Thank you for being willing to do a follow-up interview. Since the last time we chatted, what new things have you learned from the peer-reviewed studies you have been looking at?
Sure! There’s a ton of research that’s come out since the interview we did. I can’t cover it all, but let’s look at a few different studies that shed light on various topics. To kick things off, here’s what an article from the beginning of the Omicron frenzy was finding: “It is of concern that 83% of cases occurred in fully or booster-vaccinated people. Whether this observation is an artefact as the major superspreading events and subsequent chains of transmission have occurred primarily in young adults, and not yet spread to children, who have not been vaccinated, is still too early to say.” “Recent results, however, indicate that Omicron significantly escapes two-doses’ vaccines, ranging from complete loss to 33- to 44-fold reduction of neutralizing activities [8,12] Sera from people who received the third dose of vaccines maintained about 10% of the neutralizing activity, and such neutralizing activity was completely lost after three months.” So, even at the beginning of the Omicron wave, there were a few facts that were emerging:
Cutting-edge Vaccine Findings This is a big one. Hot off the presses, this study took the Pfizer vaccine and put it on some human liver cells in a lab. They wanted to see how quickly the cells would absorb the vaccine and what happens on the inside of the cell after a few hours. Here’s a quote from this published peer-reviewed study: “In the BNT162b2 toxicity report, no genotoxicity nor carcinogenicity studies have been provided [26]. Our study shows that BNT162b2 can be reverse transcribed to DNA in liver cell line Huh7, and this may give rise to the concern if BNT162b2-derived DNA may be integrated into the host genome and affect the integrity of genomic DNA, which may potentially mediate genotoxic side effects. At this stage, we do not know if DNA reverse transcribed from BNT162b2 is integrated into the cell genome. Further studies are needed to demonstrate the effect of BNT162b2 on genomic integrity, including whole genome sequencing of cells exposed to BNT162b2, as well as tissues from human subjects who received BNT162b2 vaccination.” Ok, in human language, here are some important things that the study found:
Compare this with the government of Israel’s fact-checker article on mRNA vaccines: “The cells' genome (DNA) is stored within the nucleus, surrounded by double membrane. This membrane allows large molecules such as the produced mRNA molecule to leave the nucleus but prevents large molecules from entering the nucleus. Therefore, the mRNA molecule administered by the vaccine is entirely incapable of entering the nucleus and "reach" the DNA.” We know this is false because this peer-reviewed study has found foreign vaccine-induced DNA floating around inside the nucleus! And it found a lot of it. Take another quote from the same government of Israel article: “The mRNA molecule survives within the body for a few hours” Well, look at what this pre-print study has found: “In this paper, we provide the first data characterizing the actual proteins produced by mouse and human cells in culture that had been incubated up to 30 minutes with the commercial vaccine produced by Moderna (i.e., Spikevax). The mRNA vaccine continues to produce proteins up to 12-14 days after introduction to the cells.” 12-14 days is significantly more than “a few hours.” Let’s go even further. Another recently published study indicates: “In contrast to disrupted germinal centers (GCs) in lymph nodes during infection, mRNA vaccination stimulates robust GCs containing vaccine mRNA and spike antigen up to 8 weeks postvaccination in some cases” In reality, if you are looking in the right place (e.g. lymph nodes), you’d actually find that the mRNA from the vaccine is still present up to 8 weeks later. This is only from the places in the body we’ve studied so far! Just to stop for a moment: these are kinds of findings that strongly vindicate people who chose to not take these experimental gene therapy drugs because of the lack of safety studies. The vaccine proponents like governments claim that these vaccines only stay in your system for a few hours. But studies are finding that’s not true at all - even up to 8 weeks later the vaccine’s “stuff” is still in your lymph nodes making your body produce spike proteins. And, if you read my last interview, you may recall studies that found the spike protein itself is harmful. Side-effects Here’s a study that found a link between vaccination and cancerous lymph nodes: “PET/CT revealed hypermetabolic lymph nodes in the axillary and supraclavicular regions draining the vaccine injection site in 36% of the subjects having received the first dose and 54% of those studied after the 2nd dose. The hypermetabolic lymph nodes were enlarged in 7% of 1st dose vaccinees and 18% of 2nd dose vaccinees. Both differences were statistically significant, demonstrating that the impact on draining lymph nodes was greater after the booster dose, confirming data from the meta-analysis above (12). Regarding the relationship with the underlying malignancy, hypermetabolic lymph nodes were considered as malignant in 5% of the patients while no conclusion regarding the malignant nature could be drawn in 15% of the vaccinees including 16 patients with lymphoma. Interestingly, in none of these studies, the possibility that the mRNA vaccines could have played a role in the development of malignant lymph nodes was considered.” So, there’s evidence that the mRNA vaccines could be causing cancer in lymph nodes, but as this case study reports, “Interestingly, in none of these studies, the possibility that the mRNA vaccines could have played a role in the development of malignant lymph nodes was considered.” Hmmm… Another study titled “The mRNA-LNP platform's lipid nanoparticle component used in preclinical vaccine studies is highly inflammatory” finds that injecting mice with the mRNA vaccines causes inflammation and led to a high mortality rate in those mice. “Vaccines based on mRNA-containing lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) are a promising new platform used by two leading vaccines against coronavirus disease in 2019 (COVID-19). Clinical trials and ongoing vaccinations present with very high protection levels and varying degrees of side effects. However, the nature of the reported side effects remains poorly defined… The same dose of [lipid nanoparticles] delivered intranasally led to similar inflammatory responses in the lung and resulted in a high mortality rate. In summary, here we show that the LNPs used for many preclinical studies are highly inflammatory… Furthermore, the preclinical LNPs are similar to the ones used for human vaccines, which could also explain the observed side effects in humans using this platform.” Another study titled “Four cases of acquired hemophilia A following immunization with mRNA BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine” looked at 4 people who ended up with a condition that causes your blood to not be able to clot properly. The study’s highlights were: “• Immunomodulatory effects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are still poorly understood. • Four cases of Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) observed after mRNA BNT162b2 vaccination • Unusually high AHA incidence in eight months in our province (total population 526,349)” Finally, here’s another study that’s from last year titled “Comprehensive investigations revealed consistent pathophysiological alterations after vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines.” This study found lots of different unexpected changes to the blood of those vaccinated: “Here, we report, besides generation of neutralizing antibodies, consistent alterations in hemoglobin A1c, serum sodium and potassium levels, coagulation profiles, and renal functions in healthy volunteers after vaccination… Altogether, our study recommends additional caution when vaccinating people with pre-existing clinical conditions, including diabetes, electrolyte imbalances, renal dysfunction, and coagulation disorders.” Masking There’s just so much to cover! Around masking, I’ll let you do some of your own reading and digging. Here’s a few to get started: - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00307.x - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31479137/ - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21477136/ - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26952529/ We knew masking didn’t work - even in 2011. The UK’s influenza pandemic plan from 2011 says it very plainly with all the specific reasons why masking doesn’t work. Check out page 37. Lockdowns It was known before this pandemic that lockdowns, restricting travel, gathering limits, etc. had great socio-economic harms for very little benefit. Here are a few documents highlighting this:
“Evidence and experience suggest that in pandemic phase 6 (increased and sustained transmission in the general population), aggressive interventions to isolate patients and quarantine contacts, even if they are the first patients detected in a community, would probably be ineffective, not a good use of limited health resources, and socially disruptive.”
“NPIs such as travel restrictions have also been employed by countries as a political or social measure to abate fear rather than a necessary public health measure. While national public health guidelines generally recommend NPIs during an outbreak to limit contact frequency between individuals and to decrease the potential risk of spread of respiratory pathogens, there is a broad lack of evidence of efficacy and a lack of understanding about secondary adverse impacts.”
Recently, John Hopkin’s research has come out and stated: “An analysis of each of these three groups support the conclusion that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality. More specifically, stringency index studies find that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average. SIPOs were also ineffective, only reducing COVID-19 mortality by 2.9% on average. Specific NPI studies also find no broad-based evidence of noticeable effects on COVID-19 mortality. While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.” Again, this isn’t new. Our public health approaches have not been built on science, or else we would not have used such drastic and harmful measures which we already knew would do more harm than good. Last time we didn't get into the natural side of things. What have you found out about natural immunity? There’s a great collection of 150 studies on this topic here. I’ll quote a few of the studies listed: - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.20.21255670v1 “Our results question the need to vaccinate previously-infected individuals.” - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.03.21259976v2 “There was no difference in the infection incidence between vaccinated individuals and individuals with previous infection.” - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v3 “Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination…” - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1.full “SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected…” “The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well.” “SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees were also at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those that were previously infected.” “This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.” What have you found most interesting or alarming as you look at these studies? Taking the topics and studies I covered in the last interview and this one, the most alarming thing is that all these things - immune escape, harms of lockdowns, the ineffectiveness of masking and the superiority of natural immunity are nothing new. These things have been established for years and decades. What’s so alarming is that our public health officials around the world decided to ignore these things after the pandemic began. Now we are seeing the tangible results of the poor public health measures that were using harmful and ineffective policies. So why did that happen? Was it mere incompetence? Or intentional? I don’t know the answer, but nonetheless, it’s concerning. We are increasingly seeing the public, in large, now losing trust in their political leaders and public health officials for flip-flopping so much and ignoring what used to be solid science. As we come to the end of the interview for today, I want to stress the importance of people doing their own studies. Where can people start researching for themselves? There’s a handful of scientists that I personally follow. Here are some links: - https://twitter.com/P_McCulloughMD - https://twitter.com/GVDBossche - https://twitter.com/MartinKulldorff - https://twitter.com/DrJBhattacharya - https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/archive - https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/archive - https://www.youtube.com/c/MedicinewithDrMoran - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCF9IOB2TExg3QIBupFtBDxg
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |