Canadian Doctor: 62% of Patients Vaccinated for COVID Have Permanent Heart Damage

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

We have previously covered the story of Dr. Charles Hoffe, the brave doctor who has been practicing medicine for 28 years in the small, rural town of Lytton in British Columbia, Canada.

After he had administered about 900 doses of the Moderna experimental mRNA COVID-19 injections, he sounded the alarm over the severe reactions he was observing in his patients who chose to get the shot (he chose NOT to get it himself), which included death.

The result of him sounding the alarm was a gag order issued against him by the medical authorities in his community. He defied this gag order and was interviewed by Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson on her show where he sounded the alarm. See:

Canadian Doctor Defies Gag Order and Tells the Public How the Moderna COVID Injections Killed and Permanently Disabled Indigenous People in His Community

His punishment for going public to warn others on the dangers of these experimental shots was that he was relieved from hospital duty and lost half of his income:

Canadian Doctor Removed from Hospital Duty after Speaking out about COVID “Vaccine” Side Effects

Last week, Dr. Hoffe was interviewed again by Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson, and he continues to share his findings with the public regarding the experimental COVID-19 shots.

Dr. Hoffe is truly a hero today, risking not only his reputation, but probably his very life to bring important information regarding the COVID-19 shots that the Globalists who control the corporate media and social media are trying very hard to censor.

In this latest interview, Dr. Hoffe states that the blood clots that are being reported in the corporate media as being “rare” are anything but rare, based on his own testing of his own patients who had recently received one of the shots.

The blood clots we hear about which the media claim are very rare are the big blood clots which are the ones that cause strokes and show up on CT scans, MRI, etc. The clots I’m talking about are microscopic and too small to find on any scan. They can thus only be detected using the D-dimer test.

Using this test with his own patients, Dr. Hoffe claims that he has found evidence of small blood clots in 62% of his patients who have been injected with an mRNA shot.

He states that these people are now permanently disabled, and they will no longer “be able to do what they used to do.”

These people have no idea they are even having these microscopic blood clots. The most alarming part of this is that there are some parts of the body like the brain, spinal cord, heart and lungs which cannot re-generate. When those tissues are damaged by blood clots they are permanently damaged.

His warning is very dire: “These shots are causing huge damage and the worst is yet to come.”

This is an 8 minute clip from the original interview, and we have posted it on our Bitchute channel and Rumble channel.

Dr. Hoffe is not the only doctor to sound the alarm over serious side effects from the COVID-19 shots.

Last month we covered the press conference given in Ontario at Parliament Hill that was arranged by MP Derek Sloan and featured four other Canadian doctors who were also being censored over what they are seeing and reporting regarding the COVID-19 shots.

Are these public testimonies from doctors who dare to question the official narrative in the face of tremendous censorship, ridicule, and even threats starting to make a difference in Canada?

Maybe.

Yesterday there was a Press Release from the COVID-19 Immunity Task Force in Canada. This group is comprised of:

experts from across Canada in matters related to serologic surveillance, immunology, virology, infectious diseases, public health, and clinical medicine. It also includes ex-officio members representing agencies of the Government of Canada, including the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and the office of the Chief Scientific Advisor to the Prime Minister, as well as representatives of Provincial-Territorial Ministries of Health, and McGill University (host of the Secretariat). (Source.)

This is the first time I have ever seen in any country a group with ties to government health agencies admit that there are seriously injured individuals from the COVID-19 shots, and that strategies need to be developed to deal with their injuries.

Some injuries have been acknowledged in the U.S. by the FDA, but the only action they have taken is to add warnings to the shots – nothing about how to treat the victims and their injuries.

To be sure, this group in Canada keeps stating the official narrative that “the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccination continue to outweigh the risks” while supplying no underlying data or studies to prove this statement, but the fact that they are even admitting that there are people injured by the shots that need help, is huge.

The Government of Canada, through its COVID-19 Immunity Task Force (CITF) and Vaccine Surveillance Reference Group (VSRG), is investing approximately $800,000 for a study that aims to further improve Canada’s identification and response to adverse events people may experience following COVID-19 vaccination across 10 provinces. This study is an extension of an existing vaccine safety program that provides important public health information about adverse events following immunization (AEFI) for all vaccines authorized for use in adults and children.

Let’s hope this is not just another excuse to spend money with no results, but that something substantive could come out of such a study, that quite possibly was motivated by the honest physicians in Canada who risked their careers and lives to bring the truth to the public.

Spanish Top Court Rules COVID Pandemic Lockdown Unconstitutional

by By JOSEPH WILSON via AP News

Spain’s Constitutional Court ruled Wednesday that a strict stay-at-home lockdown order the Spanish government issued under a state of emergency during the first wave of COVID-19 last year was unconstitutional.

While upholding most terms of the state of emergency, the court said provisions ordering the population off the streets except for short shopping trips, unavoidable work commutes and other essential business violated Spain’s Constitution.

The court issued a brief statement that described the ruling as a split decision. State broadcaster TVE said six magistrates were in favor and five against. The full decision is expected to be released in the coming days.

According to TVE, the court majority ruled that the limitations on movement violated citizens’ basic rights and the state of emergency was a constitutionally insufficient mechanism to do that. The six magistrates said a state of exception, which does allow the government to suspend basic rights, would have been necessary.

The Constitutional Court made its ruling in response to a lawsuit brought by Spain’s far-right Vox party. Vox leader Santiago Abascal called Wednesday for Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez to step down.

“We cannot celebrate the decision because we have proof that the government was willing to break the law and tarnish the constitution,” Abascal said.

Spain’s government declared the state of emergency on March 14, 2020, three days after the World Health Organization said the spread of the coronavirus had become a pandemic.

With Spain’s hospitals filling up, Sánchez’s left-wing coalition government won parliamentary backing, including from Vox lawmakers, for the state of emergency.

Legal experts said until the court’s full decision is released, it won’t be clear if the ruling will open the gates to lawsuits against the government.

Earlier, a German court in a landmark ruling had declared that COVID-19 lockdowns imposed by the government were unconstitutional.

Recently, it was revealed that the German Interior Ministry hired scientists to develop fake coronavirus model in order to justify strict lockdown, according to extensive email exchanges obtained by a group of lawyers in a legal dispute.

An American federal judge also ruled coronavirus restrictions in Pennsylvania as unconstitutional.

A major lawsuit has also been filed against the PM of Denmark for strict COVID-19 restrictions and for killing almost 17 million minks.

The Hague Court as well ruled that the COVID-19 lockdown which was imposed by the Dutch Govt had no legal basis and that it was illegal. However, the Dutch appeals court oveturned the ruling within hours which ordered the government to lift the “illegitimate” measure immediately.

The appeals judges argued that they wanted to avoid what they called a “yo-yo effect,” referring to public confusion around whether the curfew was still in force.

The Belgian health experts have demanded an investigation into the WHO for faking a pandemic.

As reported by GreatGameIndia earlier, a three judge court in Peru has ruled that the COVID-19 pandemic was started by the billionaires Bill Gates, George Soros and Rockefeller.

In the past in 2010, the WHO was caught faking a pandemic and was forced to admit that its methodology of measuring the virality or the spread of the disease, instead of its severity was incorrect.

Nearly 40% of New COVID Patients Were Vaccinated

Nearly 40% of new COVID patients were vaccinated – compared to just 1% who had been infected previously.

David Rosenberg , Jul 13 , 2021

via Israel National News

COVID-19 vaccineCOVID-19 vaccineiStock

Coronavirus patients who recovered from the virus were far less likely to become infected during the latest wave of the pandemic than people who were vaccinated against COVID, according to numbers presented to the Israeli Health Ministry.

Health Ministry data on the wave of COVID outbreaks which began this May show that Israelis with immunity from natural infection were far less likely to become infected again in comparison to Israelis who only had immunity via vaccination.

More than 7,700 new cases of the virus have been detected during the most recent wave starting in May, but just 72 of the confirmed cases were reported in people who were known to have been infected previously – that is, less than 1% of the new cases.

Roughly 40% of new cases – or more than 3,000 patients – involved people who had been infected despite being vaccinated.

With a total of 835,792 Israelis known to have recovered from the virus, the 72 instances of reinfection amount to 0.0086% of people who were already infected with COVID.

By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave.

According to a report by Channel 13, the disparity has confounded – and divided – Health Ministry experts, with some saying the data proves the higher level of immunity provided by natural infection versus vaccination, while others remained unconvinced.

The Prevailing Corona Nonsense Narrative, Debunked in 10 or 26 Minutes

By Dr Thomas Binder MD, June 23 via Doctors 4 Covid Ethics

Dr Binder is specialised in Cardiology and Internal Medicine, with a thesis in Immunology and Virology, and 32 years experience in diagnosis and treatment of Acute Respiratory Illness. This text is largely based on his presentation (German text / German video) held at the press conference of ‘Aletheia – Medicine and Science for Proportionality’, May 28th, 2021.

Versión en español, Deutsche Version

Every sick fellow human and every relative of deceased fellow humans has my deepest empathy, but, first and foremost, has also the right to know the truth.

I would like to present the reality of the corona crisis, go into its chronology and confront its numerous myths and intellectual absurdities with scientificity. The most important studies are linked in the text. Further scientific information, including links to other important studies, can be found on the homepages of ‘Aletheia – Medicine and Science for Proportionality’, the ‘Corman-Drosten Review Report’, and ‘Doctors for Covid Ethics’, of which I am a member.

PCR Testing Epidemic, 2006

As responsible physicians and scientists, in the case of infections diagnosed by quick PCR tests in the context of an alleged epidemic of national or pandemic of international scope, we must always consider the possibility of a pseudo or testing epidemic.

On January 27th, 2007, the New York Times, virtually the bible of journalists whose integrity they could still trust at the time, published an important piece entitled: ‘Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t’.

Dr. Herndon, internist at a medical centre in the U.S. state of New Hampshire, coughs seemingly incessantly for a fortnight starting in mid-April 2006. Soon, an infectious disease specialist has the disturbing idea that this could be the beginning of a whooping cough epidemic. By the end of April, other hospital staff are also coughing. Severe, persistent coughing is a leading symptom of whooping cough. And if it is whooping cough, the outbreak must be contained immediately because the disease can be fatal for babies in the hospital and lead to dangerous pneumonia in frail elderly patients.

It is the start of a bizarre episode at the medical centre: the story of the epidemic that wasn’t.

For months, almost everyone involved believes there is a huge whooping cough outbreak at the medical centre with far-reaching consequences. Nearly 1,000 staff members are given a quick PCR test and put on leave from work until the results are in; 142 people, 14.2% of those tested, including Dr Herndon, are tested positive in the quick PCR test, so diagnosed with whooping cough. Thousands, including many children, receive antibiotics and a vaccine as protection. Hospital beds are taken out of service as a precaution, including some in the intensive care unit.

Months later, all those apparently suffering from whooping cough are stunned to learn that in bacterial cultures, the diagnostic gold standard for whooping cough, the bacterium that causes whooping cough could not be detected in any single sample. The whole insanity was a false alarm.

The supposed whooping cough epidemic had not taken place in reality, but only in the minds of those involved, triggered by blind faith in a highly sensitive quick PCR test that had become oh so modern. In truth, all those who had fallen ill had suffered from a harmless cold. Infectiologists and epidemiologists had put aside their expertise and common sense and blatantly ignored this most likely differential diagnosis of the symptom cough.

Many of the new molecular tests are quick but technically demanding. Each laboratory performs them in its own way as so-called ‘home brews’. Usually they are not commercially available and there are rarely good estimates of their error rates. Their high sensitivity makes false positives likely. When hundreds or thousands of people are tested, as happened here, false positive results can give the appearance of an epidemic.

An infectiologist said: I had a feeling at the time that this gave us a shadow of a hint of what it might be like during a pandemic flu epidemic.

And an epidemiologist explained: One of the most troubling aspects of the pseudo-epidemic is that all the decisions seemed so sensible at the time.

The madness of a pseudo or testing epidemic seemed perfectly normal to so many involved.

I recommend you read this article published in the New York Times in 2007 and ask yourself: “Shouldn’t we all have learned a lot from this for the future?”

Swine Flu Scandal, 2009

As responsible physicians and scientists, in an alleged or real epidemic of national or pandemic of international scope we must always remember previous alleged or real epidemics or pandemics. Here is the last one.

In spring 2009, a highly contagious, very dangerous influenza virus, H1N1, seems to threaten humanity. The disease it causes is clinically indistinguishable from seasonal flu and is called swine flu.

Experts like the German virologist Prof. Christian Drosten spread horror scenarios predicting millions of deaths worldwide. In May, the WHO relaxes the criteria for declaring a pandemic for reasons that have never been explained. It removes the dangerousness of the causative pathogen from the definition of a pandemic. Now, the rapid, massive spread of a comparatively harmless pathogen over at least two WHO regions is enough. Any endemic, seasonal wave of any flu or cold virus, no matter how harmless it is, can be called a pandemic. Promptly, the WHO declares a H1N1 pandemic on June 11th.

Politicians are taking seriously the warnings of the experts and the WHO. Without consulting the population, they are procuring hundreds of millions of packages of sparsely effective, expensive antiviral drugs and hundreds of millions of doses of hastily approved vaccines that are, after all, produced using conventional methods.

Critics who describe the virus as comparatively harmless are ridiculed or ignored initially. Finally, scientists, in Europe, especially the German microbiologist and infection epidemiologist Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi and the German pneumologist and politician Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, gain attention in mass media and politics. The global madness that was already threatening at that time can be averted just in time.

Worldwide, about 150 to 600 thousand people died with or from H1N1, which turned out to be less dangerous than seasonal influenza. Correspondingly, vaccination readiness was low. Nevertheless, in Sweden alone about 700 children contracted disabling narcolepsy, sleeping sickness, caused by hastily approved unnecessary and unsafe vaccines. In Switzerland, 1.8 million vaccine doses were sold abroad or given away, and 8.9 million were disposed of.

There was hardly any media coverage of the swine flu scandal. The temporary success of the media-fuelled panic was primarily due to the interconnectedness of experts, the pharmaceutical industry, the WHO and health politicians. In the end, the seemingly completely overwhelmed health authorities had fallen for an almost perfectly orchestrated propaganda campaign.

I recommend you watch the documentary ‘Profiteers of Fear – The Swine Flu Business’, produced in German by Arte in November 2009, and ask yourself: “Shouldn’t we all have learned a lot from this for the future?”

‘Event 201’: Corona Pandemic Simulation, 2019

The situation is threatening. A new corona virus is spreading across the world. Case numbers on Johns Hopkins University’s dashboard are rising and rising. The highly contagious, immune-resistant, dangerous virus is paralysing trade and transport globally and sending the world economy into free fall.

What sounds like the alleged outbreak of the alleged pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 in China's Wuhan province in December 2019, is the scenario of 'Event 201'.

On October 18th, 2019, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Johns Hopkins University and WEF are organising a pandemic simulation under this name. After the Spanish flu, the bird flu and the swine flu, as the pathogen they do not choose another influenza virus, but a coronavirus that is completely unknown to lay people so far, especially not to politicians and journalists.

This simulation of a corona pandemic that broke out in South America is not attended by doctors, but by Western representatives of the organisers, the UN, the WHO, governments, authorities and global corporations from the fields of high finance, pharmaceuticals, logistics, tourism and the media, as well as by Dr. George Gao, virologist and director of the Chinese CDC, the Chinese equivalent of the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH).

The participants agree that a corona pandemic is disruptive, can only be overcome by global governmental and private cooperation, system-relevant global corporations must be propped up financially, medium-sized businesses must be sacrificed if necessary, voices that deviate from the prevailing narrative must be censored consistently in the mass and social media, and the pandemic can only be terminated by vaccinating the entire world population.

The simulation ends with 65 million deaths worldwide.

I recommend you watch the documentary ‘Event 201: Corona Pandemic from the Drafting Table’, produced in German with English subtitles by ExpressZeitung in June 2020, and ask yourself: “Shouldn’t the mass media have reported on this in detail?”

Corona Scandal, 2020

Two and a half months later, on December 31st, 2019, the Chinese CDC, led by Dr. George Gao, reports 27 cases of pneumonia of unknown cause to the WHO – out of a Chinese population of 1.4 billion. On January 7th, 2020, the Chinese health authorities identify a novel coronavirus as the causative agent.

On January 21st, 2020, Prof. Christian Drosten et al. submit a paper, the recipe for which laboratories can produce a rapid RT-PCR test for the detection of the virus called 2019-nCoV. It is accepted just the next day and published in the journal Eurosurveillance another day later.

The WHO had already posted the Drosten RT-PCR quick test on its website one week earlier and recommended it as the global diagnostic gold standard.

On January 30th, Drosten et al. published the justification of the narrative of epidemiologically relevant asymptomatic transmission of 2019-nCoV in the letter to the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, virtually one of the bibles of us doctors whose integrity we could still trust at the time, with the title ‘Transmission of 2019-nCoV Infection from an Asymptomatic Contact in Germany’.

On February 11th, the WHO names the novel corona virus SARS-CoV-2, the disease it causes COVID-19; coronavirus disease. It does so against the request of Chinese virologists. They preferred to call it HCoV-19, human coronavirus, because of the danger that the name SARS-CoV-2 could stir up unfounded fears out of its biological and epidemiological lack of similarity to the much more dangerous SARS-CoV-1.

On March 11th, the WHO declares a COVID pandemic. Meanwhile, its Director-General, the biologist, immunologist and philosopher Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has been charged with genocide in Ethiopia before the International Criminal Court in The Hague. The presumption of innocence applies, of course.

Now, almost everything is going on as it did during the swine flu scandal in 2009, but in an even more lubricated way. Experts, mostly laboratory physicians and biologists working as virologists or epidemiologists, who have never examined anyone suffering from a respiratory infection, let alone treated them, declare that SARS-CoV-2 is virtually an alien about which we know absolutely nothing and that we must regard as extremely dangerous, until largely the same experts will have proven otherwise at some point. In Switzerland, they constitute themselves as ‘Swiss National COVID-19 Science Task Force’ and offer themselves to the Swiss Federal Council as scientific advisors.

The executive and legislative politicians as well as the federal and cantonal health authorities, all panicked by them, accept their offer and seem to follow them as blindly as the Federal Council apparently blindly followed the WHO when it declared the COVID pandemic. Unlike any ninepins club, the now official scientific advisory board to the Swiss government through what is supposed to be Switzerland’s biggest crisis since the Second World War does not keep any record of its activities.

On March 16th, the Swiss Federal Council declares the ‘exceptional situation’, the highest danger level of the epidemic law, based on exactly zero scientific evidence.

The mass media, including the Swiss public service broadcaster SRG, take on the third part in this conglomerate of mutually escalating ignorance, arrogance, incompetence and organised irresponsibility. Brainless and heartless themselves, they hammer into our heads around the clock:

There is a pandemic of a highly contagious and even epidemiologically relevant asymptomatically transmissible corona killer virus. Every seemingly hale and hearty fellow human being can be your angel of death!

Unlike in 2009, the mass media consistently censor, discredit and defame questioning doctors and scientists, including luminaries such as John Ioannidis, Professor of medicine, epidemiology and public health at Stanford University School of Medicine, one of the world’s most renowned and most cited scientists, specialised in science fraud, Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi, and Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg. After having been libelled, including alleged threats to politicians and my family, by a private person well known to me, myself, was brutally arrested by an anti-terrorist unit in my practice and, after it turned out immediately that I had not threatened anyone, merely the world view of insane people, I was shipped off to a closed psychiatric ward for six days because of ‘self-endangerment while in COVID insanity’.

The governments of almost all countries seem to have forgotten their epidemic plans, which wisely spare the individuals, the society and the economy. In blind obedience to the WHO and to lobbyists, called experts, they are enacting self-destructive non-pharmacological interventions, including lockdowns never considered before, following the authoritarian Chinese role model. They are doing this almost globally, in lockstep.

Without consulting the population, they procure billions of doses of emergency mRNA and DNA injections, that are even temporarily approved by Swissmedic. This technology is being widely used on humans for the first time. Almost worldwide, the constitution, the rule of law, human rights, civil liberties, ethics, scientificity, and common sense are being sacrificed in favour of a quasi-global authoritarian regime under the control of the WHO: Who controls the WHO, controls the world!

All elements of the prevailing corona narrative are invented out of the fact-free vacuum

1. SARS-CoV-2 did not emerge in Wuhan in December 2019. First, in November 2020, a study from Milan showed that SARS-CoV-2 was endemic in Italy as early as September 2019, before the 2019/20 flu season. Other studies showed the same later, for example in France.

2. There is no SARS-CoV-2 epidemic of national scope, thus no pandemic. This is already evident from the lack of excess mortality when corrected for demographics, and from the rather low occupancy of the intensive care units, whose capacities, in addition, have been massively reduced since April 2020.

3. The indication to test, namely not only critically ill hospitalised patients with a need for specific antiviral therapy, in the surveillance system, and in a study cohort, but to test even asymptomatic, formerly called healthy, people and, on top of that, to test only for one single of all respiratory viruses that must be considered in the differential diagnosis of respiratory infections, is wrong.

4. The Drosten RT-PCR test is neither diagnostic for an infection with SARS-CoV-2 nor for a sickness or death from COVID-19. On November 27th, 2020, an international group of 22 life scientists, including myself, published an ‘External Peer Review of the Corman-Drosten Paper’.

We explain that conflicts of interest exist, that the alleged peer review within 24 hours is absurd, and ten fundamental scientific flaws. This most important medical publication of 2020, which can hardly be surpassed in terms of lack of scientificity, should never have been published.

The Corman-Drosten RT-PCR test protocol is fabricated poorly and vaguely, without validation and standardisation. As a result of cross reaction with other coronaviruses, its specificity of about 98.6%, corresponding to 1.4% false positives, which is already low in the absence of any virus, is further reduced to up to 92.4%, corresponding to 7.6% false positives, during the flu season. Everywhere, the test is performed differently and at too high cycle thresholds. Although studies have shown that no culturable viruses are present in samples with a Ct value above 28, the tests are still carried out with cycle threshold values above 35. Their results are reported worldwide without reference to clinical symptoms.

5. The symptoms, clinical, laboratory and radiological findings of COVID-19 are not clearly distinguishable from diseases caused by other respiratory viruses.

6. There is no epidemiologically relevant asymptomatic transmission of respiratory viruses. What we learned in medical school has meanwhile been confirmed also for SARS-CoV-2 by numerous studies. The ‘asymptomatic contact’ invented by Prof. Drosten in the Letter to the Editor of January 30th, 2020 was very much symptomatic: the patient had suppressed her symptoms with medication.

Therefore, all non-pharmacological interventions for asymptomatic, formerly called healthy, people beyond the proven effective measures to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2, hygiene and self-isolation of sick people, are ineffective.

7. The long quoted high case fatality rate (CFR) of 2% was misleading. Every primary school student knows that it is not the CFR that is relevant, but the infection fatality rate (IFR), which can easily be lower by a factor of about one hundred because of the number of undetected cases.

8. The initial claim that 5% of the infected people would need intensive care treatment was wrong, for the same reasons that every primary school studentunderstands. It led to the procurement of about 1,000 ventilators and to the postponement of non-emergency but of necessary operations.

9. SARS-CoV-2 is not a mass murderer. The most recent realistic estimate of the global IFR is 0.15%, below 0.05% for under 70s. After replacing the number of deceased within 28 days with a positive PCR test on whatever cause by the number of deceased from COVID-19, it is even much lower, well below that of seasonal influenza.

10. An epidemic does not spread exponentially, but according to a logistic or Gompertz function.

11. Due to basic and cross-immunity only about 10-20% of the people contract the seasonal corona and influenza viruses during each flu season. Herd immunity is likely to exist since the end of the Corona-19 season, in our mid-northern latitudes in April 2020. Therefore, an ‘nth wave of a respiratory virus’ is also a biological impossibility.

12. There is effective prophylaxis: for example healthy lifestyle, lots of social contacts, and vitamin D3.

13. There is effective, well tolerated, low cost therapy: for example topical budesonide, normal doses of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.

14. The serial experimental mRNA and DNA injections are unnecessary (IFR 0.15%, for <70a: <0.05%, even much lower after replacing the number of deceased from whatever cause within 28 days with a positive PCR test by the number of deceased from COVID-19, moreover SARS-CoV-2 is mutating permanently and in the sense that it becomes more infectious while less dangerous), ineffective (according to the registration studies, which are not worth the paper they are written on, the mRNA injections reduce the risk of mild COVID-19 disease absolutely(!) by <1%, there are no data for severe courses and in >75-year-olds), and unsafe (anaphylactic reactions, thromboembolism, thrombocytopenia, DIC, and myocarditis in the short term, possible ADE in the medium term, possible autoimmune diseases, cancer, and others in the medium to long term).

SARS-CoV-2 is not an alien! It is a newly discovered member of the well-known beta coronavirus family. Therefore, it self-evidently occurs seasonally from November to April and mutates, without human intervention, in such a way that it becomes ever more contagious but less dangerous. Because of existing basic and cross-immunity, only a fraction of the population falls ill. The disease is usually self-limiting and leaves immunity, possibly for life, and better than the best vaccination ever could. It kills comparatively few people and, unlike influenza, no children.

The entire prevailing corona narrative is nonsense. It justifies the globally dominating unscientific, inhumane madness. Such can be wrought with any respiratory virus: if we no longer test all people with a hypersensitive, low-specific RT-PCR test that cross-reacts with other viruses for theoretically one RNA fragment of SARS-CoV-2, but for one of, say, influenza or metapneumoviruses, we immediately have an influenza or metapneumo testing pandemic.

Incidentally, every second-year medical student must study the basics of epidemiology. There, he or she learns that when an epidemic of national scope is declared, a study cohort representative of the population must be formed immediately. It is used to monitor the number of cases, the severity of the disease and the status of immunity, in this case by determining antibodies and T-cell immunity.

Although it has been more than a year since the WHO declared the COVID pandemic, such a representative surveillance cohort does not exist. Even worse: from week 13 to 44, the FOPH had also paused the surveillance system, thus completing the total blind flight.

The epidemic is largely an unreal PCR testing epidemic, but the oppressive measures which it has produced are real; they threaten our freedom, our livelihoods and even our lives.

Dear responsible colleagues!

Please remember the Hippocratic Oath (“Primum non nocere, secundum cavere, tertium sanare”) and the Geneva Declaration of the World Medical Association:

I will not use my medical knowledge to violate human rights and civil liberties, even under threat.

Dear responsible fellow humans!

Wake up, stand up and fight, peacefully but firmly; if not for yourself, then for your children’s future and that of your grandchildren!`

Breaking News! Dr. David Martin reveals Fauci’s Trail of Covid Patents’ since 2002

Dr David Martin was one of the speakers in the Plandemic films, whose work history for 20 years has involved investigating biological weapons. You will see him explain evidence that patents exist, which you can look up at: https://www.uspto.gov/ disconfirming what the media, doctors, scientists, and governmernt agencies around the world have said about SARS-COV-2 and the spike protein jab. Dr. Martin’s bombshell testimony reveals that we – the people of the world – have been lied to in a big way.

Check on these patents that can be found in the official site of the American Patent Office. https://www.uspto.gov/
 
Go to this section of their website and key in the following patent numbers: https://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm
 
Patent Number: 7279327
https://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7279327.PN.&OS=PN/7279327&RS=PN/7279327
 
This is a SARS-Cov-2 patent filed in April 2002  by researchers from University of North Carolina  at Chapel Hill and also Ralph Baric for a “an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus particle, that specifically targets lung epithelial cells wherein said cell is a coronavirus permissive cell…..” This virus was genetically modified to infect humans more effectively! The research and development of this research was funded by Dr. Anthony Fauci from the NIH! There were claims that this research was initiated to develop HIV vaccines using coronaviruses as vectors. However, the research deployed genetically modifying platforms to enhance the coronavirus to infect human cells using the ACE2 receptors.
 
Patent Number: 7220852
;p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7220852.PN.&OS=PN/7220852&RS=PN/7220852″>https://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7220852.PN.&OS=PN/7220852&RS=PN/7220852
 
Patent filed in April 2003 by US CDC for the SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 genome. (Note that US laws do not allow a naturally occurring virus to be patented.)
 
Patent Number: 46592703P and 776521 concerning the SARS-CoV-2 were classified by the CIA and masked in the last 24 hours! (These patents cover PC RCT testing platforms for SARS-CoV-2.)
 
Patent Number: 7151163
https://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7151163.PN.&OS=PN/7151163&RS=PN/7151163
 
This patent was filed by Sequoia Pharmaceuticals, Inc. on 28th April 2003 for the antivirals to treat SARS-CoV  and SARS-CoV-2. The  company was later absorbed by Pfizer and Johnson + Johnson.
 
Patent Number: 9193780
https://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=9193780.PN.&OS=PN/9193780&RS=PN/9193780
 
Patent filed on 5th June 2008, but approved in 2015, by Ablynx Pharma (former Sequoia Pharmaceuticals) for the polybasic cleavage found on the SARS-CoV-2 genome that allows access to human cells via ACE2 receptors!

Another more than 73 patents were filed between 2003 to 2018 regarding various aspects of the SARS-CoV-2.
 

WATCH: Whitney Webb Dissects the Wellcome Leap into Transhumanism

Whitney Webb of UnlimitedHangout.com joins James to discuss her latest article, “A “Leap” toward Humanity’s Destruction.”

Even if you’re familiar with the transhumanist agenda, what the ex-DARPA, ex-Silicon Valley old hands at the newly created Welcome Leap are planning to do in their quest to transform the human species in the coming decade will blow your mind.

Just in case you needed a reminder of the state of the internet these days – this video was uploaded to YouTube and then removed only a few hours later. If you make video content, or know anyone who does, remind them to have a back-up channel on an independent platform.

Links, sources – plus download options and an audio-only version – are available here.

China Foreign Vice-Minister Says US Must Accept Its Hegemony Is Waning

via ZeroHedge

In the latest exchange of diplomatic barbs between the world’s two superpowers, on Friday China’s foreign vice-minister Le Yucheng called on Washington to accept that “American hegemony” is in decline, but insisted it will be difficult to overtake the United States even within a “relatively long period of time”.

The US is still the leading power in terms of strength but its adoption of a cold war mentality and creation of “small clubs” is a sign of ideological decline, Le told media outlet Guancha according to SCMP.

“The US decline is not a decline in strength but a decline of hegemony,” Le said. “No matter a country’s strength, hegemonic power is bound to wither, hegemony is not popular.” But he conceded that the US remains “a strong and large nation in the number one spot”, adding that “It will be hard to overtake it over a relatively long period of time.”

China’s foreign vice-minister Le Yucheng

Le said that US-led groupings like the defence-focused Quad, the intelligence-sharing Five Eyes, and the Group of Seven were all examples of Washington trying to define the “international community” when there are many more nations willing to support China’s position.

He also referred to a recent UN vote backed by 44 nations, including the US, which backed a call for the UN human rights chief to be given access to Xinjiang, where Beijing is accused of the mass detention of Muslim minorities and using forced labor. Afterwards, China said that it had won the backing of 90 nations, which had “said ‘no’ to anti-China ‘small clubs’,” according to Le. He said: “This is the international community’s voice of justice, this is real multilateralism.”

The remarks come at a time when Beijing is urging the US not to form a relationship rooted in rivalry but to continue engaging with China.

In an event marking the 50th anniversary of Henry Kissinger’s secret visit to China which set in motion the normalization of US-Sino relations, Vice-President Wang Qishan said the biggest challenge facing the US came from within rather than from China.

Meanwhile the former US secretary of state has called for serious dialogue between China and the United States to avoid “catastrophe”.

Between 1979 and 2016, US-China relations were for the most part friendly, mostly because of Washington’s policy of engagement, which assumed that integrating China into the global economy – read mass producing cheap goods which would allow the US to enjoy low prices even as its monetary policy eased for decades and made a handful of people beyond rich – would ensure that political liberalization would follow. Le said that this policy had allowed the two countries to cooperate on issues of global importance, including the 2008 financial crisis and climate change.

[…]

Le also accused Biden and his administration of revealing their hegemonic view of the world order and lingering cold war mentality when they spoke of approaching China “from a position of strength”. The phrase also irked China’s foreign policy chief Yang Jiechi during his March meeting with US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken in Alaska.

“The biggest challenge faced by a superpower like the United States will always come from within, and destroying China is by no means a prescription for solving American problems,” Le said. “We hope that the United States will return to reason and the right path of dialogue and cooperation, no need to turn resisting China into a policy, nor containing China into ‘political correctness’.”

Le is viewed as a moderate voice among Beijing’s far more hawkish diplomatic corps, being the first to send an olive branch to the US after last year’s election and penning long commentaries in state-run media calling for US-China dialogue at all levels of government and among think tanks and the media. This contrast with the more aggressive rhetoric of Le’s “Wolf Warrior” colleagues, such as the foreign ministry spokespersons Zhao Lijian and Hua Chungying.

However, during the interview on Friday Le made several criticisms of the US that were similar in tone and substance to the more aggressive rhetoric of the Wolf Warriors: Le said the genocide of Native Americans was one reason why Washington’s criticisms of China’s human rights record were not credible, he also described the hypothesis that the coronavirus could have leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan as a “conspiracy theory manufactured by spies”, urging the US to clear up suspicions surrounding its own biolaboratories.

Haiti President Assassinated – Why?

via Haiti Libre April 7, 2021

Haiti, refused a donation of 756,000 doses of AstraZeneca vaccine proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) via the Covax mechanism, reported Tuesday April 6, according to the Spanish news agency EFE who quotes a high-ranking source requesting the anonymity within the Haitian Government.

According to this source the Haitian Government refused to receive the AstraZeneca vaccine, manufactured under license by “Serum Institute of India” because of “the global unrest surrounding this vaccine”, considering that the population of Haiti “would not accept it”.

The Haitian authorities have asked the WHO to send vaccines from other laboratories to Haiti, including the vaccine from Johnson & Johnson laboratories which requires only one injection and which can be stored at temperatures between 2 and 8 degrees Celsius. But the World Health Organization is “reluctant” to accept Haiti’s demands, reminding Haitian authorities that “the deadlines are running out”.

Note that Haiti is one of the four countries in the world (out of 192 infected with Covid-19) not to have started to vaccinate its population against the coronavirus according to Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the Director General of WHO.

Note that according to figures from the Ministry of Public Health Haiti would be relatively unaffected by the coronavirus, with a total of 12,803 confirmed cases (as of March 28, 2021 latest data available https://www.haitilibre.com/en/news-33419-haiti-covid-19-haiti-special-report-382.html ) confirmed cases throughout the national territory since the first case (March 19, 2020 https://www.haitilibre.com/en/news-30319-haiti-health-origin-of-the-first-2-cases-of-covid-19-in-haiti.html However, many experts believe that these data do not reflect the true extent of the pandemic in Haiti due to the limited capacity detection of the virus in the country.

Makers Say Vaccines Cut Chance of Dying by 10 Times, but Age Cuts It by Up to 15,000 Times

by Marko Marjanović via Anti-Empire

Here is the estimated US COVID infection fatality rate stratified by age:

As you can see, and as we have known ever since the first detected outbreak in Wuhan, COVID mortality risk varies by age to a colossal degree. (It varies by age 10X more than influenza which is already hugely age-dependent.)

The infection mortality for an 80-year old male reaches 5%. That’s not nothing.

By the same token, the difference in estimated IFR between an 80-year old and a 6-year old is a factor of 5,000. The difference in observed COVID-attributed mortality between an 84-year old and 5-year olds is a factor of 15,000.

The vaccine manufacturers claim a vaccine “efficacy” of just over 90 percent. If they are right that means the vaccine can reduce your chances of dying by 10 times.

However, your age can reduce your chances of dying by up to 15,000 times.

Clearly one of these two figures is far, far greater than the other.

It means age will always remain the far more important factor to mortality outcomes. Astronomically so.

A 10 times reduction is a scientific accomplishment and in certain, very specific circumstances useful and nothing to be scoffed at.

But in a different setting, it is likewise absolutely meaningless. If thanks to a younger age you already enjoy a reduction in mortality risk in the 100s or 1000s, then how useful is it to multiply that by another 10?

Understand that at certain ages we start to talk about COVID mortality risks below that of mortality due to drownings.

There are 286 documented deaths of children under 18 officially attributed to COVID in 2020 and 2021. There are 800 child drowning deaths each year.

The 42,000 road accident deaths in just 2020 are more than all the COVID deaths of all Americans under 54.

They are 15 times more than all 2860 COVID-attributed deaths among the under 30s.

They are still 5 times more than all 8685 COVID-attributed deaths among the under 40s.

How much time do you spend fretting about death on your commute to work, or in a drowning, and how far would you go to reduce your chances of such by a factor of 10?

Would you inject a substance that promised to reduce your chances of a drowning death 10 times as soon as it was invented, or would you wait 5-10 years to see if there are long-term side effects?

The popo harrasing not-at-risk people for not sheltering from what does not threaten them

If someone is 80 years old I will be the last person to say that that person shouldn’t take the vaccine. Let’s be real. At 80 years old long-term side effects are less of a concern, and if it can cut your chances of dying, should you catch it, by 10 times from 5% to 0.5% that’s a very sweet deal.

Of course, there are reasons to believe the reduction is not really 10 times, particularly in the elderly.

One reason is that between 30% to 50% have already had COVID so for them the vaccine will at best do nothing.

The other reason is that vaccines don’t work as well in individuals whose immune systems are already weak.

In fact, the manufacturers didn’t include the elderly in their effectiveness studies in any real numbers precisely because their inclusion would bring down the numbers they were after.

Nonetheless, at 80 or 85 you’ve got less to lose, and more to gain.

If it works as well as the manufacturer claims it would be the equivalent of making you 15-20 years younger for the purposes of COVID death risk. Even if it works only one-third as well as advertised it could still be the difference between life and death.

On the other hand, if you’re 35 years old your chances of dying with COVID are already microscopic. A 10 times reduction in risk would mean making you the equivalent of a 20-year old, but it still means just dividing by 10 a figure that was already microscopic in the first place.

In fact, there is something misleading in saying that 14 out of every 100,000 US 35-year olds died with COVID.

That makes it sound as if any and all 35-year olds have a chance of dying with COVID albeit a very small one. That is not true.

The common flu can kill an active 85-year old. Someone who was healthier than his octogenarian peers. It happens all the time. The same is true of COVID.

They do not kill healthy 35-year olds.

The 621 deaths with COVID of 35-year old Americans were overwhelmingly of 35-year olds with very serious comorbidities.

At 35 if you still have a liver and at least half a lung you are already just about immortal for purposes of COVID death.

Even if vaccination can make you “more immortal,” the question is at what risk cost?

And I’m not saying at all that the risk cost is high. What I’m saying is that when the benefit is converting microscopic risk into slightly smaller microscopic risk, taking on any risk cost above microscopic is illogical.

The risk cost of COVID vaccine is not microscopic:

  • They are less than one year old and their long-term effects can not be known by definition.
  • They are based on the completely new mRNA and the relatively new adenovirus technologies.
  • Vaccines getting pulled after a mass government injection program is not unheard of. There’s the Dengvaxia vaccine that the Philippines pulled in 2017 after it caused more Dengue than it prevented. There is the 2009 Pandemrix swine flu vaccine that was pulled after it gave hundreds of children narcolepsy for life. There is the US mass swine flu vaccination drive of 1976 that was later admitted to have been folly.

Moreover, it isn’t as if the vaccines are going anywhere. It’s not a binary choice between taking an injection now or never.

The vast majority of people alive today have the option to wait and take the vaccine 5 or 10 years from now if they are proven safe, or when they are improved. The risk cost for a 35-year old to wait 20 years until he is 55 is near zero.

I would say there is a cutoff age at which the math says it makes sense to take the injection even now. (I would say it’s somewhere in old age, eg 70, but your comfort levels with pharma products and pathogens may differ.) I would likewise say there is a cutoff age below which math says not to take the injection. I do not know why this is controversial.This is not an anti-vax stance. This is a pro-vax stance as corresponds to pro-vaxx ideology as it existed before 2020. Ie when we actually believed in testing vaccines before putting them into billions of arms.

I would also say there are other ways to reduce your risk besides the injection such as sun, outdoors, less social media, vitamin D, zinc… They are not silver bullets. Neither is the vaccine. It only reduces the risk by at most 10 times. For most people that is actually very, very little. Microscopically so.

Prof. Dolores Cahill: Covid Vaxxs Will Cause Some 10% Population Deaths

World renowned, Prof. Dolores Cahill minces no words warning people against going for Covid shots, forecasting innocent deaths in the few years ahead, something in the range of 10 percent or more. The interview, by Asia Pacific Today, took place on July 6, 2021.

For the short version watch this, or you can play the full interview: