleged to be a pandemic. We do not have any evidence that the gene sequence alteration had any clinical significance whatsoever, There has not been a single paper published by anyone that is actually established that anything novel since November of 2019 has clinical distinction from anything that predates November of 2019. The problem with the 73 patents that I described is that those 73 patents all contain what was reported to be novel in December and January of 2019 and 2020 respectively, so the problem is that even if we were to accept that there are idiopathic pneumonias, even if we were to accept that there are some sets of pathogen induced symptoms, we do not have a single piece of published evidence that tells us that anything about the subclade SARS-CoV-2 has clinical distinction from anything that was known and published prior to November 2019 in 73 patents dating to 2008.

Influenza did not leave the human population. Influenza was a failed decade-long pan-influenza vaccine mandate that was desperately desperately desperately promoted by governments around the world. They failed and they decided if influenza doesn’t deliver on the public promise of getting everybody to get an injection, let’s change the pathogen.