BREAKING NEWS: COVID-19 Vaccine Clinics across Canada have been ordered to destroy all vials of Pfizer & Moderna COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines!
— William Makis MD (@MakisMD) September 6, 2024
My urgent message to all who have access:
DO NOT RETURN OR DESTROY any Vaccine vials, they are priceless! Hide them@ABDanielleSmith#ableg pic.twitter.com/WQVt0AaAby
Fist tap Dale.
judiciary.house.gov | Today, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administrative
State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust, led by Chairman Thomas Massie
(R-KY), released an interim staff report titled, "Politics, Private Interests, and the Biden Administration's Deviation from Agency Regulations in the COVID-19 Pandemic" The
report details how the Biden Administration pressured the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) to go beyond its regulatory authority to change
its procedures, cut corners, and lower agency standards to approve the
Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine and authorize boosters. This approval enabled
the Biden Administration to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine, despite
concerns that the same vaccine was causing injury among
otherwise healthy young Americans.
"In August 2021, when the Pfizer shots received FDA licensure, and just
before the booster received EUA, the top two FDA vaccine reviewers with
decades of experience announced they were leaving the agency," said Chairman Thomas Massie (R-KY).
"During the pandemic, politics overruled science at the government
institutions entrusted with protecting public health. The FDA abandoned
its congressional directive to protect citizens from false claims and
undisclosed side effects, and instead ignored its own rules to pursue a
policy of promoting the vaccine while downplaying potential harms.
Exposing and acknowledging mistakes that were made is a necessary step
toward restoring integrity and trust in our regulatory agencies."
The
Subcommittee's investigation also revealed that the administrative
state mishandled reports of vaccine injury, despite requirements to
actively obtain, synthesize, and report feedback on the safety and
efficacy of the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) vaccine. Two former
FDA scientists, Dr. Marion Gruber and Dr. Philip Krause, testified to
the Subcommittee that they felt pressure to cut corners on the vaccine
review, which was due to outside pressure to provide immediate approval
so that the government could mandate vaccines. Despite evidence of harms
from the EUA vaccine, the Biden Administration sought to fully approve
the Pfizer vaccine through the Biologics Licensing Application (BLA)
process.
Under the leadership of then-Acting FDA Commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock,
a long-time FDA staffer who the Biden Administration promoted to Acting
Commissioner, and Dr. Peter Marks, head of the FDA's Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the agency cut corners in its
usually rigorous BLA process to brand the Pfizer EUA vaccine as the only
fully licensed "safe and effective" COVID-19 vaccine on the market at
the time. Today, former Acting FDA Commissioner Woodcock says that, as
it relates to vaccine-related injury, she is "disappointed in
[her]self" and that the FDA did not do enough to address
vaccine-related injury.
The FDA succumbed to the Biden Administration's pressure to act beyond
its authority, which may have long-term impacts on the agency's ability
to confidently serve the American public. This poor policy by the Biden
Administration reveals many significant problems related to
accountability and good decision making in the administrative state that
warrant legislative reform.
Read the full interim staff report and appendix here.
amidwesterndoctor | One of the things I have come to appreciate as the years have gone by is how much of what people say are not their own thoughts. The current structure of our educational system (discussed here) is largely about replacing critical thinking with the illusion of intelligence, where you are seen as smart if you copy what the most authoritative sources or voices say instead of formulating your own opinion.
Because of this, whenever I hear someone proudly share an argument or train of logic I have already seen numerous times, one of the most common replies I give is “are you sure those ideas are your own?”
If you look at this article within the context of
Oster’s previous plea and its response (both of these articles are
essentially trying to do the same thing), I believe a strong case can be
made that these were tests to see what narrative needs to be pivoted
to. Likewise, Germany’s minister of health (and a well-credentialed
scientist) finally made a limited apology
for the disastrous policies he pushed on the German people without
acknowledging the worst mistakes while simultaneously shifting the blame
for his decisions to unnamed scientists who gave him bad advice.
Similarly, let’s consider Malcom Kendrick’s recent commentary on another leading advocate of this insanity:
With the resignation of Jacinda Ardern [two weeks ago], my thoughts were dragged back to Covid once more. Jacinda, as Prime Minster of New Zealand was the ultimate lockdown enforcer. She was feted round the world for her iron will, but I was not a fan, to put it mildly. Whenever I heard her speak, it brought to mind one of my most favourite quotes:
‘Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.’ C.S. Lewis
At one point she actually said the following:
“We will continue to be your single source of truth” “Unless you hear it from us, it is not the truth.’
Yet, there are still many who believe her to have been a great and caring leader. She certainly hugged a lot of people with that well rehearsed pained/caring expression on her face.
In many ways it’s remarkable that we have been able to move the dialogue this far in just a few months, and to be honest, I would have given almost anything for a compromise like what this article presented to have been made any time in 2020 or early in 2021. However, any time a negotiation occurs, you must keep in mind that whatever is initially offered is much less than the party is willing to agree to, and the fact that something like this is being openly offered means we are in a very strong bargaining position.
Any type of promise or apology (especially
disingenuous ones) will not prevent what we saw happen over the last few
years from happening again. Laws, and ideally constitutional amendments
(initially at the state level and ideally at the national level) can
prevent such tragedies, and many people I have spoken to feel we have a
once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to correct many of the systemic issues
within medicine that have poisoned our culture.
In
my own opinion, if these people are actually sorry for what they did to
us, they would be willing to relinquish some of their power so it could
not happen again and I believe moving forward it is critical for us to
hold them to that. Anything less should not be considered acceptable
for them to be granted amnesty.
igorchudov | Both Dr. Fauci and Joe Biden are elderly men who are in good physical shape, with Anthony Fauci, in addition, being in good mental shape. They both had four COVID vaccine shots.
What made them have Paxlovid rebounds? How do Paxlovid rebounds work? Why did Dr. Fauci’s COVID bout last 26 days instead of 5-6 days, as was the usual case prior to vaccines? The answer can be seen after examining what repeated “COVID vaccinations” do to immune systems, and understanding Paxlovid’s role better.
Paxlovid is not a magic STOP button that kills all active virions of Sars-Cov-2 and ends the illness. It is a protease inhibitor that puts puts on hold a key stage of viral replication called “cleaving”. It can be best described as a SNOOZE button, that pauses viral replication for 5 days, just as the SNOOZE button would pause your alarm clock for 5 minutes. The 5-day treatment ends, and a few days after that the replication process, paused by Paxlovid, is able to restart.
In early trials, Paxlovid was helpful to unvaccinated patients, whose undamaged immune systems were able to mount an adequate response and suppress any new virions that emerged from infected cells, where replication was paused by Paxlovid. So, Paxlovid appeared to work in unvaccinated people by stopping replication for 5 days, as 5 days was enough to develop a robust response.
However, science has established that boosted people, whose immune systems are damaged by repeat transfections of spike-protein-generating mRNA nanoparticles, have problems with viral clearance and need much more time to clear live, replicating virions.
So, since boosted people are slow to mount an effective immune response, and have no defenses developed by Day 5 of Paxlovid treatment, their infection essentially restarts again after a five-day pause.
Why the slow immune response? Because of immune tolerance arising from repeated spike protein antigen shots, as seen with allergy shots, where tolerance is the intended effect.
Fauci and Biden received four antigen shots of mRNA, making “Covid spike protein”. If you heard of such repeat antigen shots before the pandemic, it is possibly because you or your loved ones received “allergy shots”. The purpose of allergy shots is very noble: give people repeated shots of allergens like pollen, have people develop “tolerance” to the antigen, and stop allergies from reducing our quality of life. I received allergy shots myself. It helped somewhat.
However, Sars-Cov-2 is NOT pollen! Unlike pollen, which should not cause immune overreaction, a dangerous virus is supposed to cause a robust immune response, high fever, muscle pains, and other symptoms of the immune system giving a strong reaction that ends viral infections quickly.
amidwesterndoctor | This is a supplemental addition to my previous piece. I would strongly encourage you to read that article before reading this one as this one goes into more tangential and complex points that supplement the original, but many of you may find very insightful. Many of the concepts here also appear to apply to the COVID immunizations, however for length considerations, I will omit most of those connections and leave you to draw your own conclusions. All of the books I cited here can be easily found on Amazon and often as PDFs, but I avoided linking to them here and supporting Amazon. Lastly, as I did not want to further delay publication, a significant number of minor edits will occur in the next few days.
I did not expect to attract the viewership the original article received, or the follow-up by larger media outlets (Steve Kirsch’s newsletter, the Kate Daley show and mercola.com)
and am sincerely grateful for your support, and those parties in
particular in spreading this message. As I now have many readers, I
will try to produce quality content as my time permits (with work and
all), as I want it to be worth your time to read what I produce. For
the time being I will focus on interesting bits of medical history (the
next piece will be interesting lessons from the 1918 influenza I applied
to my treatment of COVID).
Additionally, since my last publication a reader notified me of a short book written in 1889 and viewable online which concisely provides evidence for many of the points covered in Dissolving Illusions,
such as the lack of efficacy from the vaccination, the diseases
associated with its administration, the distortion of data used by
government officials to claim benefit rather than harm, and false claim
it reduced death in hospitals.
To be complete and illustrate the observed effects of the smallpox vaccines, this article is a bit longer than the previous. I could have cited significantly more resources, but I aimed to cover one text that was representative from each major school of thought at the time. Its sections are as follows:
-Introduction
-General Smallpox Observations
-Allopathy
-Naturopathy
-Homeopathy
-Osteopathy
-Traditional Chinese Medicine
-Modern Research
igorchudov | Now, for June-July, we see that more boosters mean MORE deaths and that the association between booster rates and Covid deaths is highly statistically significant!
This is the Best “Apples-to-Apples” Comparison
Let’s summarize. We looked at the same set of countries in Europe during three different periods of time. During the first period, booster rates were associated with statistically significant reductions in Covid deaths. During the second period, booster rates had no effect on Covid death rates. And during the last, third period, booster rates CONTRIBUTED to greater deaths!
The fact that all three periods involved the same countries (except a couple who did not report booster rates during the first period), means that this outcome is NOT due to population-wide age or other demographic differences. The difference between outcomes in these periods is due to the passage of time, and changes in the interaction of boosted immune systems with the evolving virus.
Note that my data shows something much worse than “boosters stopping to work”. Instead of merely becoming useless, like in the second period, boosters became harmful and promoted deaths in the third period.
Immune Tolerance due to Boosters
Why is this happening? Boosters and vaccines worsening Covid outcomes is really a topic for another article to explore possible answers.
There are certainly MANY REASONS why boosters do not work anymore. Let me touch upon just one such reason. Remember that other reasons are also important!
Jan Ashton describes the “immune phenomenon known as tolerance”. What “tolerance” means is that repeated antigen injections end up working like allergy shots, increasing tolerance to the antigen, which is in this case spike protein.
Tolerance towards allergens, like tree pollen, is a good thing. (I had allergy shots myself). However, tolerance toward a replicating virus that damages our cardiovascular system and immune system, is a bad thing! Tolerance also turns affected people into walking Covid superspreaders.
Instead of seeing the viral antigen as a sign to start a battle against the virus, the immune system says “oh well, another spike protein injection” and ignores it. That allows the virus to multiply unchecked and cause immense damage by killing various cells and hurting our cardiovascular systems and more. The infected person feels less fever and less disturbance than they would feel from a robust immune reaction, so the illness feels “milder”, but this is actually a bad thing because the virus multiplies unopposed.
As long as the virus doesn’t mutate into something really nasty, and as
long as it doesn’t inconvenience too many people that matter,
everything will be just fine....,
expose | UK Government confirms the Triple / Quadruple Vaccinated account for 91% of all COVID Deaths since the beginning of 2022
In January, the vaccinated accounted for 85% of Covid-19 deaths, whilst the unvaccinated accounted for 15%. By March, the vaccinated accounted for 93% of Covid-19 deaths, whilst the vaccinated accounted for just 7%. And by May, the vaccinated accounted for 94% of Covid-19 deaths, whilst the vaccinated accounted for just 6%.
Many people may believe that this is simply because, according to data published by the UK Health Security Agency, 50% of the population of England refused the third jab, and those vaccinated deaths are among the double vaccinated and partly vaccinated. But unfortunately, those people are wrong.
Overall, there were 15,113 Covid-19 deaths by 31st May 2022, and a shocking 13,666 of those deaths were among the vaccinated population. But what’s even more shocking than this is that 12,442 of those deaths were among the triple/quadruple vaccinated population.
This means the triple/quadruple vaccinated population have accounted for a frightening 91% of all Covid-19 deaths among the vaccinated since the beginning of 2022.
NEJM | Social media and other digital platforms provide the opportunity to collect data on vaccine hesitancy in nearly real time70,71; they also allow new methods of analysis72 and the opportunity to investigate the effect of vaccine sentiment on actual vaccine uptake and vaccine-preventable diseases. Facebook collaborated with Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Maryland to collect survey data on a wide variety of behaviors related to the Covid-19 pandemic.73 Starting in January 2021, Facebook users who agreed to participate in the survey were asked about their attitudes toward Covid-19 vaccines and reasons underlying vaccine hesitancy.
Although data collected on social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, may not be representative, since the users of the platform are not a random sample of the population, the data have aligned well with other, less frequently compiled survey data that are available for select topics and populations. In addition, sometimes data collected through online platforms are the only available information about vaccine hesitancy (e.g., when large-scale surveys have not been conducted). Furthermore, the large samples and the speed with which data are collected and made available make real-time analysis possible for what has become a volatile topic. As data collected through social media platforms become more widely used, we anticipate that validation studies will be conducted, with improvements made in the sampling, weighting, and interpretation of the data.
The large volume of timely data on vaccine hesitancy has provided an opportunity to develop spatially detailed estimates of vaccine hesitancy (i.e., mapping by location). For the United States, surveys administered through Facebook have been used to estimate vaccine hesitancy according to week and ZIP code. These spatial analyses show that vaccine hesitancy varies substantially within a county. For example, vaccine hesitancy ranges from 7 to 49% across ZIP codes within the rural Stearns County, Minnesota. Such widespread variation within a county is common in all U.S. states (Figure 2).
Spatially refined estimates of vaccine hesitancy have proved to be useful in local efforts to increase vaccination rates.75,76 The information has been used by community outreach programs to tailor their efforts to local areas that have the greatest need. Other groups have used local patterns to help to decide where to provide mobile vaccination clinics and where to initiate other measures for reducing barriers to vaccination. Local information can also be used to monitor the effect of local interventions, including the effect of various types of vaccination mandates.
In the future, large and complex data sets on vaccine hesitancy, often referred to as big data, can be analyzed according to spatial identifiers such as ZIP code and various individual characteristics, including race or ethnic group, age, sex, and occupation, which can help to further microtarget vaccination outreach efforts. This information is also potentially critical for monitoring progress toward vaccine equity.
One of the various challenges in taking such an approach to scale and applying it globally is the inequity in the access to and reach of digital media. As the digital revolution unfolds globally, the global health community must keep pace. The consequences of not doing so are loud and clear, as we have seen in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic with regard to the rapid spread of misinformation and consequent vaccine hesitancy.
nature | Vaccine mandates do risk overly politicizing health policy, says MacDonald. But it is hard to accurately quantify the consequences such as social exclusion, loss of public trust or inequitable outcomes. Numerous other factors are at play, such as the way a government handled the pandemic overall, wider political campaigns against vaccination or mandates, or frustrations with the way that a mandate was implemented. Another crucial aspect of whether mandates are successful is the political skill and messaging used to introduce them.
Opposition to vaccines — and mandates — can also be a way of expressing displeasure with other aspects of civil society, says Heidi Larson, an anthropologist and founding director of the Vaccine Confidence Project at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. “All of a sudden everyone who had an issue with government has an issue with vaccines,” she says. Oliu-Barton says that some mandates seem like a referendum: “Do you like the government? You can say, ’no’, by not getting a shot.”
Ward has tried to gauge how the French public reacted to vaccination policies by using questionnaires. When asked if they felt relief, anger or regret when they got vaccinated, respondents who were vaccinated in early 2021 said they mostly felt relief. But most of those vaccinated later, especially after the government imposed health-pass requirements, reported anger or regret6. In a later poll conducted in March this year, more than 60% of respondents said they had felt at least somewhat ‘constrained’ to get vaccinated. Ward’s future work will further dissect why and how.
In Germany, Katrin Schmelz, a psychologist at the University of Konstanz, has led a unique series of surveys that tracked the evolving views of nearly 2,000 German residents over the course of the pandemic7.
The questionnaire showed that only around 3% of the population consistently opposed vaccination if it was voluntary. By contrast, each survey revealed that around 16% of people opposed mandatory vaccination — crucially, however, it was not always the same 16% of respondents who felt this way. Roughly half of respondents changed their minds over time — and the shifting variables most closely tied to support for mandates were trust in government and belief in vaccine effectiveness.
“Mandates are an essential part of public health policies,” says Schmelz, but her work also suggests that it was a good decision to make vaccination a personal choice initially. Polling before vaccines were available showed that 73% of German adults were OK with getting vaccinated voluntarily8 — which corresponded almost exactly to the fraction who were vaccinated before mandates were introduced. Schmelz says she believes that a sense of moral autonomy motivated these people to help battle the virus, and that mandating vaccination earlier would probably have reduced this motivation. “People respond to feeling distrusted by lowering their effort,” she says.
A major concern is that if a substantial proportion of society has lost trust in public institutions, this will make public-health policies harder to implement — in particular, other ongoing vaccine programmes. “Sentiments around vaccines are hugely tied to trust in government,” says Larson. “What’s the knock-on effect of this COVID experience on routine vaccination?”
Deciphering those longer trends might take time. Larson is awaiting the results of the Vaccine Confidence Project’s latest survey of overall attitudes to vaccines, which she thinks will be an indicator of how views have shifted.
Like so many aspects of the pandemic, decisions about mandates and their implementation have occurred at speed — amid a constantly shifting crisis. The legal requirements now being studied were introduced in the summer of 2021, when anxieties about the pandemic still ran deep, and such measures were more palatable. Available vaccines also offered protection against infection, not just against serious illness. With people becoming less afraid of COVID-19 and vaccines offering less protection against infection by Omicron variants, plans this spring to introduce new nationwide mandates in Austria and Germany, for example, were rejected or never enforced.
As concerns about the pandemic wane in many countries, researchers fear that research fatigue is setting in, too, not least when it comes to analysing the complex behavioural responses of people to the virus and mitigation strategies. Yet behavioural science is an essential part of the response to this pandemic and future ones. “People are tired,” MacDonald says, “I think everybody wants this done.” But what she’s more tired of is seeing governments not learning the lessons of previous public-health emergencies. “We need this analysis done.”
"We will never be fully vaccinated against Covid-19."
— True North (@TrueNorthCentre) July 4, 2022
Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos says Canadians need to be "up-to-date" on their vaccines, which he describes as getting the Covid vaccine every nine months. #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/pjuPGbORQa
bombthrower | Despite increasingly compelling data and peer reviewed studies coming out detailing the harms and side-effects of vaccinations, Canada’s Liberal-Socialist coalition government is doubling down on vaccinations, and appear ready to move the goalposts on what constitutes vaccine compliance.
As reported via Blacklocks Reporter (@mindingottawa on Twitter),
Canadians will be required to get a Covid shot every nine months for the foreseeable future, says Health Minister . Previous definitions of “fully vaccinated” made no sense, he told reporters.
“Nine months is very clear and will help people understand why ‘up to date’ is the right way to think about vaccination now,” said Duclos. “‘Fully vaccinated’ makes no sense now. It’s about ‘up to date.’ So am I up to date in my vaccination? Have I received a vaccination in the last nine months?”
Duclos previously called for the provinces to make vaccinations mandatory and when asked by reporters if mandates would return this fall, he replied “We must continue to fight against Covid.”
Canada seems to be one of the few countries outside Communist China who is frantically clinging to the COVID narrative, relentlessly pushing largely ineffective (and arguably dangerous) vaccines on an increasingly fed up population.
The Trudeau regime is increasingly unpopular, a recent Angus Reid poll finding those who “strongly support” the government falling into single digits. The largest single category was “strongly disapprove” at 41%, Reeling with numerous scandals, corruption and gaffes, Justin Trudeau holds power solely through the merger of his party with the Canada’s Socialist NDP, headed by millionaire Jagmeet Singh.
The deal ostensibly keeps him in office until 2025. Singh is also on the
ropes, frequently being jeered in public even among his base
constituency in Brampton, Ontario. His brother lost his seat in the
recent Ontario election, and Singh himself was run out of a campaign stop by enraged Sikhs who called him “a sell out”.
amidwesterndoctor | Most of the injuries I saw reported here overlapped with the ones I encountered and documented within my own adverse event log. Additionally, there were dozens of respondents (primarily healthcare workers) who had observed a large number of individuals with vaccine injuries; meaning that my experience is not at all unique. The most commonly reported injuries were as follows:
•Strokes and blood clots.
•Fatal heart attacks and less frequently myocarditis or heart failure.
•Cancers that often emerge spontaneously, shock the doctor, and were highly aggressive (frequently killing the individual).
•Sudden severe cases of COVID-19.
•Cases of sudden death (i.e. a wife heard a thump upstairs, ran up, and found her husband dead on the floor).
•Rapid
progression towards dementia in an elder relative (typically resulting
in a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, although in one case Lewy body
dementia occurred).
•Other neurological conditions
One thing I have noticed in reviewing reports of adverse reactions to vaccines is that a large number of them go underreported (even within these reporting surveys) because they represent common diseases people develop rather than something very noteworthy. For example, I believe new autoimmune diseases or exacerbation of pre-existing autoimmune diseases are the most common adverse event that occurs following vaccination, as that seems to be the case for around 20-40% of the patients in many rheumatology practices (see this testimony for example) and this report of a survey conducted by the Israel ministry of health.
However, despite this being the case, I only saw a few reports of autoimmune conditions resulting from the mRNA vaccines within these survey responses. This is relevant because adverse reactions always distribute on a bell curve and the more extreme ones, therefore, are much rare than the less severe. ones. This means the adverse reactions that are noteworthy enough for someone to notice and share likely only represent the tip of the iceberg for adverse events occurring. A recent article showing there has been a 10% spike in disability within the US population so far is the best dataset I have come across to suggest something very concerning on a more chronic level throughout the population is happening.
Many of these cases were very sad, and it is difficult to even begin to imagine what the survey respondents had gone through during this process. Cancer is a particularly terrible disease given the death process associated with it, and despite coming across numerous cases of this happening, I was a bit surprised at how frequently respondents reported these cases. I likewise can understand why continually seeing these types of reports has motivated Steve Kirsch to spend every waking moment he has to bring attention to this issue.
Other conditions were less commonly reported. I took particular note of the following:
•Seven
cases of liver failure (or something similar), along with additional
cases of cancers rapidly metastasizing to the liver and causing liver
failure.
•Six Reports of Lou Gehrig's disease (also known as ALS)
•Three Reports of Fatal Prion Diseases (two of which were specified to be CJD, the third most likely was as well).
•A
few reports of birth defects in vital organs with ACE-2 receptors such
as the heart (it is harder to draw a correlation here since those
defects sometimes happen otherwise, but given that I know one case where
this almost certainly happened, I suspect these may have been linked as
well).
I learned a few major lessons from these reports.
The first is that one respondent made it very clear he and another individual had had a mild Covid infection they were dealing with, but once they became vaccinated, the infection went out of control and rapidly landed them in the hospital. I have been trying to come up with an explanation for a while over why it is so common to see individuals be vaccinated and then rapidly be hospitalized or died from severe Covid. I now suspect that being vaccinated while you are infected alters the immune response and makes COVID much more likely to progress towards being a fatal condition. This is unfortunate because those deaths are often used to justify the urgency of vaccinating.
A Midwestern Doctor Jun 24 Author
Oh that's crazy, I had no idea that spike protein had clotting factors in it. Could you like me to that post? That is really interesting.
Regarding your question, I have seen patients with Covid who had a very thick blood, and blood that was very dark and look different (which I know from having done a lot of blood draws correlates with low zeta potential), and I have friends who have had Covid whose body filled with major clots (to the point they needed blood transfusions once the clots were removed).... but the blood clotting being described here has only occurred in alive and vaccinated patients
In 2021 I've send the entire list of the Spike and human proteins homologies to FDA. Parts of that letter to them I posted at: https://mejbcart.substack.com/p/why-cdcfda-ignore-the-spike-protein Here the list of part of the factors for you. Descriptions are in my post: - human coagulation factor VII (75% sc, 45% id) - human coagulation factor VIII (94% sc, 32% id) - human coagulation factorIX (97% sc, 31% id) - human coagulation factorX (85% sc, 35% id)** - human coagulation factorXI (89% sc, 22% id) - human coagulation factorXII (82% sc, 35% id) |
That is really interesting. As you probably know, one of the major issues with Covid blood clots and vaccine damage is that they don't really respond to anticoagulants. Each of the anticoagulants on the market (the main ones are heparin and Xarelto and Plavix) don't really work… Plavix is the only one that seems to stop the blood clots. This will probably make more sense if you look at it yourself, but it's very likely one of the things that's happening is that the spike protein is messing with the coagulation cascade in a way that are not designed to address. I do not have a good enough background in hematology to say anything definitive on this, but I suspect that there's some extent, the spike protein coagulation factors are able to activate sequential parts of the coagulation cascade. Would you be open to taking a deep dive on this and seeing if the structure of any of the coagulation factor like domains could cause a subsequent part of the coagulation cascade to activate? This might require some In Silico modeling or docking analysis. If that's beyond your ability to do, I might know someone who could figure this out. Overall, I do not think this is that complicated and disco potentially be a really big deal for what all the clinicians are working with in the field.
I also wonder if one of the reasons why you periodically see clotting disorders and severe hemorrhages after exposure to the spike protein is because they are having antibodies to the clotting factor form within the body (I am the most familiar with this occurring in hemophiliacs from foreign factor VIII).
if you know the part sequence of those anti-bodies just check it with the known Spike sequence. Once you chop it down, you end up with all these pieces! There is a good paper about the epitopes within the spike, every single segment of it is an epitope, wrote abut it in the last few posts all the time... |
if you are performing the 'official medicine' then yes, normal drugs won't help, you need new drugs, more drugs.. Was just listening to Dr. Klinghard on acu2020 hearing: https://odysee.com/@Corona-Ausschuss:3/s110de:0 He is using 3ple combo, of which heparin is just one component, which won't work on its own. He adds hydroxychloroquine and zinc, with antibiotic. I think they will translate his 1 hour interview so you can listen to it yourself and get the formula. I used to do macromolecular modeling years back, but no more for the last quite few years, do not have the software for that. Just do the open source support in the bioinformatics area, but can check out if online support is available. Also I must say, people need HELP NOW, FAST. The NATURAL remedies for anticoaglation are out there, just have the guts to use it, against your board of .... Last but not least, the ANTI-venom remedy is equally worth to try out. Even I, as NON-MD, know what to use to help myself... |
https://www.jabfm.org/content/18/2/147
https://pubs.asahq.org/anesthesiology/article/62/4/515/28531/Factor-IX-Induced-Hypercoagulable-State
The video will play if you click on the picture.
amidwesterndoctor | If you do not have time to read this article, there are a few key takeaways from it:
•A
wide range of approaches have been utilized to reduce the population,
many of which directly affect your health and total lifespan regardless
of your desire to have children.
•These horrific
sterilizing campaigns are always first conducted on vulnerable and
ignored groups of people (i.e. impoverished racial minorities), so that
these campaigns can first be trialed and refined out of sight and out of
mind.
•It is in everyone’s best interest to stand
up for these vulnerable groups because if you allow evil to be done to
them, that same evil will eventually end up on your doorstep, and by the
time it has built enough momentum to get there, it is very difficult to
stop.
•The primary obstacle to these campaigns has
always been their technological feasibility; their morality is rarely if
ever considered.
It is my belief that vaccines
represent the ideal form of population control because they are very
easy to administer, they can provide long-term or permanent
sterilization and the blind public faith in vaccination prevents most
people from ever questioning sterilization done under the guise of
“public health.” I am not the only person who realized this and the
Western Elite (currently led by the WHO and Bill Gates) have spent
decades attempting to develop sterilizing vaccines.
There
is clear evidence forced trials of sterilizing vaccines have been
repeatedly occurring over the decades. As such, it was reasonable to
assume that the Eugenicists would not let an opportunity like the Covid
vaccines to go to waste, and there was a real possibility that something
was present in the mRNA vaccines that would cause sterility or death. I
likewise attempted to objectively summarize this complex and
emotionally charged subject here:
"Gravity is fractally dual" is an assertion waaay above my pay grade. That said, I'll just slide this little morsel in here.
In the 1960s, in an attempt to understand quantum gravity, physicist Roger Penrose proposed such a radical alternative. In Penrose's twistor theory, geometric points are replaced by twistors—entities that most closely resemble stretched, light ray-like shapes. Within this twistor space, Penrose discovered a highly efficient way to represent fields that travel at the speed of light, such as electromagnetic and gravitational fields. Reality, however, is composed of more than fields—any theory needs also to account for the interactions between fields, such as the electric force between charges, or, in the more complicated case of General Relativity, gravitational attraction resulting from the energy of the field itself. However, including the interactions of General Relativity into this picture has proven a formidable task. So can we express in twistor language a full-fledged quantum gravitational theory, perhaps simpler than General Relativity, but with both fields and interactions fully taken into account? Yes, according to Neiman."Things are interesting (life, consciousness, whatever) when the dynamic nature and static nature come to an agreement with each other." RNA is the embodied information that sets causal boundary conditions I got excited last year when it struck me Jordan B. Peterson gish gallop style that interference with any machinery setting causal boundaries for the quantum information flow that makes me interesting is strictly out of bounds.
amidwesterndoctor | One of the tremendously frustrating experiences I have had during my lifetime has been watching an amazing candidate run for president, be widely liked by the voting base because of their excellent track record in standing up for the working class, and then watch the media systematically torpedo each and every one of their campaigns.
The only person I have ever seen who was able to address this dilemma was Donald Trump, as he took a rather unorthodox approach where he campaigned on the basis of the media being evil. As a result, each time the media gave him negative attention it helped rather than hindered his campaign, and before long he was able to pull the mass media into a symbiotic relationship where it could not help but continually provide oxygen to Trump’s campaign.
The upside of this approach
was that it provided Trump with the freedom to advance populist
positions that went against the vested interests of the financiers of
the corporate media, something very few other presidents have done. The
downside of this approach was that it was incredibly polarizing, and
divided the country to the point that the left was willing to force
through vaccine mandates as a way of getting back at the right. While
it is important to advance populist positions that go against entrenched
interests (and to expose the systemic corruption within the media),
there was a tremendous cost to the political polarization this approach
created we will likely be stuck with for years to come.
Something
that is often not appreciated about the media is that their business
model is based upon getting as much viewership as possible and to
provide content that appeases their advertisers. For this reason,
content that is critical of any sponsor is never allowed to air. As a
result most media programming is meaningless stories that do not
challenge any vested interest and are emotionally hyped up as much as
possible to antagonize the audience so that the audience is drawn into
caring about them.
Given that the largest sponsor of
the mainstream media is the pharmaceutical industry, it is not
surprising that all news content aggressively promotes the
pharmaceutical party line (the only occasional exceptions I know of are
Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham). One of the ethical journalists who
has spoken out the most on this issue is Sharyl Atkinson, who in one
interview specifically noted that she observed a variety of major
changes occur in the media that coincided with her suddenly being
forbidden from ever discussing vaccine safety concerns on air.
It
is difficult to assign blame for the botched pandemic response to any
single party. However, if I have to identify the key culprit, I would
argue that the rigid censorship by the mainstream media, big tech and
the academic publishing institutions was what allowed the insane
pandemic policy is to march forward despite being clearly in opposition
to most existing scientific evidence. In the same way that
pharmaceutical corruption has gradually taken over the legacy media (the
Gates Foundation for example frequently gives media grants to ensure
their massages dominate the airwaves), these other media venues are
likewise highly susceptible to pernicious influence, which is why
independent media platforms are so critical moving forward.
statnews | A patient who has taught me a lot about how to best care for people who use drugs floored me one afternoon while she was in the clinic when I asked her thoughts on getting vaccinated against Covid-19.
“I know this sounds crazy,” she said, casting her gaze to the floor, “but I trust my drug dealer more than I trust this vaccine.”
I was stunned. Curious how anyone could trust putting something from the current fentanyl-contaminated heroin supply in their arm over a highly vetted vaccine, I had to ask, “What makes you trust your dealer?”
Here’s the gist of what she told me: When she speaks to her dealer, they listen to her concerns without judgment and accept her for who she is. When she feels bad, they are attentive to her. They will not sell her drugs if they know she is in a bad place because they have known each other for a long time. They are highly accessible, often by text or phone at all hours. They deliver a tangible, immediate response to the needs she expresses. They have time for her and treat her like they would any other human.
To be sure, not all people who sell drugs operate in the best interest of their consumers. After all, we are currently enduring the fourth wave of the opioid overdose epidemic due to illicitly-manufactured fentanyl that has been contaminating the drug supply. Although this phenomenon should be analyzed as a potential result of the war on drugs, some sellers in the drug market clearly prioritize profits over the lives of their customers. This is highlighted by the fact that people who use drugs are more likely to die of a drug overdose than Covid-19.
supremecourt.gov | 31 pages, 25 pages are very plain language, concise, and cover succinctly what many hear have read, heard, and seen over the past 2 plus years.
“It is the consensus of the medical community that the currently available Covid-19 vaccine injections do not prevent the spread of SARS- CoV-2. Relevant federal agencies have repeatedly acknowledged this consensus. Therefore, there is no scientific or legal justification for OSHA to segregate injected and un-injected people. Indeed, since the Covid-19 injections do not confer immunity upon the recipients, but are claimed to merely reduce the symptoms of the disease, they do not fall within the long-established definition of a vaccine at all. ”
Today, @CDCDirector said:
— Matthew Cortland, JD (@mattbc) January 8, 2022
"The overwhelming number of deaths, over 75%, occurred in people who had at least 4 comorbidities. So really these are people who were unwell to begin with and yes, really encouraging news in the context of Omicron."
This is eugenicist. pic.twitter.com/zd3iBQTH0J
CDC | Among 1,228,664 persons who completed primary vaccination during December 2020–October 2021, severe COVID-19–associated outcomes (0.015%) or death (0.0033%) were rare. Risk factors for severe outcomes included age ≥65 years, immunosuppressed, and six other underlying conditions. All persons with severe outcomes had at least one risk factor; 78% of persons who died had at least four.
What are the implications for public health practice?
Vaccinated persons who are older, immunosuppressed, or have other underlying conditions should receive targeted interventions including chronic disease management, precautions to reduce exposure, additional primary and booster vaccine doses, and effective pharmaceutical therapy to mitigate risk for severe outcomes. Increasing vaccination coverage is a critical public health priority.
politico | The Washington Post on Friday announced it will no longer endorse presidential candidates, breaking decades of tradition in a...
That is unheard of! Are you talking about living patients actually??? Do the unjabed patients with Covid have identical symptoms of that severe clamping or it is 'just' the jabbed? Thank you very much for sharing all this... Actually I wrote many posts with the genetic analysis of the Spike code, which has pieces of everything, including every single clotting factor out there, as if the Spike sequence was made for hemophiliacs, to keep their blood running properly...