• Welcome to Global Gulag Media Forum. Please login or sign up.


Started by tahoeblue, Jan 11, 2020, 01:51:09 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.



[United States Holocaust Memorial Museum note]

On August 19, 1947, the judges of the American military tribunal in the case of the USA vs. Karl Brandt et. al. delivered their verdict.

Before announcing the guilt or innocence of each defendant, they confronted the difficult question of medical experimentation on human beings.

Several German doctors had argued in their own defense that their experiments differed little from previous American or German ones.
Furthermore they showed that no international law or informal statement differentiated between legal and illegal human experimentation.

This argument worried Drs. Andrew Ivy and Leo Alexander, American doctors who had worked with the prosecution during the trial. On April 17, 1947, Dr. Alexander submitted a memorandum to the United States Counsel for War Crimes which outlined six points defining legitimate research. The verdict of August 19 reiterated almost all of these points in a section entitled "Permissible Medical Experiments" and revised the original six points into ten.

Subsequently, the ten points became known as the "Nuremberg Code."

Although the code addressed the defense arguments in general, remarkably none of the specific findings against Brandt and his codefendants mentioned the code. Thus the legal force of the document was not well established.

The uncertain use of the code continued in the half century following the trial when it informed numerous international ethics statements but failed to find a place in either the American or German national law codes. Nevertheless, it remains a landmark document on medical ethics and one of the most lasting products of the "Doctors Trial."


[United States Holocaust Memorial Museum note]

On August 19, 1947, the judges of the American military tribunal in the case of the USA vs. Karl Brandt et. al. delivered their verdict. Before announcing the guilt or innocence of each defendant, they confronted the difficult question of medical experimentation on human beings. Several German doctors had argued in their own defense that their experiments differed little from previous American or German ones. Furthermore they showed that no international law or informal statement differentiated between legal and illegal human experimentation. This argument worried Drs. Andrew Ivy and Leo Alexander, American doctors who had worked with the prosecution during the trial. On April 17, 1947, Dr. Alexander submitted a memorandum to the United States Counsel for War Crimes which outlined six points defining legitimate research. The verdict of August 19 reiterated almost all of these points in a section entitled "Permissible Medical Experiments" and revised the original six points into ten. Subsequently, the ten points became known as the "Nuremberg Code." Although the code addressed the defense arguments in general, remarkably none of the specific findings against Brandt and his codefendants mentioned the code. Thus the legal force of the document was not well established. The uncertain use of the code continued in the half century following the trial when it informed numerous international ethics statements but failed to find a place in either the American or German national law codes. Nevertheless, it remains a landmark document on medical ethics and one of the most lasting products of the "Doctors Trial."
[from Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. Nuremberg, October 1946–April 1949. Washington, D.C.: U.S. G.P.O, 1949–1953.]
Permissible Medical Experiments

The great weight of the evidence before us is to the effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.[/b]

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probably cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

Of the ten principles which have been enumerated our judicial concern, of course, is with those requirements which are purely legal in nature — or which at least are so clearly related to matters legal that they assist us in determining criminal culpability and punishment.


Just in case you missed it ,,, it was totally under reported ...

Ivermectin Triple Therapy Protocol for COVID-19 to Australian GP
August 19, 2020, 12:23 AM PDT

Ivermectin Triple Therapy Protocol for COVID-19 Released to Australian GPs for
Infected Elderly and Frontline Workers

SYDNEY, Aug 19, 2020 - (ACN Newswire) - Triple therapy specialist Professor
Thomas Borody, famous for curing peptic ulcers using a triple antibiotic
therapy saving millions of lives
, today released the COVID-19 treatment
protocol to Australian GPs
, who can legally prescribe it to their COVID-19
positive patients, and can also prescribe it as a preventative medication.
Borody says this could be the fastest and safest way to end the pandemic in
Australia within 6-8 weeks.

Professor Thomas Borody MB, BS, BSc(Med), MD, PhD, DSc, FRACP, FACP, FACG,
AGAF, FRS(N) said:
"The three medications are on chemist shelves right now. GPs can email
GP@CDD.com.au to obtain the dosing protocol and COVID-19 treatment information
for their patients.

"GPs can legally prescribe the therapy today as an "off label"
treatment according to Australian Guidelines
- a standard practice in
medicine. In fact more than 60% of prescriptions in Australia are
It's not a new concept. It's happening every
day to manage diseases and save lives."

Professor Borody, an internationally regarded physician with 4 FDA approved
drugs on the US and Australian markets, is famous for developing the triple
therapy that cured peptic ulcers, saving more than 18,000 lives just in
Australia and millions internationally. [See Professor Borody's published
research at ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0519-4698]

"No trial has shown Ivermectin-based therapy to be ineffective. In-fact,
international data reports an almost 100% cure rate and a symptom improvement within 4-6 days.

We should share Australian findings from this triple therapy with the world," said Professor Borody.

"An Ivermectin tablet can cost as little as $2 - which could make it by
far the cheapest, safest, and fastest cure for Australians and the Australian
This needs to be available for aged care facilities and frontline
health workers today.


Ivermectin was discovered in the 1970s and is on the World Health Organization
(WHO) list of essential medicines.

"There is mounting worldwide clinical literature pointing to a 100% cure
rate using Ivermectin Triple Therapy," he said.

There are currently 28 COVID-19 Ivermectin treatment studies running globally.

| - 0- -


Last Updated: February 11, 2021

Clinical Trials

Several clinical trials that are evaluating the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 are currently underway or in development. Please see ClinicalTrials.gov for the latest information.

'Quadruple Therapy with Ivermectin is effective in treating COVID-19'
Updated: September 14, 2020 19:35 IST

Elaborating on the effective methods being followed for treating COVID-19 across the globe, Shashikanth Manikappa, a specialist cardiac anaesthetist working at Monash Health in Melbourne, Australia, has strongly advised what he termed Quadruple Therapy involving four medicines — Ivermectin, Doxycycline, Zinc and Vitamin D3 — as a preventive as well as treating method.

Addressing a media conference in Kalaburagi on Monday, the senior doctor said that the use of Ivermectin would be more effective than that of Hydroxychloroquine which was widely being used worldwide, right from the outbreak of the pandemic.

Referring to a pre-official release of a randomised controlled trial using Ivermectin in three doses in primary contacts of COVID-19, Dr. Manikappa said that 93 % of primary contacts who received Ivermectin did not develop any symptoms and 58 % of primary contacts who did not receive Ivermectin did progress to have symptoms of the pandemic.

"Quadruple Therapy includes Ivermectin 12 mg one dose, Doxycycline 100 mg once a day for four days, Zinc 50 mg once a day for four days and Vitamin D3 once a week.

Ivermectin, Doxycycline and Zinc are to be repeated every 14 days and Vitamin D3 every week with blood levels monitored.

The synergistic effect of these medicine acts to prevent viral multiplication and also stop the virus from entering human cells

Thomas Borody, an Australian gastroenterologist who is known for curing peptic ulcers with triple antibiotic therapy, has revealed that one block in South America that received Ivermectin combination prophylaxis did not contract coronavirus infection while others did," he said.

Asked about the statutory guidelines for the use of these medicine, Dr. Manikappa said that the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) had, though late, come up with new guidelines recommending Ivermectin.

Al Bundy

Greece and Austria are urging other EU states to adopt coronavirus vaccination "passports" which could help revive Europe's stricken tourist industry.

The idea of such a document, likely to be a certificate, would be to permit those who have been vaccinated to travel freely within the EU.

The proposal was put forward during a virtual discussion between EU leaders.

But a vaccine passport faces opposition from some of the bloc's 27 member states.

Source: BBC


What is obvious now :

TPTB never wanted effective therapies as they would preclude the need for vaccinations ...

A year into this mind bender and these sob's do no accept any therapy as effective ... which is a lie ...


Did the Chinese eliminate all the covid positives in Wuhan ? The purpose being to eliminate it from their country ?

last year there where many reports of crematoriums running 24/7 ...
We know how kind and humane the CCP is ... 

Satellite data show a large release of sulfur dioxide gas from the outskirts of Wuhan, China, and could be viewed as evidence of the mass cremation of new coronavirus victims.

Report: Wuhan Funeral Homes Burned Coronavirus Victims Alive
Frances Martel7 Apr 2020

Locals in Wuhan, where the Chinese coronavirus pandemic originated, have heard screams coming from funeral home furnaces, and some treated in hospitals say they saw workers put living coronavirus patients in body bags, Radio Free Asia (RFA) reported on Monday.

RFA noted that it could not independently verify that the Chinese Communist Party was burning coronavirus patients alive, nor has the Communist Party confirmed or denied the rumors. Yet the rumors persist that, to make room for new patients in Wuhan's overcrowded hospitals, medical staff chose older patients less likely to survive the infection and shipped them to incinerators while they were still alive and conscious.

RFA quoted a source "close to the funeral industry" identified only as Ma who said that he had heard reports of "people restrained and forced into body bags when they were still moving."

"Some people are saying that ... there are video clips of screams coming from funeral homes, from inside the furnaces ... which tells us that some people were taken to the funeral homes while they were still alive," Ma added.


The Chinese Communist Party claims that, as of Tuesday, it has documented 82,718 cases of coronavirus nationwide and 3,335 deaths across the country. The vast majority of these, 3,212 deaths, were recorded in Hubei province. Wuhan is the capital of Hubei.

Multiple reports citing sources in Wuhan's seven funeral homes dispute this claim, estimating that the real death toll in the city is as much as ten times higher than China's official nationwide death toll. Reports of hundreds of bodies cremated in some funeral homes began surfacing in February, at the height of the epidemic in the city. Government officials did not allow residents to pick up the remains of their relatives until late March, however, as the strict lockdown that saw government officials welding Wuhan residents in their homes was still ongoing.

When the funeral homes opened to distributed ashes two weekends ago, witnesses estimated that some funeral homes were distributing as many as 5,000 sets of remains a day. Estimates as to the number of sets of remains distributed last week in Wuhan range from 30,000 to 46,000 people.

| - - - -

Wuhan crematoriums 'are burning bodies 24/7 to cope with extra workload during coronavirus outbreak'

    Wuhan crematoriums working around the clock to cope with influx of bodies 
    Worker Mr Yun said 'more manpower' needed as chambers are working 24/7
    Bodies of coronavirus victims must be burned, not buried to prevent spread
    Coronavirus symptoms: what are they and should you see a doctor?

By Sophie Tanno For Mailonline

Published: 09:53 EDT, 5 February 2020

The bodies of victims who have died from the virus must be cremated rather than buried, China's National Health Commission ruled on February 1.


The WHO has said the outbreak does not yet constitute a 'pandemic'.
China has struggled to contain the virus despite unprecedented measures, including virtually locking down more than 50 million people in Hubei province.

| - - -

Wuhan's Crematoriums Are Filling Thousands of Urns With Coronavirus Remains Each Day
Wuhan residents are waiting for hours in line to pick up the remains of their loved ones.
March 30, 2020, 5:17am
by David Gilbert

China has declared victory over the outbreak and on Friday closed its borders to the rest of the world over fears of importing infections. But skeptics say reports of zero new infections are too good to be true and point out that, unlike the rest of the world, China does not report positive test results if the person is asymptomatic.


The true extent of the coronavirus epidemic in Wuhan may never be known, but in recent days, the full scale of the horror has begun to emerge.

7:41 PM · Mar 26, 2020
Jennifer Zeng 曾錚
How many people died in #Wuhan and #China?
Conservative estimation based on numbers of urns being given out at 8 crematoriums in Wuhan by financial analyst @charles984681
Total death in Wuhan: 59K
Total death in China: 97K
Total infection in China: 1.21 M

#CCPVirus #COVID2019


Earlier forced retirement after outing the mask nazi  Fauci ...

Disagree with the propaganda ? You're fired ... you're DOX'ed ...


Fauci staffer to retire
after report he trashed 'mask nazi' Fauci and coronavirus 'fraud' online
The Daily Beast reported that the staffer's posts have become more and more conspiratorial as the pandemic has dragged on.

Sept. 21, 2020, 2:52 PM PDT
By Dareh Gregorian

A public relations staffer for the agency run by Dr. Anthony Fauci announced his "intention to retire" Monday, the department said, after the Daily Beast reported that he was the author of numerous articles trashing Fauci and dismissing the coronavirus pandemic as a "massive fraud."

The man, William B. Crews, a public affairs specialist for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, or NIAID, was identified by the Daily Beast as moonlighting as managing editor of the conservative website RedState, where he wrote articles under the pseudonym "streiff." The articles are filled with misinformation, directly contradicting the agency's recommendations about the virus and calling Fauci a "mask nazi," among other insults.


According to his LinkedIn account, Crews has worked for NIAID since 2007. The Daily Beast said his posts have become more and more conspiratorial as the pandemic, which has killed over 200,000 people in the U.S., has dragged on.


Last week, the top spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services, Michael Caputo, announced that he was taking a medical leave shortly after he promoted dangerous conspiracy theories in a Facebook Live video.

Caputo charged that scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention "don't want America to get well" and were plotting "how they're going to attack Donald Trump." He urged Trump supporters to load up on ammunition in preparation for a violent left-wing rebellion if the president wins re-election.

| - - - -

| - - - -

Earlier .... 

Anthony Fauci: Loser, Liar, Fake, Propagandist And Medical Con Man Exposed. Must Hear Robert Kennedy Jr. Podcast Interview.
Source: drleonardcoldwell.com
April 20, 2020

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. warns that Anthony Fauci is a fraud, and has "poisoned an entire generation of Americans"

During a recent episode of the Thomas Paine Podcast, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. blew the lid on Dr. Anthony Fauci's extensive legacy of fraud and coverups throughout his lengthy medical career in the federal government.

Kennedy explained that Fauci has been a problematic character all throughout his more than 50-year tenure in public health, during which he operated as a workplace tyrant and ruined the careers of countless physicians and researchers who, unlike himself, were upstanding and honorable individuals.

Fauci has been with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984 – can you say deep state? – and he's known among those on the inside as the guy who "poisoned an entire generation of Americans," according to Kennedy.

In at least one instance, Fauci targeted a whistleblower who was trying to expose the fact that America's blood supply is tainted with deadly disease strains. Fauci ruined the career of this physician and proceeded to cover up his crucial research on the subject.

Kennedy also warned during the program that Fauci has attacked many other good guys who've tried to actually serve the public rather than shill for Big Pharma, Bill Gates, the mainstream media and other deep state assets and mouthpieces of deception and lies.

Anthony Fauci owns "many, many" patents on vaccines, warns Kennedy

Fauci is also guilty of abusing his post for financial gain in the form of obtaining lucrative vaccine patents. Doctors and researchers underneath him who developed breakthrough technologies have been fired so that Fauci could assume ownership of their work in order to enrich himself.

| - - - -

Reverse Speech ...

February 2, 2021
Reverse Speech Exposes Coronavirus Agenda

CDC's statement reversed over Corona was - That disease will use the terror. (To control the populations by terrorizing them into submission.)

As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.

I honestly have come to the revulsive conclusion that there is no worse person on this planet than Anthony Fauci. He is deplorable in his virus breeding, his lying, his Dr. Mengele psychological terror of children over Santa Claus and wearing suffocation masks.

David John Oates on Rense in Reverse Speech focused on Fauci, and this horrid person, was exposed in defining Covid IS A CON. He mentions war connected with this virus con.

The creators of the Covid test kit, both experts have died mysteriously now. There is a cover up in this.


    Discussions with CDC in 2 masks - Say C lock (corona lockdown)

    Feds and States coordination - It's in this death anew (Fauci is initiating a fed control of states)

    Herd immunity - Yes dream in the con (Fauci knows this Covid is a con)

    When will life get back to normal - We fed the big con (Covid is a fraud and Fauci is using it for other purposes.)

    Predicting normality in things going right - See a war (Fauci knows a war is on the agenda and that is what happens when this goes right.)

  If they do it right - The sham got us scared (If the con does not work they are scared.)

    Only 50% vaccinated the timetable goes out the window - I know with Pfizer (Fauci knows the inside data needs over 50% forced vax)

    That person infecting other people - Bogus the death made you. (Fauci used this scam to gain control.)


Al Bundy

Al Bundy

3/20 / 2021 Belgrade, Serbia

Protest in Belgrade against "Corona Terror" conducted by the President of Serbia A. Vucic

Antivaxers said from the podium that, in history, vaccines have taken more lives than they have saved.
The protest rally continued with a walk towards the building of the Public TV Service of Serbia
(RTS) and further towards the Government and the monument to Stefan Nemanja.
Among those gathered were private individuals, who are currently banned from working.
There were also citizens who oppose the research of "Rio Tinto" in Radjevina and Jadar, globalization, migrant policy, and there was talk of stealing babies in maternity hospitals for decades, which is only now being talked about (until now it was conspiracy theory).
Most of the protesters did not wear a mask, and the rally passed without incident.
Although she is constantly followed by the opposition
protest TV N1 ( CNN on Serbian ) since they did not liked the topics the article lasted a few seconds.


Wow ... slow walking the news ... now they admit the virus "escaped" Wuhan Lab  ...
notice it's still " believes "  and " Escaped " oh and its " stunning "  hmmmm ...

BREAKING: Former CDC Director Says He Believes Coronavirus 'Escaped' From Wuhan Lab
By Aidan McLaughlinMar 26th, 2021, 9:41 am

Former CDC Director Robert Redfield said he believes the coronavirus escaped from a Wuhan lab, a stunning assessment that echoes claims made by other members of the Trump administration, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

In an interview with CNN's Sanjay Gupta, Redfield made clear he was expressing his opinion that the coronavirus, which erupted into a global pandemic in 2020, first spread from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

"I'm of the point of view that I still think the most likely etiology of this pathology in Wuhan was from a laboratory. Escaped. Other people don't believe that. That's fine. Science will eventually figure it out," Redfield said in an interview that aired on New Day Friday.

"It's not unusual for respiratory pathogens that are being worked on in a laboratory to infect the laboratory worker," he said. "That's not implying any intentionality. It's my opinion, right? But I am a virologist. I have spent my life in virology."

"I do not believe this somehow came from a bat to a human and at that moment in time that the virus came to the human, became one of the most infectious viruses that we know in humanity for human-to-human transmission."


| - - - -


According to Redfield, even his counterpart at the China CDC, Dr. George Gao, was initially left in the dark about the magnitude of the problem until early January. He described a private phone call he had with Gao in early January 2020, when Gao became distraught and started crying after finding "a lot of cases'' among individuals who had not been to the wet market. Gao, Redfield says, "came to the conclusion that the cat was out of the bag."
The initial mortality rates in China were somewhere between "5-10%," Redfield told me. "I'd probably be cryin' too," he added.


Its getting to be winter in the southern hemi ... so the propaganda is laid on think ..
It is interesting  the verbage .. the vaccines are long term UNPROVEN ... yet drug therapies are dismissed  ...

Why ? - Maybe to push for universal deployment of m-rna unproven and possibly dangerous "vaccines" "treatments"

FLCCC Alliance Convenes Global Panel That Warns World Governments of the Consequences of Not Deploying Ivermectin for COVID-19
By FLCCC Mar 18, 2021

WASHINGTON, March 18, 2021 /PRNewswire-PRWeb/ -- A group of medical and scientific experts convened by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) today call for action to put an end to the COVID-19 pandemic by immediately adopting policies that allow for the use of ivermectin in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

Scientists and physicians from the U.S., U.K., E.U., South America, and Israel gathered to discuss the latest data on how ivermectin has reduced positive COVID-19 cases in major cities across the world, ivermectin's role in the early treatment of COVID-19, and why ivermectin needs to be adopted as safe and effective prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

"Ivermectin is safer than most medicines being given (for Covid), meta-analyses of mountains of data show that it reduces mortality 68%," said Tess Lawrie, Director, The Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd. and expert consultant to the WHO, United Kingdom. "For a government to continue not to take action on ivermectin is to let people suffer from this terrible disease."

The panelists' discussion included the latest results from trials in several regions, including Brazil, where ivermectin is used to prevent COVID-19 in regions where researchers see far fewer COVID-19 cases and no presence of any COVID-19 variants compared to areas where ivermectin is not widely used. "We are seeing fewer hospitalizations, faster recovery and no presence of disease from the variants in these regions," said Hector Carvallo, MD, Professor of Medicine, Adolfo Ibanez University y Universidad Mayor, Argentina.

The experts also discussed the extensive body of science showing ivermectin as a safe and effective preventative and treatment for COVID-19. "Why wait? The drug is very safe, and it could crush the pandemic in a few weeks. It is beyond absurd to delay its use and ask for even more data," said Marc Wathelet, Ph.D., Molecular and cellular biologist, Coronavirus specialist from Belgium. "I have questions about the ethics of conducting more RCTs (randomized clinical trials). These studies will include people who we know will get sicker without ivermectin."

A recording of the panel discussion will premiere live on Friday, March 19 at 7 pm E.T. on the FLCCC YouTube Channel. FLCCC president and chief medical officer Pierre Kory, MD, MPA will answer viewer questions in the live chat. To join the premiere and live event with Dr. Kory and see the latest updates from FLCCC, use the following link to subscribe:

Front Line COVID-19 Critcal Care Alliance

This is the story about how the FLCCC Alliance was formed — and how, at the start of the pandemic, the team quickly began to develop protocols to successfully treat patients. Their first protocol was the MATH+ Hospital Treatment Protocol that was used to save critically ill patients and to prevent them from having to rely on ventilators to breathe.
Subsequently, as COVID-19 cases surged, they urgently researched ways to offload the hospitals and reduce case counts and deaths. The team developed the I-MASK+ Prevention & Early Outpatient Treatment Protocol —centered around the drug ivermectin—which is effective for every phase of COVID-19 disease...from prevention through late phase illness.

| - - -

March 18, 2021
Why Brazil is Losing the Global Race for Vaccines
by Raphael Tsavkko Garcia


[ notice the language ... " far-right" the disease is political !!! ]

To date, over 260,000 people have died of Covid-19, a disease that Brazil's far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, once called a "little flu". Since the start of the pandemic, Bolsonaro denied scientific evidence and refused to comply with basic health measures, including wearing a mask in public or avoiding crowds. Even after he and several members of the cabinet came down with the virus, Bolsonaro continued to oppose all measures to contain the pandemic and to hinder efforts to start the vaccination in the country. Moreover, he argued that the lockdown would affect the economy.

| - - -

Look at this ...

Ivermectin: Game changer vs Covid-19? What's the controversy?
March 21, 2021


Game changer? Worldwide cases on ivermectin have been accumulating since the middle of 2020. Many highly competent doctors and research institutions are asserting that it can massively decrease infection rates, periods, and severity, at low risk, even prior to the arrival and use of vaccines. What are the arguments for or against ivermectin use for Covid control and treatment?

The National Institute of Health (NIH) of the US in January 2021 had upgraded their recommendation on ivermectin
, from "against" to "neither for nor against," making it an option for use against Covid-19.


The Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) also weighed in for it. "Ivermectin is one of the world's safest, cheapest and most widely available drugs ... The studies we presented to the NIH revealed high levels of statistical significance showing large magnitude benefit in transmission rates, need for hospitalization and death," according to Dr. Kory, who was a resource for the US Senate Congress on Covid-19.


Who has taken the jump to use it on mass scale?

Slovakia became the first country in the European Union to officially adopt Ivermectin as a treatment for Covid-19, followed by Mexico City, which makes it standard care for the largest city in the Western hemisphere.

Haiti[/b] is another. The Critical Care Alliance cites the country of Haiti having far lower, almost negligible infection rates than the US (https://bit.ly/2Qo8ViJ), possibly from mass use. In Brazil, India, Turkey, Poland and Dominican Republic, data are being studied.

Peru also jumped in. The Critical Care Alliance and Chamie, Hibberd, Scheim studies show that in 24 Peruvian states, over 30 million population, case fatality and infections dropped drastically for all except Lima, despite large increase in population physical interaction shown by Google tracked mobility. (https://bit.ly/38XVyMB).


The Spanish inquisition had the Church on their side, but Galileo had the actual planetary motions. On this Quincentennial, Magellan reached the Philippines, and his ship was the first to circumnavigate the globe... because he didn't listen to the majority who said his ship would fall off a cliff, meet monsters. Crowd sourcing of information and knowledge is now possible linking competent people across the world who are not necessarily running the institutions. Ivermectin or not, let's get moving!


UK super-Covid


Epidemiologist warns the US is 'walking into the mouth of this virus monster' as UK super-Covid becomes dominant in America with A THIRD of variant cases in Florida, Michigan and New Jersey

    There are at least 11,500 cases of the UK variant known as B.1.1.7 in the U.S., according to CDC data 
    Florida, Michigan and New Jersey account of 34.2% of all confirmed variant cases in the U.S.
    A recent study estimated that the UK variant is now dominant with 67% of all samples tested between December and February linked to the strain
    Epidemiologist Dr Michael Osterholm said he is expecting a surge in COVID-19 cases because the majority of the U.S. population isn't vaccinated
    He advocated for a strategy of giving as many people first shots as possible and then administering second shots in the summer when the stockpile increases

By Mary Kekatos Senior Health Reporter For Dailymail.com

Published: 11:24 EDT, 1 April 2021 | Updated: 13:53 EDT, 1 April 2021


After a year ... the "approve treatments are likely to get you on a respirator ... Is that progress from the "progressive's" ?  ...

If you notice the earlier post 

"No trial has shown Ivermectin-based therapy to be ineffective. In-fact,
international data reports an almost 100% cure rate and a symptom improvement within 4-6 days.

FLCCC Alliance Convenes Global Panel That Warns World Governments of the Consequences of Not Deploying Ivermectin for COVID-19
By FLCCC Mar 18, 2021

Addressing a media conference in Kalaburagi on Monday, the senior doctor said that the use of Ivermectin would be more effective than that of Hydroxychloroquine which was widely being used worldwide, right from the outbreak of the pandemic.

Referring to a pre-official release of a randomised controlled trial using Ivermectin in three doses in primary contacts of COVID-19, Dr. Manikappa said that 93 % of primary contacts who received Ivermectin did not develop any symptoms and 58 % of primary contacts who did not receive Ivermectin did progress to have symptoms of the pandemic.

"Quadruple Therapy includes Ivermectin 12 mg one dose, Doxycycline 100 mg once a day for four days, Zinc 50 mg once a day for four days and Vitamin D3 once a week.

Ivermectin, Doxycycline and Zinc are to be repeated every 14 days and Vitamin D3 every week with blood levels monitored.

The synergistic effect of these medicine acts to prevent viral multiplication and also stop the virus from entering human cells

| - - - -


Why to only use approved treatments

Only use treatments for COVID-19 prescribed by your healthcare provider. Unapproved treatments can cause serious harm or even death.
Drugs approved for use

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved one drug  to treat COVID-19: remdesivir (Veklury).

  The FDA has issued emergency use authorizations (EUAs). These let healthcare providers use products that are not yet approved. Some drugs approved for other uses are also permitted to treat COVID-19. But certain requirements must be met.

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has developed COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines. These help COVID-19 healthcare providers understand how to use available drugs.


Under section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), when the Secretary of HHS declares that an emergency use authorization is appropriate,
PREP Act - COVID-19 Related Information

    Notice of Declaration under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act for medical countermeasures against COVID-19 (February 4, 2020)


In the earliest stages of infection, before the host has mounted an effective immune response, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody-based therapies may have their greatest likelihood of having an effect. In this regard, although there are insufficient data from clinical trials to recommend either for or against the use of any specific therapy in this setting, preliminary data suggests that outpatients may benefit from receiving anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies early in the course of infection. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for certain anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19; please see Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Monoclonal Antibodies for more information.

Remdesivir, an antiviral agent, is currently the only drug that is approved by the FDA for the treatment of COVID-19. It is recommended for use in hospitalized patients who require supplemental oxygen. However, it is not routinely recommended for patients who require mechanical ventilation due to the lack of data showing benefit at this advanced stage of the disease.1-4

| - - - -

VEARS - Covid ... FAERS -  Fda Adverse Event Reporting System



The FAERS Public Dashboard is a highly interactive web-based tool that will allow for the querying of FAERS data in a user friendly fashion. The intention of this tool is to expand access of FAERS data to the general public to search for information related to human adverse events reported to the FDA by the pharmaceutical industry, healthcare providers and consumers.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, FDA launched the FAERS Public Dashboard for COVID-19 emergency use authorization (EUA) products. The COVID-19 EUA FAERS Public Dashboard provides weekly updates of adverse event reports submitted to FAERS for drugs and therapeutic biological products used under EUA in COVID-19. After launching the FAERS Public Dashboard, click on the COVID-19 EUA link on the home page to open the COVID-19 EUA FAERS Public Dashboard.

| - - - -

So Just remeber none of the adverse effects or death are from the vaccine shots!
Just remember that!@

QuoteWhat you need to know

    COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective.
    Millions of people in the United States have received COVID-19 vaccines, and these vaccines will undergo the most intensive safety monitoring in U.S. history.
    CDC recommends you get a COVID-19 vaccine as soon as you are eligible.


Adverse events described on this page have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)external icon. https://vaers.hhs.gov/

VAERS accepts reports of any adverse event following vaccination, even if it is not clear the vaccine caused the problem.

Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination is rare. If this occurs, vaccination providers can effectively and immediately treat the reaction.

CDC and FDA scientists have evaluated reports from people who experienced a type of severe allergic reaction—anaphylaxis—after getting a COVID-19 vaccine.

Over 145 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through March 29, 2021.

During this time, VAERS received 2,509 reports of death (0.0017%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. CDC and FDA physicians review each case report of death as soon as notified and CDC requests medical records to further assess reports. A review of available clinical information including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records revealed no evidence that vaccination contributed to patient deaths. CDC and FDA will continue to investigate reports of adverse events, including deaths, reported to VAERS.

Al Bundy

What will the Covid passport look like?

Source: B92 Tuesday, March 30, 2021 | 21:54

The European Union officials presented what the Covid passports, which will be in use from June 15, will look like. The passport will initially be valid for citizens of the European Union. Third countries, including Serbia, will soon be able to issue similar travel documents.

In addition to a regular passport, citizens of the European Union will soon have to carry a health travel document. The long-announced so-called "Covid passport" will come to life in June and will be digitally issued. The health certificate is recommended for air travel, participation in an important event or entry into a public place, and will be issued by the ministries of health of the member states.

"The document will contain person's name, surname, date of birth, citizenship, passport number verified with a QR code, whether the person has been vaccinated or not, the type of vaccine and whether the person has been a carrier of the virus."

As explained in Brussels, the member states are obliged to adopt certificates related to vaccines recognized by the European Medicines Agency, but also that each member state has the right to decide separately on the recognition of any other vaccine. In this way, both Chinese and Russian vaccines, which have not been approved by the agency, can be included in the certificates.

Covid-passport: Without confirmation that we are immune to the virus, travel to many countries may not be possible
Everyone should be able to obtain such a certificate, regardless of whether the vaccine has been approved by a European regulator or is approved only at the national level. The issuance of a certificate and the recognition of a specific vaccine must be distinguished from the state.

The EU is currently working on a plan how Covid passports will be issued in third world countries, including Serbia. Until then, a negative test for coronavirus will be necessary for entering the EU, as well as all previously determined rules prescribed by EU member states.


Skull & Bones, Bilderberg, Mario Draghi: the plans to transform Italy into a Spa

By BuenoBuonoGood - Dec 13, 2012
"Italy: headed by an unelected prime minister, devastated by an economic crisis, endemic unemployment and an increase in suicides, has entered the spiral of death". This is how this special in-depth study on the political, economic and social situation of our country begins, presented by Daniel Estulin in his program "Desde la sombra" (whose vision I highly recommend - link at the end of the article, ed).

Italy Mandates COVID-19 Shots For All Its Healthcare Workers

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Italy's government has announced that all health workers in the country must get a COVID-19 jab or face possible sanctions.

A decree on Wednesday—approved by Prime Minister Mario Draghi's cabinet—says that health workers, including pharmacists, "are required to undergo vaccination," with those who refuse facing potential suspension without pay, according to Reuters.

    "The aim of the measure is to protect as much as possible both medical and paramedical staff and those who are in environments that may be more exposed to the risk of infection," the Italian government said in a statement.

The move comes after the discovery of COVID-19 clusters in hospitals after staff refused to get shots, in a country noted for relatively high levels of vaccine hesitancy. A survey last fall found that nearly 40 percent of Italian respondents said they didn't want to risk a COVID-19 jab.


Logan's Run 1976 - Carousel Begins

World Shocked by SPARS 2025-2028 Document
Alexandra Bruce
Published April 4, 2021

Rumble — In 2017, Johns Hopkins published "The SPARS Pandemic 2025-2028", a report about a drill for a vaccine that caused spongiform encephalopathy aka "Mad Cow" prion disease. There is a concern, that like other "drills" they have published in the past, such as Event 201, the SPARS report will turned out to be the actual script of a planned genocidal attack on the mass populace that is unfolding as we speak.

Anthony Fauci is on video in 2017 predicting the current outbreak and he spent millions of dollars at several labs, including at the Level 4 facility in Wuhan, China to weaponize viruses by bioengineering so-called "gain of function".

In the drill, the politicians are blamed for speeding up the release of the vaccines without proper testing and trials, unleashing this devastating illness on children and adults, not Big Pharma. Alex Jones says here that "Trump really stepped into it."

Here is a copy of the report: https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/spars-pandemic-scenario-copy.pdf



Lazarus Microbe's Immortality Secret Revealed
By Ker Than September 28, 2006

H1N1-influenza as Lazarus: Genomic resurrection from
the tomb of an unknown

The 1918–1919 pandemic of H1N1 virus influenza was the greatest acute plague of the 20th century. Incurring over 20 million human fatalities, however, was  not a good strategy for sustaining the evolutionary fitness of the virus, because it is no longer extant; whereas, say, measles and chickenpox remain with us with no evidence of remarkable genetic change, although this may become more evident if they were to face total or near eradication through vaccination programs. The folly of flu virulence remains our chagrin, because the threat always looms over us that this family of viruses, endemic in birds, again may generate human-lethal gene reassortments.


My deepest anxieties pertain to the smoldering technology and arms race that
attends the power struggles in the Middle East and the economic instabilities of the
former Soviet Union.

Although the 1975 Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) has demilitarized the main drivers of bioweaponry technical advance, in the U.S. and in the overt activities of other formidable powers, the BWC has not been enforced successfully against Iraq and is more or less openly flouted in a handful of other countries. The United Nations (UN) Security Council is too splintered on other issues to take a firm stand on the defiance by Iraq of the UN-mandated inspections. It would not be child's play for defiant small countries to adopt advanced biotechnology into their weapons programs. But we have seen that the climactic high-science successes in one decade become fodder for high-school projects in the next. Influenza is an unlikely candidate for rational weapons development, because new strains promptly embrace the world. But that logic is insufficient reason to neglect the contingency. More likely similar principles would be applied to more governable bioagents, but any bioagents in warfare are an affront and a threat to the entire human species.

Informed professionals throughout the world should be leading campaigns to insist on universal compliance with the BWC as a major bulwark of human health and associating that with the most positive measures to apply advanced biotechnology in a constructive way for dealing with nature's continued scourges.


April 9 2021

Today on TRUNEWS, the team looks at the connection of Dr. Fauci to the Chinese Communist Party through the shady dealings of the EcoHealth Alliance.

We also show how the mainstream media is thoroughly filled with self-confessed paid agents of China, promoting the COVID party line.

Edward Szall, Rick Wiles, Doc Burkhart. Airdate (04/09/21)

Watch part 1 of the Godcast: Covid Crazy: One-Third Coronavirus Victims Developed Neurological-Psychiatric Illnesses


Today on TRUNEWS, host Edward Szall and the team share information that nearly a third of those that receive the COVID vaccine experience some form of mental illness.

Also, we examine how YouTube has shuttered the Florida governor from questioning masks for kids, while a New Hampshire track coach stands defiant against mandates.

Edward Szall, Rick Wiles, Doc Burkhart. Airdate (04/09/21)



A Christian Science perspective on vaccination and public health

    Press room A Christian Science perspective on vaccination and public health

Concern for public health and safety is something that all responsible people share—including Christian Scientists. Grateful as we are to live in communities where honest differences can be respected, Christian Scientists are also mindful of the obligations all citizens have to respect the rights of others in their communities.

For more than a century, our denomination has counseled respect for public health authorities and conscientious obedience to the laws of the land, including those requiring vaccination. Christian Scientists report suspected communicable disease, obey quarantines, and strive to cooperate with measures considered necessary by public health officials. We see this as a matter of basic Golden Rule ethics and New Testament love.

As for the issue of exemptions for vaccination in the law, Christian Scientists' perspective on this issue may be unique. In the past, many public officials have been broadly supportive of exemptions when these have not been considered a danger to the wider community. In more recent years, public health concerns relating to vaccinations have risen as exemptions from them have been claimed by larger numbers. Christian Scientists recognize the seriousness of these concerns.

Most of our church members normally rely on prayer for healing. It's a deeply considered spiritual practice and way of life that has meant a lot to us over the years. So we've appreciated vaccination exemptions and sought to use them conscientiously and responsibly, when they have been granted.

On the other hand, our practice isn't a dogmatic thing. Church members are free to make their own choices on all life-decisions, in obedience to the law, including whether or not to vaccinate their children. These aren't decisions imposed by their church.

The public controversy over vaccination has produced strong opinions—and strong divisions—on the competing concerns of public health and toleration of diversity. Whatever the right answer may be for any community, Christian Scientists hope that their long experience as a religious minority working in cooperation with society's majority might point to the possibility of resolutions based on mutual respect and understanding in the best interest of all.

And most of all, we hope that our collective care and effort can promote public health and healing to all affected by disease and contagion around the world.

| - - - -

Bioethicists warn against potential COVID-19 vaccines using cells from aborted babies
By Brandon Showalter, Christian Post Reporte

Christian bioethicists in the United Kingdom and the United States are warning against a potential coronavirus vaccine in which British scientists are using fetal cells from aborted babies.

According to CruxNow Tuesday, some ethicists are concerned the vaccine being developed at Oxford University is using cell lines that were obtained from an aborted child in the early 1970s.

Both the HEK 293 used at Oxford and the PER C6 cell line from the 1980s trace their origin from tissue from an aborted child, the outlet reported.

"Such concerns should be viewed with particular sympathy in the area of abortion, bearing in mind that even those who do not object to all abortions may well object to the particular abortion from which a fetal cell line was derived."

In the United States, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra led a coalition of states in late March, urging President Trump to end his ban, which was enacted in June, on federally-funded research on fetal tissue that was procured from abortions in order to help scientists find a vaccine. Becerra argued that scientists at the National Institutes of Health had been hampered by the restriction and the attorneys general in his coalition said that fetal tissue research led to the development of vaccines for other diseases such as polio, rubella and measles.

Religious leaders and bioethicists in the U.S. are also denouncing the prospect of a COVID-19 vaccine developed with cell lines from aborted fetuses.

Dr. Naomi Hunter


18 Reasons I Won't Be Getting a Covid Vaccine

Updated: 2 hours ago

A few friends have asked my thoughts on the covid jab(s) so I thought it was time to write an article on the topic.

All my friends had not heard most of the details I shared, so I figured you might appreciate hearing some of what I told them.

Knowing how contentious this issue is, part of me would rather just write about something else, but I feel like the discussion/news is so one-sided that I should speak up.

As I always strive to do, I promise to do my best to be level-headed and non-hysterical.

I'm not here to pick a fight with anyone, just to walk you through some of what I've read, my lingering questions, and explain why I can't make sense of these covid vaccines.


If you care to engage on this topic with me, excellent.

Here are the rules...

I am more than happy to correspond with you if...

    You are respectful and treat me the way you would want to be treated.

    You ask genuinely thoughtful questions about what makes sense to you.

    You make your points using sound logic and don't hide behind links or the word "science." In other words, make a kind, level-headed argument (links welcome), but don't just post a link and say "read the science." That's intellectually lazy.

If you do respond, and you break any of those rules, your comments will be ignored/deleted.

With that out of the way, let me say this...

I don't know everything, but so far no one has been able to answer the objections below.

So here are the reasons I'm opting out of the covid vaccine.


The only industry in the world that bears no liability for injuries or deaths resulting from their products, are vaccine makers.

First established in 1986 with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, and reinforced by the PREP Act, vaccine makers cannot be sued, even if they are shown to be negligent.

The covid-vaccine makers are allowed to create a one-size-fits-all product, with no testing on sub-populations (i.e. people with specific health conditions), and yet they are unwilling to accept any responsibility for any adverse events or deaths their products cause.

If a company is not willing to stand behind their product as safe, especially one they rushed to market and skipped animal trials on, I am not willing to take a chance on their product.

No liability. No trust.

Here's why...


The four major companies who are making these covid vaccines are/have either:

    Never brought a vaccine to market before covid (Moderna and Johnson & Johnson).

    Are serial felons (Pfizer, and Astra Zeneca).

    Are both (Johnson & Johnson).

Moderna had been trying to "Modernize our RNA" (thus the company name)--for years, but had never successfully brought ANY product to market--how nice for them to get a major cash infusion from the government to keep trying.

In fact, all major vaccine makers (save Moderna) have paid out tens of billions of dollars in damages for other products they brought to market when they knew those products would cause injuries and death--see Vioxx, Bextra, Celebrex, Thalidomide, and Opioids as a few examples.

    If drug companies willfully choose to put harmful products in the market, when they can be sued, why would we trust any product where they have NO liability?

In case it hasn't sunk in, let me reiterate...3 of the 4 covid vaccine makers have been sued for products they brought to market even though they knew injuries and deaths would result.

    Johnson & Johnson has lost major lawsuits in 1995, 1996, 2001, 2010, 2011, 2016, 2019  (For what it's worth, J&J's vaccine also contains tissues from aborted fetal cells, perhaps a topic for another discussion)

    Pfizer has the distinction of the biggest criminal payout in history. They have lost so many lawsuits it's hard to count. You can check out their rap sheet here. Maybe that's why they are demanding that countries where they don't have liability protection put up collateral to cover vaccine-injury lawsuits.

    Astra Zeneca has similarly lost so many lawsuits it's hard to count. Here's one. Here's another...you get the point. And in case you missed it, the company had their covid vaccine suspended in at least 18 countries over concerns of blood clots, and they completely botched their meeting with the FDA with numbers from their study that didn't match.

    Oh, and apparently J&J (whose vaccine is approved for "Emergency Use" in the US) and Astrazenca (whose vaccine is not approved for "Emergency Use" in the US), had a little mix up in their ingredients...in 15 million doses. Oops.

Let me reiterate this point:

    Given the free pass from liability, and the checkered past of these companies, why would we assume that all their vaccines are safe and made completely above board?

Where else in life would we trust someone with that kind of reputation?

To me that makes as much sense as expecting a remorseless, abusive, unfaithful lover to become a different person because a judge said deep down they are a good person.

No. I don't trust them.

No liability. No trust.

Here's another reason why I don't trust them.


There have been many attempts to make viral vaccines in the past that ended in utter failure, which is why we did not have a coronavirus vaccine in 2020. 

In the 1960's, scientists attempted to make an RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) vaccine for infants.

In that study, they skipped animal trials because they weren't necessary back then. 

In the end, the vaccinated infants got much sicker than the unvaccinated infants when exposed to the virus in nature, with 80% of the vaccinated infants requiring hospitalization, and two of them died. 

After 2000, scientists made many attempts to create coronavirus vaccines.

For the past 20 years, all ended in failure because the animals in the clinical trials got very sick and many died, just like the children in the 1960's.

You can read a summary of this history/science here.

Or if you want to read the individual studies you can check out these links:

    In 2004 attempted vaccine produced hepatitis in ferrets

    In 2005 mice and civets became sick and more susceptible to coronaviruses after being vaccinated

    In 2012 the ferrets became sick and died. And in this study mice and ferrets developed lung disease.

    In 2016 this study also produce lung disease in mice.

The typical pattern in the studies mentioned above is that the children and the animals produced beautiful antibody responses after being vaccinated.

The manufacturers thought they hit the jackpot.

The problem came when the children and animals were exposed to the wild version of the virus.

When that happened, an unexplained phenomenon called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) also known as Vaccine Enhanced Disease (VED) occurred where the immune system produced a "cytokine storm" (i.e. overwhelmingly attacked the body), and the children/animals died.

Here's the lingering issue...

    The vaccine makers have no data to suggest their rushed vaccines have overcome that problem.

In other words, never before has any attempt to make a coronavirus vaccine been successful, nor has the gene-therapy technology that is mRNA "vaccines" been safely brought to market, but hey, since they had billions of dollars in government funding, I'm sure they figured that out.

Except they don't know if they have...


When vaccine makers submitted their papers to the FDA for the Emergency Use Authorization (Note: An EUA is not the same as a full FDA approval), among the many "Data Gaps" they reported was that they have nothing in their trials to suggest they overcame that pesky problem of Vaccine Enhanced Disease.

They simply don't know--i.e. they have no idea if the vaccines they've made will also produce the same cytokine storm (and deaths) as previous attempts at such products.

As Joseph Mercola points out...

"Previous attempts to develop an mRNA-based drug using lipid nanoparticles failed and had to be abandoned because when the dose was too low, the drug had no effect, and when dosed too high, the drug became too toxic. An obvious question is: What has changed that now makes this technology safe enough for mass use?"

If that's not alarming enough, here are other gaps in the data--i.e. there is no data to suggest safety or efficacy regarding:

    Anyone younger than age 18 or older than age 55

    Pregnant or lactating mothers

    Auto-immune conditions

    Immunocompromised individuals 

    No data on transmission of covid

    No data on preventing mortality from covid

    No data on duration of protection from covid

Hard to believe right?

In case you think I'm making this up, or want to see the actual documents sent to the FDA by Pfizer and Moderna for their Emergency Use Authorization, you can check out this, or this respectively. The data gaps can be found starting with page 46 and 48 respectively.

For now let's turn our eyes to the raw data the vaccine makers used to submit for emergency use authorization.


Would you like to see the raw data that produced the "90% and 95% effective" claims touted in the news?

Me too...

But they won't let us see that data.

As pointed out in the BMJ, something about the Pfizer and Moderna efficacy claims smells really funny.

    There were "3,410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1,594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1,816 in the placebo group."


Did they fail to do science in their scientific study by not verifying a major variable?

Could they not test those "suspected but unconfirmed" cases to find out if they had covid?

Apparently not.

Why not test all 3,410 participants for the sake of accuracy?

Can we only guess they didn't test because it would mess up their "90-95% effective" claims?

Where's the FDA?

Would it not be prudent for the FDA, to expect (demand) that the vaccine makers test people who have "covid-like symptoms," and release their raw data so outside, third-parties could examine how the manufacturers justified the numbers? 

I mean it's only every citizen of the world we're trying to get to take these experimental products...

Why did the FDA not require that? Isn't that the entire purpose of the FDA anyway?

Good question.

Foxes guarding the hen house?

Seems like it.

No liability. No trust.


Obviously, with products that have only been on the market a few months, we have no long-term safety data.

In other words, we have no idea what this product will do in the body months or years from now--for ANY population.

Given all the risks above (risks that ALL pharmaceutical products have), would it not be prudent to wait to see if the worst-case scenarios have indeed been avoided?

Would it not make sense to want to fill those pesky "data gaps" before we try to give this to every man, woman, and child on the planet?

Well...that would make sense, but to have that data, they need to test it on people, which leads me to my next point...


What most who are taking the vaccine don't know is that because these products are still in clinical trials, anyone who gets the shot is now part of the clinical trial.

They are part of the experiment.

Those (like me) who do not take it, are part of the control group.

Time will tell how this experiment works out.

But, you may be asking, if the vaccines are causing harm, wouldn't we be seeing that all over the news?

Surely the FDA would step in and pause the distribution?

Well, if the adverse events reporting system was working, maybe things would be different.


According to a study done by Harvard (at the commission of our own government), less than 1% of all adverse reactions to vaccines are actually submitted to the National Vaccine Adverse Events Reports System (VAERS) - read page 6 at the link above.

While the problems with VAERS have not been fixed (as you can read about in this letter to the CDC), at the time of this writing VAERS reports over 2,200 deaths from the current covid vaccines, as well as close to 60,000 adverse reactions. 

    "VAERS data released today showed 50,861 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines, including 2,249 deaths and 7,726 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and March 26, 2021."

And those numbers don't include (what is currently) 578 cases of Bell's Palsy.

If those numbers are still only 1% of the total adverse reactions (or .8 to 2% of what this study published recently in the JAMA found), you can do the math, but that equates to somewhere around 110,000 to 220,000 deaths from the vaccines to date, and a ridiculous number of adverse reactions.

Bet you didn't see that on the news.

That death number would currently still be lower than the 424,000 deaths from medical errors that happen every year (which you probably also don't hear about), but we are not even six months into the rollout of these vaccines yet.

If you want a deeper dive into the problems with the VAERS reporting system, you can check this out, or check this out.

But then there's my next point, which could be argued makes these covid vaccines seem pointless...


Wait, what?

Aren't these vaccines supposed to be what we've been waiting for to "go back to normal"?


Why do you think we're getting all these conflicting messages about needing to practice social distancing and wear masks AFTER we get a vaccine?

    The reason is because these vaccines were never designed to stop transmission OR infection.

If you don't believe me, I refer you again to the papers submitted to the FDA I linked to above.

The primary endpoint (what the vaccines are meant to accomplish) is to lower your symptoms.

Sounds like just about every other drug on the market right?

That's it...lowering your symptoms is the big payoff we've been waiting for.

Does that seem completely pointless to anyone but me?

    It can't stop us from spreading the virus.

    It can't stop the virus from infecting us once we have it.

    To get the vaccine is to accept all the risk of these experimental products and the best it might do is lower symptoms?

Heck, there are plenty of other things I can do to lower my symptoms that don't involve taking what appears to be a really risky product.

Now for the next logical question:

    If we're worried about asymptomatic spreaders, would the vaccine not make it more likely that we are creating asymptomatic spread?

If it indeed reduces symptoms, anyone who gets it might not even know they are sick and thus they are more likely to spread the virus, right?

For what it's worth, I've heard many people say the side effects of the vaccine (especially the second dose) are worse than catching covid.

I can't make sense of that either.

Take the risk.

Get no protection.

Suffer through the vaccine side-effects.

Keep wearing your mask and social distancing...

And continue to be able to spread the virus.


It gets worse.


Talk about a bummer.

You get vaccinated and you still catch covid.

    It's happening in Washington State

    It's happening in New York

    It's happening in Michigan

    It's happening in Hawaii

    It's happening in several other states too.

    It happened to 80% of 35 nuns who got the vaccine in Kentucky. Two of them died by the way.

In reality, this phenomenon is probably happening everywhere, but those are the ones making the news now.

Given the reasons above (and what's below), maybe this doesn't surprise you, but bummer if you thought the vaccine was a shield to keep you safe.

It's not.

That was never the point.

If 66% of healthcare workers in L.A. are going to delay or skip the vaccine...maybe they aren't wowed by the rushed science either.

Maybe they are watching the shady way deaths and cases are being reported...


According to the CDC's own numbers, covid has a 99.74% survival rate.

Why would I take a risk on a product, that doesn't stop infection or transmission, to help me overcome a cold that has a .26% chance of killing me--actually in my age range is has about a .1% chance of killing me (and .01% chance of killing my kids), but let's not split hairs here.

With a bar (death rate) that low, we will be in lockdown every year...i.e. forever.

But wait, what about the 500,000 plus deaths, that's alarming right?

I'm glad you asked.


Something smells really funny about this one.

Never before in the history of death certificates has our own government changed how deaths are reported.

Why now, are we reporting everyone who dies with covid in their body, as having died of covid, rather than the co-morbidities that actually took their life?

Until covid, all coronaviruses (common colds) were never listed as the primary cause of death when someone died of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, auto-immune conditions, or any other major co-morbidity.

The disease was listed as the cause of death, and a confounding factor like flu or pneumonia was listed on a separate line.

To bloat the number even more, both the W.H.O. and the C.D.C. changed their guidelines such that those who are suspected or probable (but were never confirmed) of having died of covid, are also included in the death numbers.


If we are going to do that then should we not go back and change the numbers of all past cold and flu seasons so we can compare apples to apples when it comes to death rates?

According to the CDCs own numbers, (scroll down to the section "Comorbidities and other conditions") only 6% of the deaths being attributed to covid are instances where covid seems to be the only issue at hand.

In other words, reduce the death numbers you see on the news by 94% and you have what is likely the real numbers of deaths from just covid.

Even if the former CDC director is correct and covid-19 was a lab-enhanced virus (see Reason #14 below), a .26% death rate is still in line with the viral death rate that circles the planet ever year.

Then there's this Fauci guy.

I'd really love to trust him, but besides the fact that he hasn't treated one covid patient...you should probably know...


Thanks to the Bayh-Dole Act, government workers are allowed to file patents on any research they do using tax payer funding.

Tony Fauci owns over 1,000 patents (see this video for more details), including patents being used on the Moderna vaccine...which he approved government funding for.

In fact, the NIH (which NIAID is part of) claims joint ownership of Moderna's vaccine.

Does anyone else see this as a MAJOR conflict of interest, or criminal even?

I say criminal because there's also this pesky problem that makes me even more distrustful of Fauci, NIAD, and the NIH in general.


What is "Gain-of-Function" research?

It's where scientists attempt to make viruses gain functions--i.e. make them more transmissible and deadlier.

Sounds at least a touch unethical, right?

How could that possibly be helpful?

Our government agreed, and banned the practice.

So what did the Fauci-led NIAID do?

They pivoted and outsourced the gain-of-function research (in coronaviruses no less) to China--to the tune of a $600K grant.

You can see more details, including the important timeline of these events in this fantastically well-researched documentary.

Mr. Fauci, you have some explaining to do...and I hope the cameras are recording when you have to defend your actions.

For now, let's turn our attention back to the virus...


Not only does the virus (like all viruses) continue to mutate, but according to world-renowned vaccine developer Geert Vanden Bossche (who you'll meet below if you don't know him) it's mutating about every 10 hours.

How in the world are we going to keep creating vaccines to keep up with that level of mutation?

We're not.

Might that also explain why fully vaccinated people are continuing to catch covid?

Why, given that natural immunity has never ultimately failed humanity, do we suddenly not trust it?

Why, if I ask questions like the above, or post links like what you find above, will my thoughts be deleted from all major social media platforms?

That brings me to the next troubling problem I have with these vaccines.


I can't help but get snarky here, so humor me.

How did you enjoy all those nationally and globally-televised, robust debates put on by public health officials, and broadcast simultaneously on every major news station?

Wasn't it great hearing from the best minds in medicine, virology, epidemiology, economics, and vaccinology from all over the world as they vigorously and respectfully debated things like:


    Mask wearing


    Vaccine efficacy and safety trials

    How to screen for susceptibility to vaccine injury

    Therapeutics, (i.e. non-vaccine treatment options)

Wasn't it great seeing public health officials (who never treated anyone with covid) have their "science" questioned?

Wasn't it great seeing the FDA panel publicly grill the vaccine makers in prime time as they stood in the hot-seat of tough questions about products of which they have no liability?

Oh, wait...you didn't see those debates?

No, you didn't...because they never happened.

What happened instead was heavy-handed censorship of all but one narrative.

Ironically, Mark Zuckerberg can question vaccine safety, but I can't?


When did the first amendment become a suggestion?

It's the FIRST amendment Mark--the one our founders thought was most important.

With so much at stake, why are we fed only one narrative...shouldn't many perspectives be heard and professionally debated?


What has happened to the scientific method of always challenging our assumptions?

What happened to lively debate in this country, or at least in Western society?

Why did anyone who disagrees with the WHO, or the CDC get censored so heavily?

Is the science of public health a religion now, or is science supposed to be about debate?

If someone says "the science is settled" that's how I know I'm dealing with someone who is closed minded.

By definition science (especially biological science) is never settled.

If it was, it would be dogma, not science.

OK, before I get too worked up, let me say this...


I really do.

If lockdowns work, I want to do my part and stay home.

If masks work, I want to wear them.

If social distancing is effective, I want to comply.

But, if there is evidence they don't (masks for example), I want to hear that evidence too.

If highly-credentialed scientists have different opinions, I want to know what they think.

I want a chance to hear their arguments and make up my own mind.

I don't think I'm the smartest person in the world, but I think I can think.

Maybe I'm weird, but if someone is censored, then I REALLY want to hear what they think.

Don't you?

To all my friends who don't have a problem with censorship, will you have the same opinion when what you think is censored?

Is censorship not the technique of dictators, tyrants, and greedy, power-hungry people?

Is it not a sign that those who are doing the censoring know it's the only way they can win?

    What if a man who spent his entire life developing vaccines was willing to put his entire reputation on the line and call on all global leaders to immediately stop the covid vaccines because of problems with the science?

What if he pleaded for an open-scientific debate on a global stage?

Would you want to hear what he has to say?

Would you want to see the debate he's asking for?


Here is what may be the biggest reason this covid vaccine doesn't make sense to me.

When someone who is very pro-vaccine, who has spent his entire professional career overseeing the development of vaccines, is shouting from the mountaintops that we have a major problem, I think the man should be heard.

In case you missed it, and in case you care to watch it, here is Geert Vanden Bossche, explaining:

    Why the covid vaccine may be putting so much pressure on the virus that we are accelerating it's ability to mutate and become more deadly.

    Why the covid vaccines may be creating vaccine-resistant viruses (similar to anti-biotic resistant bacteria).

    Why, because of previous problems with Antibody Dependent Enhancement, we may be looking at a mass casualty event in the next few months/years.

If you want to see/read about a second, and longer, interview with Vanden Bossche, where he was asked some tough questions, you can check this out.

If half of what he says comes true, these vaccines could be the worst invention of all time.

If you don't like his science, take it up with him.

I'm just the messenger.

But I can also speak to covid personally.


I didn't enjoy it.

It was a nasty cold for two days:

    Unrelenting butt/low-back aches

    Very low energy.

    Low-grade fever.

It was weird not being able to smell anything for a couple days.

A week later, coffee still tasted a little "off."

But I survived.

Now it appears (as it always has) that I have beautiful, natural, life-long immunity...

...not something likely to wear off in a few months if I get the vaccine.

In my body, and my household, covid is over.

In fact, now that I've had it, there is evidence the covid vaccine might actually be more dangerous for me.

That is not a risk I'm willing to take.


The above are just my reasons for not wanting the vaccine.

Maybe my reasons make sense to you, maybe they don't.

Whatever does makes sense to you, hopefully we can still be friends.

I for one think there's a lot more that we have in common than what separates us.

    We all want to live in a world of freedom.

    We all want to do our part to help others and to live well.

    We all want the right to express our opinions without fearing we'll be censored or viciously attacked.

    We all deserve to have the access to the facts so we can make informed decisions.

Agree or disagree with me; I'll treat you no differently.

You're a human just as worthy of love and respect as anyone else.

For that I salute you, and I truly wish you all the best.

I hope you found this helpful.

If so, feel free to share.

If not, feel free to (kindly) let me know what didn't make sense to you and I'd be happy to hear your thoughts too.

Stay curious and stay humble.

Until next time,


PS. If you think I studied this topic well, think about how much thought I would put into helping you with your health. Helping people with their health is what I do all day, every day.

PPS. Health can't be injected, but it can be earned. 

Dr. Naomi Hunter


Dr. Naomi Hunter

QuoteSo not only do these Q-anon nut jobs  at Health Canada claim that these masks contain Graphene, an asbestos like substance, but now

anti-semites Qanon nut jobs are coming out with ridiculous theories that the masks contain synthetic worms that can only be activated with the heat from human breath.