PLEASE SHARE: This is the first meeting held by the newly founded World Freedom Alliance (WFA), announcing it’s newly elected representatives and their mission to bring us into a "world that was better than before" with freedom for us all like we have never known.
Protest exemption set to be removed from England lockdown rules
Expected move is met with fierce criticism from campaigners and human rights groups
Coronavirus – latest updates
See all our coronavirus coverage
Jamie Grierson and Vikram Dodd
Tue 3 Nov 2020 19.41 GMTFirst published on Tue 3 Nov 2020 12.56 GMT
A Black Lives Matter protest in Westminster, London on 12 July
There have been a series of a high-profile protests since the pandemic erupted in the UK including demonstrations for racial equality led by the Black Lives Matter movement. Photograph: Peter Summers/Getty Images
Protections for protesters are set to be removed from the coronavirus rules under the second national lockdown, it has emerged, provoking anger from human rights groups and campaigners.
An exemption that permits demonstrations to take place with additional conditions designed to mitigate the spread of the virus is expected to be omitted from fresh regulations being drawn up for the lockdown that will commence from this Thursday.
There have been a series of a high-profile protests since the pandemic erupted in the UK including rallies for racial equality led by the Black Lives Matter movement, racist counter-demonstrations and marches against lockdown measures directed by conspiracy theorists and extremists.
While there will be no explicit ban on protests in the regulations, the removal of the exemption will render organising large-scale lawful protest almost impossible.
The expected move, first revealed by the Times, has been met with fierce criticism from campaigners and human rights groups.
Tyrek Morris, the co-founder of All Black Lives UK, a youth-led campaign group born out of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, said: “With regards to protesting, and protesting through the pandemic, one thing that is clear, we have no support from the government in any way shape or form.”
Morris said protests organised by All Black Lives UK had faced a heavy handed response, despite meeting the criteria set out by the exemption.
“Since the BLM movement arose again, the government has been completely against our protest, against protest full stop, and at every chance possible have tried to stop us. But we’ve always found a way around it. They could stop us protesting, but they can’t stop us fighting for our own rights.”
Quick guide
What you can and can't do in England's new national Covid lockdown
Show
Morris said criticism of the current government was implicit in the All Black Lives UK protests. “We have criticism for the way the government has mishandled the coronavirus pandemic, for how black people are more likely to suffer from this pandemic, we’ve been very vocal about Boris Johnson and his racist tendencies, his previous comments. So this does not come as a shock to me. They don’t want to hear us talk.”
Rosalind Comyn, the policy and campaigns manager at Liberty, the human rights group, said: “We should all be able to stand up for what we believe in. In a healthy democracy protest is one way we do that, and that’s why any measures which stop people expressing dissent are deeply worrying and should be treated with suspicion.
“We have always supported proportionate measures to protect lives, but people must not be criminalised en masse for voicing opposition to government action – even in the context of a pandemic. What’s more, parliament has been sidelined at every turn of this government’s pandemic response, making protest even more important than ever to ensure everyone’s voices are heard.
“The government and police must commit to uphold their duty to facilitate protest so we can stand up to power.”
A spokesperson for Extinction Rebellion UK, which has staged climate protests since the pandemic outbreak, said: “Only a government keenly aware of its epic failing would bring in such extreme restrictions to protest.
“These are the actions of a government not willing to listen to its citizens. Studies over the last year have found that protests held outdoors do not lead to spikes in infection rates. This is clearly a political choice at a time when the government needs to be held to account on many fronts.”
When the regulations were refreshed for the new three-tiered system in England, the wording explicitly said a clause about gatherings of more than six was applicable to protests.
The clause in effect permitted individuals to gather in a group of more than six for the purposes of protest as long as the following rules were satisfied:
The gathering has been organised by a business, a charity, a benevolent or philanthropic institution, a public body, or a political body.
The organiser of the protest has carried out a risk assessment that meets the requirements of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
The organiser has taken all reasonable steps to limit the risk of transmission of coronavirus, in line with the risk assessment and with any relevant government guidance.
But while the clause remains in the new lockdown regulations, which were published late on Tuesday, the explicit reference to “protests” has vanished.
Whitehall sources told the Guardian the change was spearheaded by the Covid-19 taskforce and was designed to make the rules simpler.
But a senior police source told the Guardian they feared being “left in the middle” by any dropping of the protections for protests and also would rather there was a clear-cut regulation, rather than something vague and open to interpretation. “It’s going to be difficult,” the source said.
Police are saying they are already under strain from trying to impose existing Covid regulations, with regular crime returning to normal levels, having plunged during the first lockdown.
A Home Office spokesperson said: “The right to peaceful protest is one of the cornerstones of our democracy. In these unprecedented circumstances, any gathering risks spreading the disease, leading to more deaths, so it is vital we all play our part in controlling the virus.
“People must follow the rules on meeting with others, which apply to all gatherings and therefore protests too. As they have done throughout the pandemic, the police and local authorities will engage, explain and encourage people to follow the rules before moving on to enforce the law.”
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:39 am Post subject:
Britons could launch class-action lawsuit for BILLIONS in compensation for Government ‘falsely imprisoning’ nation during lockdown, law lecturer predicts
Dr Jonathan Morgan is Director of Law at Corpus Christi College in Cambridge
He has put forward an argument around whether the Government can be sued
Says legal precedent suggests the amount of compensation could be billions
Comes after former Supreme Court judge said the Government had twisted law
By EMER SCULLY FOR MAILONLINE
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8914971/Britons-launch-class- action-lawsuit-Government-falsely-imprisoning-nation-says-lawyer.html
PUBLISHED: 22:01, 4 November 2020 | UPDATED: 10:38, 5 November 2020
Britons could potentially sue the Government for billions of pounds in compensation for 'falsely imprisoning' the nation with its Stay At Home order at the outbreak of coronavirus in March, a law lecturer has predicted.
Dr Jonathan Morgan, director of law at Corpus Christi College in Cambridge, said a class action against the Government was 'unprecedented' - but added that so was the lockdown itself.
In a blog post published yesterday he wrote: 'Could the regulations’ invalidity expose the Government to mass liability—to the entire UK population—for the tort of false imprisonment?
+5
The UK Government carried the message 'Stay Home, Protect the NHS, Save Lives' at the beginning of the pandemic in March
'Thus stated, the proposition seems highly unlikely. It would certainly be unprecedented.
Dr Jonathan Morgan, director of law at Corpus Christi College in Cambridge +5
Dr Jonathan Morgan, director of law at Corpus Christi College in Cambridge
'But perhaps that is because a pre-emptive quarantine of the entire population is also unprecedented. It is worth thinking about a hypothetical claim.'
Dr Morgan used the example of Ibrahima Jollah, a Liberian citizen who was ordered to stay at home every night between 11pm and 7am between 2014 and 2017.
Mr Jollah was warned he would be liable to imprisonment or a fine if he failed to comply without reasonable excuse - much like Britons were told to stay home unless they had a reasonable excuse including exercise or shopping.
The Supreme Court found the Secretary of State had no legal power to impose the restrictions and Mr Jollah was awarded £4,000 for the two-and-a-half years he was 'falsely imprisoned'.
If Mr Jollah's case is applied to the UK population the UK Government could be forced to pay £800 - for six months - to each British citizen.
RELATED ARTICLES
Previous
1
Next
Couples and families are banned from shopping together at...
Last orders before lockdown: Pubs run dry as drinkers make...
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Share
It could mean a total of £4.8 billion in compensation has to be paid in a nationwide class action.
Dr Morgan added: 'If a test case established that the entire population were entitled to similar payments, the financial consequences for the government would be astonishing.'
A sign which says 'stay at home to save lives' on the A470 southbound on October 26 in Cardiff +5
A sign which says 'stay at home to save lives' on the A470 southbound on October 26 in Cardiff
It comes ahead of tomorrow's second national lockdown, dubbed Lockdown2.
Shops, bars and restaurants have been ordered to shutter for a month from midnight as part of continuing Government efforts to balance suppression of the virus with keeping the economy going.
In his blog post, Dr Morgan referred to former Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption's warning ministers have been exceeding their rightful powers by imposing such stringent measures.
In a speech last month Lord Sumption accused ministers of using the police to suppress opposition to their policies, of creating new criminal offences without the legal right to do so, and of grabbing unconstitutional powers by issuing misleading guidance.
A social distancing sign in a shopping arcade on October 28, 2020 in Bridgend, Wales +5
A social distancing sign in a shopping arcade on October 28, 2020 in Bridgend, Wales
Britain's streets were empty as millions of people stayed home unless they needed to buy essential items. Pictured, Oxford Street in London was deserted during the lockdown +5
Britain's streets were empty as millions of people stayed home unless they needed to buy essential items. Pictured, Oxford Street in London was deserted during the lockdown
At the Cambridge Freshfields annual law lecture, he accused the Government of 'tendentiously' presenting guidance as if it was law - such as the two-metre social distancing rule.
Dr Morgan wrote: 'One of Lord Sumption’s major claims was that the Covid-19 regulations that have restricted the free movement of the UK population were, in many instances, ultra vires (meaning outside of) the empowering legislation.'
Lord Sumption opened his speech by blasting the Government for placing 'everybody under a form of house arrest'.
'During the Covid-19 pandemic, the British state has exercised coercive powers over its citizens on a scale never previously attempted,' he said.
'It has taken effective legal control, enforced by the police, over the personal lives of the entire population: where they could go, whom they could meet, what they could do even within their own homes.
'For three months it placed everybody under a form of house arrest, qualified only by their right to do a limited number of things approved by ministers.'
Meanwhile, charities have lashed out at the Government's decision to announce a return to shielding for around two million people just hours before England was dragged into a draconian second lockdown.
Except for exercise and medical appointments, people considered to be at a very high risk of dying if they catch Covid-19 should remain at home and not meet up with others, officials said today.
The Department of Health toughened its guidance just weeks after reassuring people that shielding would not return and 'soft advice' would be used instead.
Announcing the national intervention in a gloomy press conference on Saturday night, Boris Johnson insisted ministers would 'not ask people to shield again in the same way'.
The vulnerable won't have to protect themselves from members of their own household and can go outside to exercise or visit a doctor but the 'stay at home at all times' message is back.
Manchester police shut down a 100-person rave in the early hours of Sunday morning, which was attended by people “from across the North West”.
Greater Manchester Police were called to the Boxing Day party at 4.20am last night, after reports of a large gathering and loud music at empty flats on Hanover Street, near Manchester’s Victoria train station.
The force say they seized music equipment and are continuing their enquiries to hold people accountable for the rule-breaking party.
Two teenage boys - aged 17 and 18 - were each given £1,000 fixed penalty notices, which are normally issued for breaking Covid rules.
Organisers of gatherings that break Covid restrictions can be fined up to £10,000 each.
Read more: Plea for medical students to staff ICU wards as Covid hospitalisations surge
Read more: 'Significant number' of police officers assaulted on Christmas Day
Met Police releases footage of Tier 4 Covid enforcement
Play Video
A 27-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence and remains in custody. He was also given a £200 notice.
Chief Inspector Colin MacDiarmid, of GMP’s City of Manchester division said the force “will not hesitate to take enforcement action against those found to be responsible for blatant examples of flouting the rules such as this."
He added: “There is no denying the blatant breach of COVID legislation that took place here last night, and enquiries are ongoing to ensure the organisers of this gathering are held accountable for their unacceptable actions.
“It is clear that the people at this gathering weren’t just people from Manchester but from across the North West, and it not only disregards the rules there to protect public health but also undermines the whole spirit of us all needing to be in this together to battle the ongoing risk of coronavirus.”
Read more: Tier 4: Extra police in London to crack down on non-essential travel
Read more: Greater Manchester Police to be placed in special measures after damning report
LBC joins the Met Police on patrol
Play Video
Greater Manchester is continuing to see a rise in Covid cases respite being in Tier 3 restrictions since October.
The region recorded 193 cases per 100,000 people for the week ending December 22, a rise of 18 percent compared to the previous week.
Read more: Police footage shows 'flagrant' breaches of Covid rules as London enters Tier 4
Read more: More areas of England likely to enter Tier 4 in the New Year
“The majority of people in Manchester have made tremendously difficult sacrifices over the Christmas period and have complied with the rules that we all have to follow,” Chief Inspector MacDiarmid.
Palestinian and Arab Israeli rave attendees make merry at the Nabi Musa mosque in the West Bank on December 26, 2020 (Screenshot/Twitter)
Palestinian and Arab Israeli rave attendees make merry at the Nabi Musa mosque in the West Bank on December 26, 2020 (Screenshot/Twitter)
A Saturday night dance party by Palestinians at a West Bank Muslim holy site featuring alcohol and techno music has elicited condemnation from across the Palestinian political spectrum.
Videos from the Nabi Musa mosque between Jerusalem and Jericho showed a rave held at the scene, featuring young Palestinians and Arab Israelis dancing and drinking.
Prominent Palestinian disc jockey (DJ) Sama Abd al-Hadi led the festivities. Abd al-Hadi, originally from Ramallah, is considered a pioneering artist in the budding Palestinian electronic music scene, as well as one of the first female DJs in an overwhelmingly male-dominated field.
Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition by email and never miss our top storiesFREE SIGN UP
Abd al-Hadi was arrested Sunday night by Palestinian Authority police, the Kan public broadcaster reported, citing Palestinian sources.
The festivities appeared to have alcohol and men and women dancing together at the Muslim holy site. Most forms of Islam forbid drinking alcohol, and mixed dancing is also controversial in many parts of conservative Palestinian society.
A number of other Palestinians, apparently angered by what they considered to be the desecration of the site, arrived and confronted them. The partygoers told the newcomers that they had received permission from the Palestinian Authority Tourism Ministry in Ramallah to hold the event.
“Whisky! Alcohol! Women! Tourism Ministry, this isn’t religious morals. In fact, these aren’t morals,” one of the angry demonstrators said as he videotaped the site with his phone.
The Nabi Musa mosque — named after Moses, who many Jews, Christians and Muslims all revere as a prophet of God — is a prominent West Bank pilgrimage site. Each year in spring, Palestinian Muslims travel by foot to the mosque, which is situated between Jerusalem and Jericho.
Most of the revelers on Saturday night were either Arab Israelis or Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem, and the matter is currently being processed by the Israel Police. A spokesperson for the police’s West Bank Division could not be reached for comment.
PA Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh has assembled an investigative committee to look into the incident, PA government spokesperson Ibrahim Milhem said.
“I feel disgust and rage about what happened at the Nabi Musa mosque… I do not know yet who is responsible for this sin, but whoever is will receive a punishment to fit the atrocity of what was committed. A mosque is a house of God; its sanctity is the sanctity of religion itself,” said Mahmoud al-Habbash, PA President Mahmoud Abbas’s advisor on religious affairs.
Nabi Musa lies largely in Area C, meaning that the Oslo Accords designates the area as under full Israeli security and civil control. Israeli security forces arrived at the scene during the night when the confrontation occurred.
“There were Israeli soldiers there, but the incident is being dealt with by the Israel Police and Palestinian institutions,” a spokesperson for the Israeli army said, without elaborating.
In the aftermath of the incident, Palestinian Authority ministries have engaged in a blame game in an attempt to avoid the wrath of the public from the perceived desecration of the holy site. The Tourism Ministry has sought to blame the Religious Affairs Ministry, which has denied any knowledge of plans to hold a rave at the site.
“I was surprised to hear the news that people had entered the mosque… the Religious Affairs Ministry was never asked for permission or consultation, nor did it ever issue a permit to hold a party in the mosque,” Religious Affairs Deputy Minister Hussam Abu al-Rabb told Ajyal Radio on Sunday.
The Nabi Musa mosque, in the Judean Desert, south of Jerusalem, on January 29, 2017. (Hadas Parush/Flash90)
On Sunday afternoon, several dozen Palestinians went to the site to pray. Videos posted on social gathered showed the worshippers hurling the remnants of last night’s party from the walls of the sanctuary before setting them ablaze.
Officials from Hamas, an Iran-backed terror group that rules the Gaza Strip and opposes the PA, quickly took advantage of the anger over the rave in the West Bank holy site to criticize their political rivals for allegedly allowing the event to take place. Palestinian Authority police, however, are rarely permitted by Israel to enforce their laws in Area C.
“We condemn the fact that this was done with the formal approval and under the protection of Mohammad Shtayyeh’s government,” said Hamas spokesperson Fawzi Barhoum, who called the rave “a despicable violation of the house of God.”
Introduction
To my horror and disappointment the shops, and indeed the streets, are full of mask-wearing
muppets. In the shops everything takes an age as shopper and assistant struggle to make
themselves heard through their masks. The muppets have become mumblies.
Many mask wearers keep their masks on even when out of doors, where it is not yet
mandatory to do so. These over-compliant collaborators are making oppression easy for the
totalitarians who will doubtless soon be demanding that we all wear our masks wherever we
are and whatever we are doing – even in our own homes.
Most mask wearers have no idea of the harm they are doing by wearing masks. Indeed,
many seem to understand very little about how to wear a mask. I have, on several occasions,
seen people drop their mask onto the pavement – face side down of course – pick it up and
put it on. Many people wear the same mask for more than two hours (which is dangerous),
wear disposable masks more than once (which is dangerous), fail to wash cloth masks (which
means they accumulate bacteria, fungi and viruses – all of which are breathed in) touch their
mask while it is in position (which makes the mask even worse than useless), put masks into
their pockets or handbags and then put them back on creased and grubby (a very dangerous
thing to do since the wearer will then be breathing in whatever bugs have been transmitted to
the mask. Scarves are often used as face coverings without ever being washed (an effective
way to catch throat and lung infections). Nearly everyone constantly fiddles with their masks
– not realising that touching a mask is something you should not do. The incidence of throat
and chest infections is going to rocket. I wonder how many people will be killed by their
masks. We’ll never know.
What the hell has happened to people? I am appalled at how easily people have become so
compliant and have accepted the Government lies. Many mask wearers now choose their
masks as fashion items and wear masks designed to match their outfits. A few wear dark
glasses and gloves as well as masks. I fear they probably think they look cool and welldressed.
As I said earlier, it won’t be long before the Government will order them to wear masks
indoors. And they will. Some will sleep in them – and doubtless die in them.
Most mask wearers are clearly being made ill by their masks. Because their oxygen levels
are low, their eyes are glazed, as though they are drugged.
When the covid-19 hoax began, authorities around the world announced that mask
wearing was pointless, and it was widely agreed by experts that they could probably do more
harm than good. Indeed, mask wearing was dismissed as ‘virtue signalling’ by Dr Fauci, the
American coronavirus expert. The World Health Organisation supported this general view
which was in accordance with the available scientific evidence. Medical advisors around the
world agreed that there was no need to wear masks.
Later during the year the story changed.
Although there did not seem to be any scientific evidence supporting such a dramatic
change, the World Health Organisation suddenly supported face mask wearing and almost
instantly governments around the world, led by medical and scientific advisors, changed their
views overnight and decided that we should all wear masks. The WHO’s main financial
supporter is the American software billionaire Bill Gates who has a number of powerful
alliances with media organisations (such as the BBC), strong financial links with Monsanto
and a number of drug companies and an enthusiasm for vaccination which, to put it politely,
does not seem justified by the evidence.
Why, in the absence of a change in medical advice did the WHO change its mind?
Well, it seems that the campaign for masks to be worn worldwide was either founded by
the World Economic Forum, which advocates a global reset and of which that well-known
medical expert Prince Charles of England appears to be a leading member, or by an
organisation called masks4all. The promotion of masks was supported by Goldman Sachs,
the bank, in my view one of the most evil companies on earth (along with Google and
Monsanto) which was once memorably described by Matt Taibbi as a vampire squid on the
face of humanity. The bank is reported to have claimed that if everyone in America wore a
mask, the American economy would be boosted.
I have no idea how they came to this conclusion or why they think their advice is better
than medical research.
The masks4all website promotes the slogan, ‘Anyone without a mask puts you and your
family at risk’, and masks4all is a fiscally sponsored project of something called Community
Initiatives which seems to have links to a whole range of organisations I’ve never heard of.
As a result of the WHO’s change of advice, media throughout the world also changed their
advice. The well-known video sharing site called YouTube betrayed users by deleting videos
made by doctors (such as myself) which offered scientific evidence proving that masks are of
no value but are dangerous.
I could find no convincing scientific evidence supporting this change of heart but, as a
result of the WHO’s about-turn, populations everywhere were forced to wear masks – or to
risk being fined. Only those prepared to self-certify that they could not wear a mask were
allowed to travel on trains or buses or any other form of public transport without a face
covering. And shortly afterwards, the rule was extended to cover shops and public buildings.
Strangely, people in offices were not always forced to wear masks – as though the
coronavirus were in some way inactive in a working environment but active in a shopping
environment.
I have kept this book short and have resisted the mild temptation to include a history of
mask wearing in all its various forms. The only thing that is important at the moment is
whether mask wearing is useful and necessary or dangerous and being forced upon us as part
of the new totalitarianism.
I repeat, I have yet to find any reliable scientific evidence proving that masks are useful,
safe or worth wearing. Many doctors who are not employed by governments or public
agencies, seem to agree that mask wearing is very likely to do far more harm than good.
The available scientific evidence shows that masks, whatever their form, provide a poor
obstacle to infective organisms but do impede air intake and oxygen exchange.
Those who wear masks are collaborating in a massive conspiracy.
Masks and Mask Wearing: 100 Facts You Must Know
1
Surgeons have been using surgical masks since their introduction in 1897. It has for some
years been customary for surgeons and nurses to wear surgical masks in the operating theatre
and to change masks part of the way through any procedure lasting more than a few hours.
The dangers associated with mask wearing were assessed by five doctors and published in
the journal Neurocirugia in 2008.
Although it is customary for operating theatres to be fitted with air conditioning systems,
the writers of the article, entitled, Preliminary Report on Surgical Mask induced
Deoxygenation During Major Surgery, pointed out that it is known that heat and moisture are
trapped beneath surgical masks and concluded that ‘it seems reasonable that some of the
exhaled carbon dioxide may also be trapped beneath them, inducing a decrease in blood
oxygenation’.
A total of 53 surgeons, of both sexes, all employed at university hospitals and aged
between 24 and 54 years of age were tested. All were non-smokers and none had any chronic
lung disease. The test involved pulse oximetry before and after the course of an operation.
The study showed that the longer a mask was worn the greater the fall in blood oxygen levels.
This may lead to the individual passing out and it may also affect natural immunity – thereby
increasing the risk of infection.
The masks used were disposable, sterile, one-way surgical paper masks. To eliminate the
effect of dehydration over a several hour surgical operation, the surgeons were allowed after
every hour to drink water through a straw.
The authors of the paper concluded that, ‘When the values for oxygen saturation of
haemoglobin were compared, there were statistically significant differences only between
preoperational and post operational values. As the duration of the operation increases, oxygen
saturation of haemoglobin decreases significantly.’
2.
This quote is taken from New England Journal of Medicine: ‘We know that wearing a mask
outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health
authorities define a significant exposure to covid-19 as face to face contact within six feet
with a patient with symptomatic covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and
some say more than 10 minutes or even 20 minutes). The chance of catching covid-19 from a
passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases the desire for
widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.’ The reference is:
M.Klompas, C.Morris et al ‘Universal Masking in hospitals in the covid-19 era’ – New
England Journal of Medicine 2020
3.
It is possible that wearing a mask for hours at a time could cause pulmonary fibrosis. In
August 1988, the proceedings of the VIIth International Pneumoconioses Conference
included details of three cases of pulmonary fibrosis, thought to be due to exposure to
synthetic textile fibres. The first was a woman of 52 who had a dry cough with increasing
difficulty in breathing. Changes were visible on an X-ray. The woman had been working in a
textile shop for 15 years where her job was measuring and cutting cloth – mainly synthetic
materials. The second patient was a woman of 66 who also had difficulty in breathing. The
lungs of this patient also showed X-ray changes. She was also involved in cutting and
measuring synthetic fabrics. A third woman, aged 47, had bilateral pulmonary fibrosis.
Studies have shown that loose fibres are seen on all types of masks and may be inhaled
causing serious lung damage.
4.
People who cough and sneeze into their mask increase the risk of a build-up of fungi and
bacteria – which can lead to dangerous chest infections.
5.
In 2015, the British Medical Journal published a paper entitled, A Cluster Randomised Trial
of Cloth Masks Compared with Medical Masks in Healthcare Workers. The paper was
written by nine authors from the University of New South Wales, the University of Sydney,
the National Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology in Vietnam and the Beijing Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention in China. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy
of cloth masks to medical masks in hospital health care workers. The study, which was
extensive, concluded that the results caution against the use of cloth masks.
‘This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety,’ concluded the
authors. ‘Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased
risk of infection.’
And the authors added: ‘…as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be
recommended for health care workers, particularly in high risk situations, and guidelines need
to be updated’.
6.
Many individuals have turned their masks into fashion items. I wonder how many wear the
same mask day after day without washing them. If masks are unwashed then they become
breeding grounds for bacteria, fungi and viruses. If they are washed then they become even
more useless (if that is possible) than they were when new. The enthusiasm for ‘fashion’
masks, which match other items of clothing, is rising. But wearing a fashionable mask is akin
to a slave painting their chains to look pretty.
7.
The word ‘covering’ is now often used in official propaganda material, having replaced the
word ‘mask’. It has clearly been decreed more acceptable than the more usual word ‘mask’
which carries worrying overtones.
8.
It is often difficult to hear what people say when they are wearing masks – particularly if the
masks are close-fitting. Conversations are kept to a minimum and social interactions in shops
and other establishments are functional at best. (It is worth noting that hairdressers and others
in service industries have been instructed to talk as little as possible – ostensibly to prevent
the spread of the virus. Singing, a joyful activity for singers and listeners, has been banned.)
9.
Mask wearers have been encouraged by the psy-op specialists to show their hatred for nonmask wearers. This loathsome ploy was first promoted by Ms Dick of the Metropolitan police
in London, and seems designed to make those who cannot or do not wear masks feel guilty
and ashamed. The mentally and physically disabled will, therefore, be harassed and abused if
they dare to go out of their homes.
10.
In October 2020, it was noticeable that when street photographs were published in the press
or online, they invariably showed members of the public wearing masks – even though mask
wearing out of doors was not compulsory. It was at that point clear that the public would soon
be forced to wear masks out of doors – even when exercising.
11.
Symptoms caused by mask wearing are now being wrongly blamed on covid-19. It seems
likely that when mask wearing starts to result in deaths (as it will do), those deaths will be
blamed on covid-19 and used as a reason for politicians and advisors to demand that people
wear masks for even longer hours. The vicious circle will be complete.
12.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration in the US has decreed that any room
where the carbon dioxide is present at a level or more than 5,000 parts per million is unsafe
and has an environment which is toxic and dangerous. Carbon dioxide levels normally exist
at between 350 and 450 parts per million. Acceptable indoor quality level is 600 to 800 ppm.
Any employer who attempts to force employees to work in an environment where the carbon
dioxide level is too high can be held to account. Similarly, any teacher who attempts to force
children to study in such an environment would be legally responsible. If a nuclear submarine
has a level of over 5,000 parts per million then it must surface because it is considered to
have a threatening and dangerous environment. There is much dispute about the levels of
carbon dioxide which may develop if a mask is worn. Generally, the tighter a mask fits the
greater the risk that the level of carbon dioxide will rise to dangerous levels but it must be
remembered that most members of the public have no training on how to wear a mask and
there are few if any restrictions on mask manufacture. Indeed, members of the public are
making their own masks and using bits of left over material to do so. A wide variety of masks
are being designed and worn. Those dismissing the danger as non-existent might like to read
HSE Contract Research Report no 27/1991, produced by the British Health and Safety
Executive and entitled, Dead space and inhaled carbon dioxide levels in respiratory
protective equipment. Those dismissing the risks associated with carbon dioxide levels should
know that the amount of carbon dioxide in a small room can easily rise to levels which are
dangerous enough to have a dramatic effect on decision making. At least eight studies in the
last decade have studied carbon dioxide levels indoors and have found worrying levels above
1,200 parts per million. _________________ www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org www.rethink911.org www.patriotsquestion911.com www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org www.mediafor911truth.org www.pilotsfor911truth.org www.mp911truth.org www.ae911truth.org www.rl911truth.org www.stj911.org www.v911t.org www.thisweek.org.uk www.abolishwar.org.uk www.elementary.org.uk www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149 http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Introduction
To my horror and disappointment the shops, and indeed the streets, are full of mask-wearing
muppets. In the shops everything takes an age as shopper and assistant struggle to make
themselves heard through their masks. The muppets have become mumblies.
Many mask wearers keep their masks on even when out of doors, where it is not yet
mandatory to do so. These over-compliant collaborators are making oppression easy for the
totalitarians who will doubtless soon be demanding that we all wear our masks wherever we
are and whatever we are doing – even in our own homes.
Most mask wearers have no idea of the harm they are doing by wearing masks. Indeed,
many seem to understand very little about how to wear a mask. I have, on several occasions,
seen people drop their mask onto the pavement – face side down of course – pick it up and
put it on. Many people wear the same mask for more than two hours (which is dangerous),
wear disposable masks more than once (which is dangerous), fail to wash cloth masks (which
means they accumulate bacteria, fungi and viruses – all of which are breathed in) touch their
mask while it is in position (which makes the mask even worse than useless), put masks into
their pockets or handbags and then put them back on creased and grubby (a very dangerous
thing to do since the wearer will then be breathing in whatever bugs have been transmitted to
the mask. Scarves are often used as face coverings without ever being washed (an effective
way to catch throat and lung infections). Nearly everyone constantly fiddles with their masks
– not realising that touching a mask is something you should not do. The incidence of throat
and chest infections is going to rocket. I wonder how many people will be killed by their
masks. We’ll never know.
What the hell has happened to people? I am appalled at how easily people have become so
compliant and have accepted the Government lies. Many mask wearers now choose their
masks as fashion items and wear masks designed to match their outfits. A few wear dark
glasses and gloves as well as masks. I fear they probably think they look cool and welldressed.
As I said earlier, it won’t be long before the Government will order them to wear masks
indoors. And they will. Some will sleep in them – and doubtless die in them.
Most mask wearers are clearly being made ill by their masks. Because their oxygen levels
are low, their eyes are glazed, as though they are drugged.
When the covid-19 hoax began, authorities around the world announced that mask
wearing was pointless, and it was widely agreed by experts that they could probably do more
harm than good. Indeed, mask wearing was dismissed as ‘virtue signalling’ by Dr Fauci, the
American coronavirus expert. The World Health Organisation supported this general view
which was in accordance with the available scientific evidence. Medical advisors around the
world agreed that there was no need to wear masks.
Later during the year the story changed.
Although there did not seem to be any scientific evidence supporting such a dramatic
change, the World Health Organisation suddenly supported face mask wearing and almost
instantly governments around the world, led by medical and scientific advisors, changed their
views overnight and decided that we should all wear masks. The WHO’s main financial
supporter is the American software billionaire Bill Gates who has a number of powerful
alliances with media organisations (such as the BBC), strong financial links with Monsanto
and a number of drug companies and an enthusiasm for vaccination which, to put it politely,
does not seem justified by the evidence.
Why, in the absence of a change in medical advice did the WHO change its mind?
Well, it seems that the campaign for masks to be worn worldwide was either founded by
the World Economic Forum, which advocates a global reset and of which that well-known
medical expert Prince Charles of England appears to be a leading member, or by an
organisation called masks4all. The promotion of masks was supported by Goldman Sachs,
the bank, in my view one of the most evil companies on earth (along with Google and
Monsanto) which was once memorably described by Matt Taibbi as a vampire squid on the
face of humanity. The bank is reported to have claimed that if everyone in America wore a
mask, the American economy would be boosted.
I have no idea how they came to this conclusion or why they think their advice is better
than medical research.
The masks4all website promotes the slogan, ‘Anyone without a mask puts you and your
family at risk’, and masks4all is a fiscally sponsored project of something called Community
Initiatives which seems to have links to a whole range of organisations I’ve never heard of.
As a result of the WHO’s change of advice, media throughout the world also changed their
advice. The well-known video sharing site called YouTube betrayed users by deleting videos
made by doctors (such as myself) which offered scientific evidence proving that masks are of
no value but are dangerous.
I could find no convincing scientific evidence supporting this change of heart but, as a
result of the WHO’s about-turn, populations everywhere were forced to wear masks – or to
risk being fined. Only those prepared to self-certify that they could not wear a mask were
allowed to travel on trains or buses or any other form of public transport without a face
covering. And shortly afterwards, the rule was extended to cover shops and public buildings.
Strangely, people in offices were not always forced to wear masks – as though the
coronavirus were in some way inactive in a working environment but active in a shopping
environment.
I have kept this book short and have resisted the mild temptation to include a history of
mask wearing in all its various forms. The only thing that is important at the moment is
whether mask wearing is useful and necessary or dangerous and being forced upon us as part
of the new totalitarianism.
I repeat, I have yet to find any reliable scientific evidence proving that masks are useful,
safe or worth wearing. Many doctors who are not employed by governments or public
agencies, seem to agree that mask wearing is very likely to do far more harm than good.
The available scientific evidence shows that masks, whatever their form, provide a poor
obstacle to infective organisms but do impede air intake and oxygen exchange.
Those who wear masks are collaborating in a massive conspiracy.
Masks and Mask Wearing: 100 Facts You Must Know
1
Surgeons have been using surgical masks since their introduction in 1897. It has for some
years been customary for surgeons and nurses to wear surgical masks in the operating theatre
and to change masks part of the way through any procedure lasting more than a few hours.
The dangers associated with mask wearing were assessed by five doctors and published in
the journal Neurocirugia in 2008.
Although it is customary for operating theatres to be fitted with air conditioning systems,
the writers of the article, entitled, Preliminary Report on Surgical Mask induced
Deoxygenation During Major Surgery, pointed out that it is known that heat and moisture are
trapped beneath surgical masks and concluded that ‘it seems reasonable that some of the
exhaled carbon dioxide may also be trapped beneath them, inducing a decrease in blood
oxygenation’.
A total of 53 surgeons, of both sexes, all employed at university hospitals and aged
between 24 and 54 years of age were tested. All were non-smokers and none had any chronic
lung disease. The test involved pulse oximetry before and after the course of an operation.
The study showed that the longer a mask was worn the greater the fall in blood oxygen levels.
This may lead to the individual passing out and it may also affect natural immunity – thereby
increasing the risk of infection.
The masks used were disposable, sterile, one-way surgical paper masks. To eliminate the
effect of dehydration over a several hour surgical operation, the surgeons were allowed after
every hour to drink water through a straw.
The authors of the paper concluded that, ‘When the values for oxygen saturation of
haemoglobin were compared, there were statistically significant differences only between
preoperational and post operational values. As the duration of the operation increases, oxygen
saturation of haemoglobin decreases significantly.’
2.
This quote is taken from New England Journal of Medicine: ‘We know that wearing a mask
outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health
authorities define a significant exposure to covid-19 as face to face contact within six feet
with a patient with symptomatic covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and
some say more than 10 minutes or even 20 minutes). The chance of catching covid-19 from a
passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases the desire for
widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.’ The reference is:
M.Klompas, C.Morris et al ‘Universal Masking in hospitals in the covid-19 era’ – New
England Journal of Medicine 2020
3.
It is possible that wearing a mask for hours at a time could cause pulmonary fibrosis. In
August 1988, the proceedings of the VIIth International Pneumoconioses Conference
included details of three cases of pulmonary fibrosis, thought to be due to exposure to
synthetic textile fibres. The first was a woman of 52 who had a dry cough with increasing
difficulty in breathing. Changes were visible on an X-ray. The woman had been working in a
textile shop for 15 years where her job was measuring and cutting cloth – mainly synthetic
materials. The second patient was a woman of 66 who also had difficulty in breathing. The
lungs of this patient also showed X-ray changes. She was also involved in cutting and
measuring synthetic fabrics. A third woman, aged 47, had bilateral pulmonary fibrosis.
Studies have shown that loose fibres are seen on all types of masks and may be inhaled
causing serious lung damage.
4.
People who cough and sneeze into their mask increase the risk of a build-up of fungi and
bacteria – which can lead to dangerous chest infections.
5.
In 2015, the British Medical Journal published a paper entitled, A Cluster Randomised Trial
of Cloth Masks Compared with Medical Masks in Healthcare Workers. The paper was
written by nine authors from the University of New South Wales, the University of Sydney,
the National Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology in Vietnam and the Beijing Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention in China. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy
of cloth masks to medical masks in hospital health care workers. The study, which was
extensive, concluded that the results caution against the use of cloth masks.
‘This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety,’ concluded the
authors. ‘Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased
risk of infection.’
And the authors added: ‘…as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be
recommended for health care workers, particularly in high risk situations, and guidelines need
to be updated’.
6.
Many individuals have turned their masks into fashion items. I wonder how many wear the
same mask day after day without washing them. If masks are unwashed then they become
breeding grounds for bacteria, fungi and viruses. If they are washed then they become even
more useless (if that is possible) than they were when new. The enthusiasm for ‘fashion’
masks, which match other items of clothing, is rising. But wearing a fashionable mask is akin
to a slave painting their chains to look pretty.
7.
The word ‘covering’ is now often used in official propaganda material, having replaced the
word ‘mask’. It has clearly been decreed more acceptable than the more usual word ‘mask’
which carries worrying overtones.
8.
It is often difficult to hear what people say when they are wearing masks – particularly if the
masks are close-fitting. Conversations are kept to a minimum and social interactions in shops
and other establishments are functional at best. (It is worth noting that hairdressers and others
in service industries have been instructed to talk as little as possible – ostensibly to prevent
the spread of the virus. Singing, a joyful activity for singers and listeners, has been banned.)
9.
Mask wearers have been encouraged by the psy-op specialists to show their hatred for nonmask wearers. This loathsome ploy was first promoted by Ms Dick of the Metropolitan police
in London, and seems designed to make those who cannot or do not wear masks feel guilty
and ashamed. The mentally and physically disabled will, therefore, be harassed and abused if
they dare to go out of their homes.
10.
In October 2020, it was noticeable that when street photographs were published in the press
or online, they invariably showed members of the public wearing masks – even though mask
wearing out of doors was not compulsory. It was at that point clear that the public would soon
be forced to wear masks out of doors – even when exercising.
11.
Symptoms caused by mask wearing are now being wrongly blamed on covid-19. It seems
likely that when mask wearing starts to result in deaths (as it will do), those deaths will be
blamed on covid-19 and used as a reason for politicians and advisors to demand that people
wear masks for even longer hours. The vicious circle will be complete.
12.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration in the US has decreed that any room
where the carbon dioxide is present at a level or more than 5,000 parts per million is unsafe
and has an environment which is toxic and dangerous. Carbon dioxide levels normally exist
at between 350 and 450 parts per million. Acceptable indoor quality level is 600 to 800 ppm.
Any employer who attempts to force employees to work in an environment where the carbon
dioxide level is too high can be held to account. Similarly, any teacher who attempts to force
children to study in such an environment would be legally responsible. If a nuclear submarine
has a level of over 5,000 parts per million then it must surface because it is considered to
have a threatening and dangerous environment. There is much dispute about the levels of
carbon dioxide which may develop if a mask is worn. Generally, the tighter a mask fits the
greater the risk that the level of carbon dioxide will rise to dangerous levels but it must be
remembered that most members of the public have no training on how to wear a mask and
there are few if any restrictions on mask manufacture. Indeed, members of the public are
making their own masks and using bits of left over material to do so. A wide variety of masks
are being designed and worn. Those dismissing the danger as non-existent might like to read
HSE Contract Research Report no 27/1991, produced by the British Health and Safety
Executive and entitled, Dead space and inhaled carbon dioxide levels in respiratory
protective equipment. Those dismissing the risks associated with carbon dioxide levels should
know that the amount of carbon dioxide in a small room can easily rise to levels which are
dangerous enough to have a dramatic effect on decision making. At least eight studies in the
last decade have studied carbon dioxide levels indoors and have found worrying levels above
1,200 parts per million. _________________ www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org www.rethink911.org www.patriotsquestion911.com www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org www.mediafor911truth.org www.pilotsfor911truth.org www.mp911truth.org www.ae911truth.org www.rl911truth.org www.stj911.org www.v911t.org www.thisweek.org.uk www.abolishwar.org.uk www.elementary.org.uk www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149 http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
NHS Consultant Says Staff Are Being Silenced Over COVID-19
Here lies an anonymous statement from an A&E consultant in a major hospital in Surrey, in relation to the criminal gagging of all levels of NHS staff, who have been threatened that they will lose their jobs if the speak out about the COVID-1984 scamdemic.
“I am a consultant at a major , regional hospital in Surrey. By major you can take that to indicate that we have an A&E department. I had agreed to give an interview to an anti lockdown activist in which I would have revealed my identity. I have since changed my mind and only feel able to give an anonymous statement. I have changed my mind simply because that all staff , no matter what grade, at all hospitals have been warned that if they give any media interviews at all or make any statements to either the Main Stream Press or smaller, independent press /social media we may, immediately be suspended without pay. I have a family, dependents and I simply cant do it to them. I therefore can not reveal my identity at this time but wish to state as follows:
In my opinion, and that of many of my colleagues, there has been no Covid Pandemic, certainly not in the Surrey region and I have heard from other colleagues this picture is the same throughout the country. Our hospital would normally expect to see around 350,000 out patients a year. Around 95,000 patients are admitted to hospital in a normal year and we would expect to see around a similar figure, perhaps 100,000 patients pass through our A&E department. In the months from March to June (inclusive) we would normally expect to see 100,000 out patients, around 30,000 patients admitted to hospital and perhaps 30,000 pass through A&E. This year (and these figures are almost impossible to get hold of) we are over 95% down on all those numbers. In effect, the hospital has been pretty much empty for that entire period.
At the start, staff that questioned this were told that we were being used as ‘redundant’ capacity, kept back for the ‘deluge’ we were told would come. It never did come, and when staff began to question this, comments like, ‘for the greater good’ and to ‘protect the NHS’ came down from above. Now its just along the lines of, ‘Shut up or you don’t get paid’. The few Covid cases that we have had , get repeatedly tested, and every single test counted as a new case. Meaning the figures reported back to ONS / PHE (Office for National Statistics & Public Health England) were almost exponentially inflated. It could be that Covid cases reported by hospitals are between 5 to 10x higher than the real number of cases. There has been no pandemic and this goes a long way to explain why figures for the UK are so much higher than anywhere else in Europe.
The trust has been running empty ambulances during lockdown and is still doing it now. By this I mean ambulances are driving around, with their emergency alert systems active (sirens & / or lights) with no job to go to. This I believe has been to give the impression to the public that there is more demand for ambulances than there actually is. Staff only wear face coverings/ masks & social distance when public facing, as soon as they are out of public view, the masks come off and social distancing is not observed. Indeed jokes are made about the measures, and I have heard staff express amazement that despite warnings on packets and at point of sales, telling people masks are totally ineffective and dangerous , the public still buy them, because a politician has told them too.
We have cancelled the vast majority of operations and of these ALL elective surgery has been cancelled. That’s surgery that has been pre planned / waiting list. Non elective Surgery, this tends to be emergency surgery or that which is deemed urgent has been severely curtailed. The outcome of this is simple. People are at best being denied basic medical care and at worst, being left to die, in some cases, in much distress and pain.
Regarding death certification. All staff that are responsible for this have been encouraged where possible to put Covid-19 complications as reason for death, even though the patient may have been asymptomatic and also not even tested for covid. I feel this simply amounts to fraudulently completed death certificates and has been responsible to grossly inflating the number of Covid deaths. The fact is that regardless of what you actually die of in hospital, it is likely that Covid-19 will feature on your death certificate. I have included with my statement the detailed published guidance from Government on Death Certification which shows how Covid-19, as a factor is encouraged to at least feature on a death certificate.
Remember Covid-19 itself can not kill. What kills is complications from the virus, typically pneumonia like symptoms. These complications are in reality incredibly rare but have featured and a large amount of death certificates issued in recent months. As long as Covid-19 appears on a death certificate, that death is counted as Covid-19 in the figures released by the ONS and PHE. I genuinely believe that many death certificates, especially amongst the older 65+ demographic have been fraudulently completed so as to be counted as Covid-19 deaths when in reality Covid-19 complications did not cause the death.
There have been Thursday nights when I stood, alone in my office and cried as I heard people cheering and clapping outside. It sickens me to see all the ‘Thank You NHS’ signs up everywhere and the stolen rainbow that for me now says one word and word only; fear.
There are many good people in the NHS and whilst I do not plead forgiveness for myself, I do plead for them. Most are on low pay, they joined for the right reasons and I did and have been bullied and threatened that if they don’t ‘stay on message’ they don’t eat. I know that if a way could be found to assure staff within the NHS of safety against reprisals, there would be a tsunami of whistleblowers which I have no doubt would help end this complete and brutal insanity. I am finding it increasingly hard to live with what I have been involved in and I am sorry this has happened. To end, I would simply say this. Politicians haven’t changed, the country has just made a fatal mistake and started trusting them without question.”
Related Posts
Don’t Trust The Plan To Distract You From The Real Plan
Grand Jury Finds Prima Facie Evidence of Pandemic Fraud
Large Numbers Of Health Care And Frontline Workers Are Refusing Covid-19 Vaccine
Tommy Beer
Tommy BeerForbes Staff
Business
Updated Jan 3, 2021, 09:22pm EST
TOPLINE Despite the Covid-19 death count in the United States rapidly accelerating, a startlingly high percentage of health care professionals and frontline workers throughout the country—who have been prioritized as early receipts of the coronavirus vaccine—are reportedly hesitant or outright refusing to take it, despite clear scientific evidence that the vaccines are safe and effective.
Piedmont's Covid-19 Vaccine Campaign Begins In Turin
Nursing staff prepare the Covid-19 vaccine. (Photo by Stefano Guidi/Getty Images) GETTY IMAGES
KEY FACTS
Earlier this week, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine said he was "troubled" by the relatively low numbers of nursing home workers who have elected to take the vaccine, with DeWine stating that approximately 60% of nursing home staff declined the shot.
Dr. Joseph Varon, chief of critical care at Houston's United Memorial Medical Center, told NPR in December more than half of the nurses in his unit informed him they would not get the vaccine.
Roughly 55 percent of surveyed New York Fire Department firefighters said they would not get the coronavirus vaccine, the Firefighters Association president said last month.
The Los Angeles Times reported Thursday that hospital and public officials in Riverside, Calif., have been forced to figure out how best to allocate unused doses after an estimated 50% of frontline workers in the county refused the vaccine.
Fewer than half of the hospital workers at St. Elizabeth Community Hospital in Tehama County, Calif., were willing to be vaccinated, and around 20% to 40% of L.A. County's frontline workers have reportedly declined an opportunity to take the vaccine.
Dr. Nikhila Juvvadi, the chief clinical officer at Chicago's Loretto Hospital, said that a survey was administered in December, and 40% of the hospital staff said they would not get vaccinated.
KEY BACKGROUND:
A recent survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that 29% of healthcare workers were hesitant to receive the vaccine, citing concerns related to potential side effects and a lack of faith in the government to ensure the vaccines were safe. Frontline workers in the United States are disproportionately Black and Hispanic. The pandemic has taken an "outsized toll" on this segment of the population, which has reportedly accounted for roughly 65% of fatalities in cases in which there are race and ethnicity data. A study published by the journal The Lancet over the summer found "healthcare workers of color were more than twice as likely as their white counterparts" to test positive for the coronavirus. According to a Pew Research Center poll published in December, vaccine skepticism is highest among Black Americans, as less than 43% said they would definitely/probably get a Covid-19 vaccine. Dr. Juvvadi told NPR that "there's no transparency between pharmaceutical companies or research companies — or the government sometimes — on how many people from" Black and Latino communities were involved in the research of the vaccine. Dr. Varon said that "the fact that [President] Trump is in charge of accelerating the process bothers" those individuals who refuse to be immunized, adding "they all think it's meant to harm specific sectors of the population." In an op-ed published in the New York Times earlier this week, emergency physicians Benjamin Thomas and Monique Smith wrote that "vaccine reluctance is a direct consequence of the medical system's mistreatment of Black people" and past atrocities, such as the unethical surgeries performed by J. Marion Sims and the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, best exemplifies "the culture of medical exploitation, abuse and neglect of Black Americans."
CRUCIAL QUOTE:
"I've heard Tuskegee more times than I can count in the past month — and, you know, it's a valid, valid concern," said Dr. Juvvadi.
WHAT TO WATCH FOR:
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said in a Friday interview that it's "quite possible" the Covid-19 vaccine could be required for international travel and to attend school at some point in the future.
BIG NUMBER:
40 million. In early December, government officials said they planned to have 40 million doses available by the end of 2020, which would be enough to fully vaccinate 20 million Americans. However, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, less than 3 million Americans have received the first dose of the vaccine, with 14 million doses have been distributed. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Given the great majority of the world's PCR tests are run at 40 cycles (or at least over 35) this shows the only thing we are dealing with is a 'Scamdemic'.
Of course people are dying - of the same things the die of every year - pneumonia, flu, heart attacks, cancer. But now they are all listed as Covid deaths. And to add to the deaths, come all the problems associated with 'Lockdowns' and now with deaths from the experimental Covid jab, which are being hushed up along with the hideous 'adverse effects' by the MSM and government. What deaths or 'adverse reactions' do manage to leak out, are blamed on Covid.
If you're reading this you are probably all ready aware of what is being perpetrated on the world, but try to spread the knowledge. The more people that are aware, the better chance we have to expose these mega crimes. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 4:07 am Post subject:
As many people already believed, the 'virus' was almost certainly made in a lab, and I certainly don't believe it was the Wuhan lab: that was IMO a classic set-up for the planned False Flag op which later unfolded:
'A Bayesian analysis concludes beyond a reasonable doubt that SARS-CoV-2 is not a natural zoonosis but instead is laboratory derived': https://zenodo.org/record/4477081 _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
And a very short 'good news' video:
'VACCINE HESITANT PROTECTED IN EUROPE': https://thehighwire.com/videos/vaccine-hesitant-protected-in-europe/ _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
All Global Research articles can be read in 27 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
***
The entire world is watching in horror as death rates have skyrocketed in Israel since the Israeli government brokered a secret deal with Pfizer to inject the entire population with their experimental COVID shots, which are now being mandated as a condition to participate in society. See: Death Rates Skyrocket in Israel Following Pfizer Experimental COVID “Vaccines”
The National File reported this past week that a group of Israeli doctors, lawyers, campaigners and concerned citizens have hired the services of Tel Aviv-based firm A. Suchovolsky & Co. Law to file a criminal complaint in the International Criminal Court, stating that the mandatory vaccine laws are a violation of the Nuremberg Code.
Israel became one of the first nations in the world to mandate COVID-19 vaccines, and to introduce a COVID passport system that would only allow individuals to participate in society – including commerce – after they received the vaccine and were approved to join the system.
Now, a group of Israeli Jews are suing the Netanyahu administration in international court, making the case that Israel is violating the Nuremberg Code by essentially making Israelis subject to a medical experiment using the controversial vaccines.
Reporting for Church Militant, Jules Gomes wrote:
The Anshe Ha-Emet (People of the Truth) fellowship — comprising Israeli doctors, lawyers, campaigners and concerned citizens — complained to the ICC prosecutor at the Hague, accusing the government of conducting a national “medical experiment” without first seeking “informed consent.”
“When the heads of the Ministry of Health as well as the prime minister presented the vaccine in Israel and began the vaccination of Israeli residents, the vaccinated were not advised, that, in practice, they are taking part in a medical experiment and that their consent is required for this under the Nuremberg Code,” the Anshe Ha-Emet suit states.
Tel Aviv-based firm A. Suchovolsky & Co. Law argues that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s agreement with Pfizer and Netanyahu’s own admission make it clear that Israel’s warp-speed vaccination campaign “is indeed a medical experiment and that this was the essence of the agreement.”
The complaint has now been accepted by the International Criminal Court (ICC), and will be considered.
The Nuremberg Code was “written after Nazi doctors were put on trial for performing their medical experiments on concentration camp prisoners, stipulates that it is deeply unethical to force or coerce a person to take part in medical experiments,” according to a Jewish anthropologist. Those behind the lawsuit believe this is especially relevant after Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla called Israel the “world’s lab” due to its ready acceptance of the company’s COVID-19 vaccine.
This comes after an Israeli group decried the country’s green passport system, which allows only those who have taken the COVID-19 vaccine or developed immunity from the virus to engage in commerce and leave their homes, as “demonic” and a “second Holocaust.”
In an interview that has now been viewed by over a half million people, Ilana Rachel Daniel has made an emotional outcry for help from Jerusalem, the capital of Israel.
“Civil rights are put aside and people can only participate in society again after vaccination,” told Ilana to Flavio Pasquino in the BLCKBX studio via a live stream connection, who tracked down Ilana after an – even – more emotional audio clip on Telegram.
Ilana talks about the Green Pass, the Freedom Bracelet, the mRNA vaccine and human rights violations.
“Currently reminiscent of the Holocaust,” said the Jewess who emigrated from the US to Jerusalem 30 years ago.
Ilana Rachel is active in Jerusalem as a health advisor and information officer for a new political party (Rappeh) that is heavily opposed by the regime. Opening a banc account is not possible and members of the party are also thwarted in their daily lives.
Watch her impassioned plea for help (this is still on YouTube – if it disappears let us know.)
Israeli Rabbi Chananya Weissman’s 31 Reasons Why I Won’t Take the Vaccine, read it here.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Dr. Michael Yeadon, former CSO and VP, Allergy and Respiratory Research Head with Pfizer Global R&D and Co-Founder of Ziarco Pharma Ltd, talks about his grave concerns about the mRNA Injection.
EarthNewspaper.com
All The Honest News Fit To Publish
Ten or more articles, news stories, and videos, from reliable sources, are published daily. Over 2,100 articles and videos have been published and archived. These posts are searchable by over 750 categories.
https://EarthNewspaper.com
Subscribe To Free Speech BitChute.com/EarthNewspaper
Over 1,875 videos uploaded, and many new daily.
Over 8,200 subscribers, and growing quickly.
Over 1,900,000 video views, and between 15,000 to 35,000 views daily.
https://BitChute.com/EarthNewspaper
Under the new rules, COVID-19 was to be listed in Part I of death certificates as a definitive cause of death, regardless of confirmatory evidence, rather than in Part II as a contributor to death in the presence of pre-existing conditions.
On its website, the CDC says, just 6% of the people counted as COVID-19 deaths died of COVID-19 alone.
The following are the top underlying medical conditions linked with COVID-19 deaths:
Influenza and pneumonia
Respiratory failure
Hypertensive disease
Diabetes
Vascular and unspecified dementia
Cardiac Arrest
Heart failure
Renal failure
Intentional and unintentional injury, poisoning and other adverse events
Other medical conditions
The researchers estimated the COVID-19 recorded fatalities “are inflated nationwide by as much as 1600% above what they would be had the CDC used the 2003 handbooks,” said All Concerned Citizens in a statement on the study...'
What Pandemic??? _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
In total, more than 30,000 vaccinees reported more than 100,000 adverse reactions to the vaccine by the end of January. Most notable are 13 people who went blind after the vaccination, eight miscarriages and a total of 236 fatal cases, Epoch Times reports.
The list of side effects and adverse reactions to Corona vaccinations is getting longer. A report by the UK’s Medicines Regulatory Agency (MHRA, a body that licenses and oversees medicines in the UK, similar to the Paul Ehrlich Institute in Germany) now adds blindness and miscarriages to already known reactions to vaccines, such as pain, facial paralysis and blood disorders. The report was updated on February 11 to include reports of suspected adverse reactions from the start of the vaccination campaign on December 9 through the end of January.
Officials say that “more than 110,000 people in the UK have died within 28 days of a positive coronal test.” By comparison, about four million people tested positive, while overseas colonies (including Gibraltar, the Cayman Islands and Bermuda) contributed a few thousand cases. This results in a mortality rate of about 2.5 percent, which is roughly equivalent to the mortality rate of a regular flu.
More side effects at AstraZeneca Vaxzevria
As with VAERS in the U.S., Britons can report suspected adverse reactions and adverse events to vaccines in what is known as the “yellow card scheme” and give a drug a “yellow card.” According to the government report, by the end of January, 9,262,367 people had received one vaccination and 494,206 people had already received two. During the same period, a total of 32,139 yellow cards were collected, with more than 100,000 individual responses. The first notifications date back to December 9, the first day of vaccinations.
About two-thirds of the notifications and nearly 60,000 individual responses in the yellow card scheme relate to Pfizer/BioNTech‘s vaccine. With the exception of 72 cases in which the manufacturer was not specified, the rest fall to AstraZeneca. Although the Moderna vaccine has also been licensed in the UK since January 8, it is not mentioned in the government report.
The distribution of reports across vaccines roughly reflects the vaccines administered. However, it is notable that a report on AstraZeneca contains an average of four separate responses, while for Pfizer/BioNTech there are “only” about 2.5 responses on each yellow card. As “dailyexpose.co.uk” calculates, this means that about one in 333 vaccinees reported side effects or adverse reactions. In reality, however, there could be even more cases “as some may not have been reported under the yellow card scheme.”
3 More EU Countries Hit Pause on AstraZeneca After Reports of Illness and Deaths
That AstraZeneca also causes side effects in Germany was also recently experienced by the emergency department in the district of Minden-Lübbecke. After employees took advantage of a short-term vaccination offer from AstraZeneca – the vaccine is not approved for people over 65 – several employees reported sick. “As a result, the emergency services were not optimally staffed,” district spokesman Florian Hemann told the “Westfalen-Blatt” at the time. Neighboring rescue stations and the DRK assisted.
The “yellow card” regulation includes, in addition to the side effects and reactions already known from the vaccine studies of the manufacturers, even more.
Side effects of Corona vaccines
1. Optical Impairment and Blindness
In total, the reports included 1,280 eye conditions. “Optical impairment and blindness (other than color blindness)” occurred in 53 reports on Pfizer/BioNTech [ed. note: see page 8], as well as 26 yellow cards for AstraZeneca [page 6] and one report without naming the vaccine [page 4]. In thirteen cases (5 Pfizer, 8 AstraZeneca) the report speaks of (complete) blindness after vaccination.
2. Cerebrovascular accidents (stroke)
In 43 cases (Pfizer/BioNTech 32 [page 31], AstraZeneca 11 [page 24]), affected individuals (or their next of kin) have reported cerebrovascular accidents following vaccination by Pfizer. The sudden death of brain cells from lack of oxygen due to an interruption in blood supply caused by a blockage or rupture of an artery to the brain is also known as a stroke. In seven cases – 3 after vaccination by Pfizer/BioNTech, 4 after vaccination by AstraZeneca – this ended fatally.
3. Abortion and miscarriage
Because of insufficient data, neither Pfizer/BioNTech nor AstraZeneca and Moderna approved their vaccines for pregnant women. What effects mRNA vaccination has on fertility or on nursing mothers is also unknown, they said. For its part, the British government announced before the vaccination campaign began that “pregnancy should be excluded in women of childbearing age before vaccination [and] pregnancy should be avoided for at least two months after the second dose.”
Yet the yellow card regulation lists eight [page 36] suspected pregnancy-related cases for Pfizer/BioNTech, and nine [page 28] for AstraZeneca. About half of these involve “spontaneous abortions” or miscarriages. In two cases, premature deliveries or premature rupture of the amniotic sac occurred after vaccination with AstraZeneca.
4. Facial paralysis
There have also been 107 facial nerve disorders reported after Pfizer/BioNTech vaccinations, including paralysis, paresis and spasm. Following vaccinations by AstraZeneca, 17 reports have been received so far. Paralysis in other parts of the body occurred in at least 21 cases (Pfizer 15, AstraZeneca 5, unattributed 1). In most cases, the paralysis symptoms had disappeared after a few days.
5. Deceased
Deaths have also been reported in the UK in the time sequence of vaccinations. The reports included a total of 236 cases with fatalities. Of these, 141 are explicitly listed as “deaths”; all other cases mention another fatal side effect. 76 cases relate to Pfizer/BioNTech’s vaccine [p. 13], 64 cases to AstraZeneca [p. 10]. One case is not attributed to the vaccine [p. 6].
Particularly notable among the deaths are 15 cases of “sudden death” (nine at Pfizer/BioNTech, six at AstraZeneca), who according to “dailyexpose” “dropped dead immediately after vaccination.”
Interim assessment by the UK government agency
In light of these figures, the MHRA states, “A large proportion of those vaccinated to date as part of the vaccination campaign are very elderly and many of them will also have pre-existing conditions.” The agency therefore concludes that both vaccines raise “no other new safety concerns.” All vaccines and drugs have “certain side effects,” but in the case of the Corona vaccines, these are “consistent with expectations from clinical trials.” It goes on to say:
Following a very extensive exposure of the UK population, no new safety concerns have emerged from the reports received to date, and for the cases of other diseases reported in a temporal association with vaccination, the available evidence does not currently indicate that the vaccine caused the event.”
In contrast, the definition of a “coronadode” which means that someone in the UK “definitely died from COVID-19” applies for up to 28 days after a positive test result. That period is about 10 to 14 days longer than it takes for someone who has tested positive to be officially counted as recovered.
https://youtu.be/QYk5lG5NYI8 _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Many of you may have seen videos on the web of people showing how magnets often stick to the places where people had their'Covid Imjections', but no explanations. Here are some articles that could possibly explain the phenomenon: also you probably have seeb videos, articles or graphs showing how in virtually every country that the jab was rolled out in, an immediate large spike in deaths occured. We are expected to believe that was 'pure coincidence'.
The Covid business is the biggest False Flag Agenda since 9/11, and promises to have even bigger consequences. The PTB are at war with 'We The People', and we need to understand they are not pulling back from their objectives.
Two important points not to miss - graphene is also now in the yearly Flu jabs, and N-acetyl cystene (NAC) supplement is a good anti-dote. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Last edited by outsider on Thu Jul 15, 2021 8:03 pm; edited 2 times in total
and here is her very good Newsletter: http://grammaseshop.com/acatalog/DD/News/YH-Newsletter-Issue-36.pdf
She is very knowledgeable, and it's quite a long read, 29 pages pdf, although more than half of it is advertising her (health supplement) wares. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2021 5:55 am Post subject:
French protesters show up in force to defy covid vaccination mandates
It started with all health care workers in France having to get jabbed for the Fauci Flu, and now Macron is demanding that everyone living in France get an injection in order to eat, work or go to church.
In order for an unvaccinated person to do anything in France, he or she will now need to show a “negative” Chinese Virus test result before being allowed inside any building.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-07-17-french-protesters-defy-covid-va ccination-mandates.html
French protesters show up in force to defy covid vaccination mandates
Saturday, July 17, 2021 by: Ethan Huff
Tags: coronavirus, COVID, France, freedom, health freedom, healthcare workers, Liberty, mandates, medical fascism, obey, pandemic, protests, Tyranny, vaccination, vaccine passports, vaccines
Bypass censorship by sharing this link:
New
https://www.afinalwarning.com/535870.html
Copy URL
6,260
VIEWS
Image: French protesters show up in force to defy covid vaccination mandates
(Natural News) The French have taken to the streets in protest of Emmanuel Macron’s new Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccine” mandate.
Video footage – see below – shows French freedom fighters chanting “Liberté” in the streets of Paris as police officers attempt to hold them back and keep their voices from being heard.
Fittingly, the start of the protests began on July 14, or Bastille Day, a national holiday in France that commemorates the anniversary of the inauguration of the French Revolution.
Reports indicate that police have been firing teargas at the demonstrators, who do not want mandatory injections, “sanitary passports,” or any other form of medical fascism that Macron might try to impose.
It started with all health care workers in France having to get jabbed for the Fauci Flu, and now Macron is demanding that everyone living in France get an injection in order to eat, work or go to church.
In order for an unvaccinated person to do anything in France, he or she will now need to show a “negative” Chinese Virus test result before being allowed inside any building.
“This is in the name of freedom,” some of the protesters told the media about why they are demonstrating.
French police side with medical tyranny, harass and abuse protesters
In Paris, at least 2,250 people showed up to protest. Similar larger gatherings were also reported in Toulouse, Bordeaux, Montpelier, Nantes and elsewhere throughout France.
French authorities estimate that at least 19,000 people turned out across France to just say no to experimental injections from Tony Fauci and Donald Trump. The French do not want to have their DNA forcibly modified at “warp speed,” even if the government and the police say they should.
Rather than respect the protests, police throughout France showed aggression towards the protesters, some of whom they claimed were “throwing projectiles” and lighting fires.
People are obviously upset about Macron’s edict, and rightfully so. With few other means through which to make change, they are doing what they think will gain the most attention and hopefully result in a policy reversal.
“Down with dictatorship” and “down with the health pass” were among the other phrases that protesters could be heard shouting as they marched through the streets in defiance of medical apartheid.
Yann Fontaine, a 29-year-old notary clerk from the Berry region of central France, believes, as do many other French people, that requiring a “sanitary pass” proving “vaccination” in order to live is a form of “segregation” that creates a two-tiered system of freedom.
“Macron plays on fears, it’s revolting,” Fontaine is quoted as saying. “I know people who will now get vaccinated just so that they can take their children to the movies, not to protect others from serious forms of covid.”
Government spokesman Gabriel Attal tried to spin the narrative, claiming that there is no “vaccine obligation.” It is merely “maximum inducement,” meaning if you do not want your life to be a living hell in France, then you will agree to get jabbed.
According to the official numbers, less than half of the French population has gotten jabbed so far. France is said to have some of the highest levels of vaccine “skepticism” in the world.
“They’re doing God’s work,” wrote one Twitter user about the French protests.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:14 pm Post subject:
Big Pharma can be bad for your health:
'ARTK#177 90 Mysterious Deaths & Counting of Holistic Doctors with Erin Elizabeth':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrnlKt2OoJA _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
There’s more laws to be read and understood and upheld - but if everyone started with those I’ve listed and upheld them, we wouldn’t be in this mess. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
“The lamps are going out all over Europe, we shall not see them lit again in our life-time.” Edward Grey
Several years ago, I wrote a book called Doctoring Data. It was my attempt to help people navigate their way through medical headlines and medical data.
One of the main reasons I was stimulated to write it, is because I had become deeply concerned that science, especially medical science, had been almost fully taken over by commercial interests. With the end result that much of the data we were getting bombarded with was enormously biased, and thus corrupted. I wanted to show how some of this bias gets built in.
I was not alone in my concerns. As far back as 2005, John Ioannidis wrote the very highly cited paper ‘Why most Published Research Findings are False’. It has been downloaded and read by many, many, thousands of researchers over the years, so they can’t say they don’t know:
‘Moreover for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias.’1
Marcia Angell, who edited the New England Journal of Medicine for twenty years, wrote the following. It is a quote I have used many times, in many different talks:
‘It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgement of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.’
Peter Gotzsche, who set up the Nordic Cochrane Collaboration, and who was booted out of said Cochrane collaboration for questioning the HPV vaccine (used to prevent cervical cancer) wrote the book. ‘Deadly Medicine and Organised Crime. [How big pharma has corrupted healthcare]’.
The book cover states… ‘The main reason we take so many drugs is that drug companies don’t sell drugs, they sell lies about drugs… virtually everything we know about drugs is what the companies have chosen to tell us and our doctors… if you don’t believe the system is out of control, please e-mail me and explain why drugs are the third leading cause of death.’
Richard Smith edited the British Medical Journal (BMJ) for many years. He now writes a blog, amongst other things. A few years ago, he commented:
‘Twenty years ago this week, the statistician Doug Altman published an editorial in the BMJ arguing that much medical research was of poor quality and misleading. In his editorial entitled ‘The scandal of Poor Medical Research.’ Altman wrote that much research was seriously flawed through the use of inappropriate designs, unrepresentative sample, small sample, incorrect methods of analysis and faulty interpretation… Twenty years later, I feel that things are not better, but worse…
In 2002 I spent eight marvellous weeks in a 15th palazzo in Venice writing a book on medical journals, the major outlets for medical research, and the dismal conclusion that things were badly wrong with journals and the research they published. My confidence that ‘things can only get better’ has largely drained away.’
Essentially, medical research has inexorably turned into an industry. A very lucrative industry. Many medical journals now charge authors thousands of dollars to publish their research. This ensures that it is very difficult for any researcher, not supported by a university, or a pharmaceutical company, to afford to publish anything, unless they are independently wealthy.
The journals then have the cheek to claim copyright, and charge money to anyone who actually wants to read, or download the full paper. Fifty dollars for a few on-line pages! They then bill for reprints, they charge for advertising. Those who had the temerity to write the article get nothing – and nor do the peer reviewers.
It is all very profitable. Last time I looked the Return on Investment (profit) was thirty-five per-cent for the big publishing houses. It was Robert Maxwell who first saw this opportunity for money making.
Driven by financial imperative, the research itself has also, inevitably, become biased. He who pays the paper calls the tune. Pharmaceutical companies, food manufacturers and suchlike. They can certainly afford the publication fees.
In addition to all the financial and peer-review pressure, if you dare swim against the approved mainstream views you will, very often, be ruthlessly attacked. As many people know, I am a critic of the cholesterol hypothesis, along with my band of brothers…we few, we happy few. In the 1970s, Kilmer McCully, who plays double bass in our band, was looking into a cause of cardiovascular disease that went against the mainstream view. This is what happened to him:
‘Thomas N. James, a cardiologist and president of the University of Texas Medical Branch who was also the president of the American Heart Association in 1979 and ’80, is even harsher [regarding the treatment of McCully]. ”It was worse than that – you couldn’t get ideas funded that went in other directions than cholesterol,” he says. ”You were intentionally discouraged from pursuing alternative questions. I’ve never dealt with a subject in my life that elicited such an immediate hostile response.”
It took two years for McCully to find a new research job. His children were reaching college age; he and his wife refinanced their house and borrowed from her parents. McCully says that his job search developed a pattern: he would hear of an opening, go for interviews and then the process would grind to a stop. Finally, he heard rumors of what he calls ”poison phone calls” from Harvard. ”It smelled to high heaven,” he says.’
McCully says that when he was interviewed on Canadian television after he left Harvard, he received a call from the public-affairs director of Mass. General. ”He told me to shut up,” McCully recalls. ”He said he didn’t want the names of Harvard and Mass. General associated with my theories.’ 2
More recently, I was sent a link to an article outlining the attacks made on another researcher who published a paper which found that being overweight meant having a (slightly) lower risk of death than being of ‘normal weight. This, would never do:
‘A naïve researcher published a scientific article in a respectable journal. She thought her article was straightforward and defensible. It used only publicly available data, and her findings were consistent with much of the literature on the topic. Her coauthors included two distinguished statisticians.
To her surprise her publication was met with unusual attacks from some unexpected sources within the research community. These attacks were by and large not pursued through normal channels of scientific discussion. Her research became the target of an aggressive campaign that included insults, errors, misinformation, social media posts, behind-the-scenes gossip and maneuvers, and complaints to her employer.
The goal appeared to be to undermine and discredit her work. The controversy was something deliberately manufactured, and the attacks primarily consisted of repeated assertions of preconceived opinions. She learned first-hand the antagonism that could be provoked by inconvenient scientific findings. Guidelines and recommendations should be based on objective and unbiased data. Development of public health policy and clinical recommendations is complex and needs to be evidence-based rather than belief-based. This can be challenging when a hot-button topic is involved.’ 3
Those who lead the attacks on her were my very favourite researchers, Walter Willet and Frank Hu. Two eminent researchers from Harvard who I nickname Tweedledum and Tweedledummer. Harvard itself has become an institution, which, along with Oxford University, comes up a lot in tales of bullying and intimidation. Willet and Hu are internationally known for promoting vegetarian and vegan diets. Willet is a key figure in the EAT-Lancet initiative.
Where is science in all this? I feel the need to state, at this point, that I don’t mind attacks on ideas. I like robust debate. Science can only progress through a process of new hypotheses being proposed, being attacked, being refined and strengthened – or obliterated. But what we see now is not science. It is the obliteration of science itself:
‘Anyone who has been a scientist for more than 20 years will realize that there has been a progressive decline in the honesty of communications between scientists, between scientists and their institutions and the outside world.
Yet, real science must be an area where truth is the rule; or else the activity simply stops being scient and becomes something else: Zombie science. Zombie science is a science that is dead, but is artificially keep moving by a continual infusion of funding. From a distance Zombie science looks like the real thing, the surface features of a science are in place – white coats, laboratories, computer programming, PhDs, papers, conferences, prizes etc. But the Zombie is not interested in the pursuit of truth – its citations are externally-controlled and directed at non-scientific goals, and inside the Zombie everything is rotten…
Scientists are usually too careful and clever to risk telling outright lies, but instead they push the envelope of exaggeration, selectivity and distortion as far as possible. And tolerance for this kind of untruthfulness has greatly increased over recent years. So, it is now routine for scientists deliberately to ‘hype’ the significance of their status and performance and ‘spin’ the importance of their research.’ Bruce Charlton: Professor of Theoretical Medicine.
I was already pretty depressed with the direction that medical science was taking. Then COVID19 came along, the distortion and hype became so outrageous that I almost gave up trying to establish what was true, and was just made up nonsense.
For example, I stated, right at the start of the COVID19 pandemic, that vitamin D could be important in protecting against the virus. For having the audacity to say this, I was attacked by the fact checkers. Indeed, anyone promoting vitamin D to reduce the risk of COVID19 infection, was ruthlessly hounded.
Guess what. Here from 17th June:
‘Hospitalized COVID-19 patients are far more likely to die or to end up in severe or critical condition if they are vitamin D-deficient, Israeli researchers have found.
In a study conducted in a Galilee hospital, 26 percent of vitamin D-deficient coronavirus patients died, while among other patients the figure was at 3%.
“This is a very, very significant discrepancy, which represents a big clue that starting the disease with very low vitamin D leads to increased mortality and more severity,” Dr. Amir Bashkin, endocrinologist and part of the research team, told The Times of Israel.’ 4
I also recommended vitamin C for those already in hospital. Again, I was attacked, as has everyone who has dared to mention COVID19 and vitamin C in the same sentence. Yet, we know that vitamin C is essential for the health and wellbeing of blood vessels, and the endothelial cells that line them. In severe infection the body burns through vitamin C, and people can become ‘scrobutic’ (the name given to severe lack of vitamin C).
Vitamin C is also known to have powerful anti-viral activity. It has been known for years. Here, from an article in 1996:
‘Over the years, it has become well recognized that ascorbate can bolster the natural defense mechanisms of the host and provide protection not only against infectious disease, but also against cancer and other chronic degenerative diseases. The functions involved in ascorbate’s enhancement of host resistance to disease include its biosynthetic (hy-droxylating), antioxidant, and immunostimulatory activities. In addition, ascorbate exerts a direct antiviral action that may confer specific protection against viral disease. The vitamin has been found to inactivate a wide spectrum of viruses as well as suppress viral replication abd expression in infected cell.’ 5
I like quoting research on vitamins from way before COVID19 appeared, where people were simply looking at Vitamin C without the entire medico-industrial complex looking over their shoulder, ready to stamp out anything they don’t like. Despite a mass of evidence that Vitamin C has benefits against viral infection, it is a complete no-go area and no-one even dares to research it now. Facebook removes any content relating to Vitamin C and COVID19.
As of today, any criticism of the mainstream narrative is simply being removed. Those who dare to raise their heads above the parapet, have them chopped off:
‘Dr Francis Christian, practising surgeon and clinical professor of general surgery at the University of Saskatchewan, has been immediately suspended from all teaching and will be permanently removed from his role as of September.
Dr Christian has been a surgeon for more than 20 years and began working in Saskatoon in 2007. He was appointed Director of the Surgical Humanities Program and Director of Quality and Patient Safety in 2018 and co-founded the Surgical Humanities Program. Dr. Christian is also the Editor of the Journal of The Surgical Humanities.
On June 17th Dr Christian released a statement to over 200 of his colleagues, expressing concern over the lack of informed consent involved in Canada’s “Covid19 vaccination” program, especially regarding children.
To be clear, Dr Christian’s position is hardly an extreme one.
He believes the virus is real, he believes in vaccination as a general principle, he believes the elderly and vulnerable may benefit from the Covid “vaccine”… he simply doesn’t agree it should be used on children, and feels parents are not being given enough information for properly informed consent.’ 6
When I wrote Doctoring Data, a few years ago, I included the following thoughts about the increasing censorship and punishment that was already very clearly out in the open:
…where does it end? Well, we know where it ends.
First, they came for the communists, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist
Then they came for the socialists, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist
Then they came from the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist
Then they came for me, and there was no-one left to speak for me
Do you think this is a massive over-reaction? Do I really believe that we are heading for some form of totalitarian stated, where dissent against the medical ‘experts’ will be punishable by imprisonment? Well, yes, I do. We are already in a situation where doctors who fail to follow the dreaded ‘guidelines’ can be sued, or dragged in front the General Medical Council, and struck of. Thus losing their job and income…
Where next?
The lamps are not just going out all over Europe. They are going out, all over the world.
About 40 state legislatures are now following Governor Ron DeSantis’ lead in Florida by moving to ban vaccine passports. But some states and cities are already implementing vaccine passports – and it looks like the puppet-masters running the Biden regime are going to try to force a federal vaccine passport on us very soon. They’ve got to keep their COVID quackery in place through 2022, so they can pull the same election shenanigans as they did last year.
brilliant! how russians crushed moscow’s dumb vaccine passports in just 3 weeks
What are we as free Americans to do about this? Well, we already have one good example of citizens defeating a tyrant mayor’s vaccine passports – in Russia, of all places.
You’ve probably heard of the Excelsior Pass, which is now mandatory in New York City thanks to Pothead Bill DeBlasio, the city’s mayor. Once a person is vaccinated, they can have their HIPAA rights and their constitutionally protected right to travel preserved by getting a QR code on their phone. If you don’t have a QR code, Pothead Bill won’t let you go to a restaurant or do lots of other stuff.
The Mayor of Moscow Russia, a guy named Sergei Sobyanin, thought that Pothead Bill’s commie QR code idea was just ducky. So, Sobyanin made vaccination QR code passports mandatory on the 1st of July this year. Mayor Sobyanin apparently doesn’t smoke as much pot as Pothead Bill, so his vaccine passport plan was actually less restrictive than Pothead Bill’s.
For example, if you’ve already had coronavirus, you are immune to it. You have better immunity than any vaccine can provide. So, Moscow citizens who have had coronavirus and recovered can get a QR code just like a vaccinated person can.
Just like in New York City, it suddenly became illegal for dirty unvaccinated second-class citizens to go certain places. Moscow residents were no longer allowed to eat at restaurants, get their hair cut, go to a movie theater, stay in a hotel, work out at a gym, have a beer at the tavern after work, or get their fingernails done at a nail salon. If they didn’t have a QR code, they were banned from participating in many aspects of the city’s economy.
Here’s how they crushed Mayor Sobyanin’s vaccine passport – and it was pretty simple. Moscow residents simply stopped frequenting any business that required a vaccine passport.
The really beautiful thing about this was that the vaccinated people stood in solidarity with the unvaccinated. Business trickled to near zero at all establishments where the vaccine passport was required.
Moscow residents let their hair grow out, skipped going to bars and restaurants, didn’t go to the movies, didn’t stay in hotels or do anything else that required a vaccine passport.
Business owners from all over the city were suddenly calling Mayor Sobyanin’s office to chew his ear off about the vaccine passports. They were going broke, and they were mad as hell about it.
Marina Zemskova, the head of a regional hotel and restaurant association in Russia, said the vaccine passport turned out to be worse for business than a full lockdown. At least if there was another lockdown, she notes, businesses “could count on some kind of government support measures.”
There’s no government support coming under a vaccine passport system. What the not-very-elite elites failed to anticipate about Moscow residents was they would simply not participate in the scam at all.
The business owners were so infuriated with the mayor that Sobyanin made a sudden, surprise announcement on July 19th that nobody needs to use a vaccine passport anymore. He made up a hilarious excuse, claiming that COVID case rates were all better suddenly, as the reason for lifting the QR code passports.
But everyone knew the truth. Moscow residents decided that their medical privacy and their right to travel is more important than whatever the people in charge were telling them.
It was a massive case of civil disobedience – and they didn’t even have to go outside and set things on fire in a big protest. All they did was say, “Any business that wants to see a vaccine passport from me is not getting any of my money.”
That’s how you do it, Americans! Vaccine passports are the new Jim Crow, and we don’t have to take it. Want to beat the CoronaTyrants at their own game? Just do like the Russians did. Refuse to participate in the Fauci/Biden mandates.
This is an anonymously posted document by someone who calls themselves Spartacus. Because it’s anonymous, I can’t contact them to ask for permission to publish. So I hesitated for a while, but it’s simply the best document I’ve seen on Covid, vaccines, etc. Whoever Spartacus is, they have a very elaborate knowledge in “the field”. If you want to know a lot more about the no. 1 issue in the world today, read it. And don’t worry if you don’t understand every single word, neither do I. But I learned a lot.
The original PDF doc is here: Covid19 – The Spartacus Letter
Hello,
My name is Spartacus, and I’ve had enough.
We have been forced to watch America and the Free World spin into inexorable decline due to a biowarfare attack. We, along with countless others, have been victimized and gaslit by propaganda and psychological warfare operations being conducted by an unelected, unaccountable Elite against the American people and our allies.
Our mental and physical health have suffered immensely over the course of the past year and a half. We have felt the sting of isolation, lockdown, masking, quarantines, and other completely nonsensical acts of healthcare theater that have done absolutely nothing to protect the health or wellbeing of the public from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
Now, we are watching the medical establishment inject literal poison into millions of our fellow Americans without so much as a fight.
We have been told that we will be fired and denied our livelihoods if we refuse to vaccinate. This was the last straw.
We have spent thousands of hours analyzing leaked footage from Wuhan, scientific papers from primary sources, as well as the paper trails left by the medical establishment.
What we have discovered would shock anyone to their core.
First, we will summarize our findings, and then, we will explain them in detail. References will be placed at the end.
Summary:
COVID-19 is a blood and blood vessel disease. SARS-CoV-2 infects the lining of human blood vessels, causing them to leak into the lungs.
Current treatment protocols (e.g. invasive ventilation) are actively harmful to patients, accelerating oxidative stress and causing severe VILI (ventilator-induced lung injuries). The continued use of ventilators in the absence of any proven medical benefit constitutes mass murder.
Existing countermeasures are inadequate to slow the spread of what is an aerosolized and potentially wastewater-borne virus, and constitute a form of medical theater.
Various non-vaccine interventions have been suppressed by both the media and the medical establishment in favor of vaccines and expensive patented drugs.
The authorities have denied the usefulness of natural immunity against COVID-19, despite the fact that natural immunity confers protection against all of the virus’s proteins, and not just one.
Vaccines will do more harm than good. The antigen that these vaccines are based on, SARS-CoV- 2 Spike, is a toxic protein. SARS-CoV-2 may have ADE, or antibody-dependent enhancement; current antibodies may not neutralize future strains, but instead help them infect immune cells. Also, vaccinating during a pandemic with a leaky vaccine removes the evolutionary pressure for a virus to become less lethal.
There is a vast and appalling criminal conspiracy that directly links both Anthony Fauci and Moderna to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
COVID-19 vaccine researchers are directly linked to scientists involved in brain-computer interface (“neural lace”) tech, one of whom was indicted for taking grant money from China.
Independent researchers have discovered mysterious nanoparticles inside the vaccines that are not supposed to be present.
The entire pandemic is being used as an excuse for a vast political and economic transformation of Western society that will enrich the already rich and turn the rest of us into serfs and untouchables.
COVID-19 Pathophysiology and Treatments:
COVID-19 is not a viral pneumonia. It is a viral vascular endotheliitis and attacks the lining of blood vessels, particularly the small pulmonary alveolar capillaries, leading to endothelial cell activation and sloughing, coagulopathy, sepsis, pulmonary edema, and ARDS-like symptoms. This is a disease of the blood and blood vessels. The circulatory system. Any pneumonia that it causes is secondary to that.
In severe cases, this leads to sepsis, blood clots, and multiple organ failure, including hypoxic and inflammatory damage to various vital organs, such as the brain, heart, liver, pancreas, kidneys, and intestines.
Some of the most common laboratory findings in COVID-19 are elevated D-dimer, elevated prothrombin time, elevated C-reactive protein, neutrophilia, lymphopenia, hypocalcemia, and hyperferritinemia, essentially matching a profile of coagulopathy and immune system hyperactivation/immune cell exhaustion.
COVID-19 can present as almost anything, due to the wide tropism of SARS-CoV-2 for various tissues in the body’s vital organs. While its most common initial presentation is respiratory illness and flu-like symptoms, it can present as brain inflammation, gastrointestinal disease, or even heart attack or pulmonary embolism.
COVID-19 is more severe in those with specific comorbidities, such as obesity, diabetes, and hypertension. This is because these conditions involve endothelial dysfunction, which renders the circulatory system more susceptible to infection and injury by this particular virus.
The vast majority of COVID-19 cases are mild and do not cause significant disease. In known cases, there is something known as the 80/20 rule, where 80% of cases are mild and 20% are severe or critical. However, this ratio is only correct for known cases, not all infections. The number of actual infections is much, much higher. Consequently, the mortality and morbidity rate is lower. However, COVID-19 spreads very quickly, meaning that there are a significant number of severely-ill and critically-ill patients appearing in a short time frame.
In those who have critical COVID-19-induced sepsis, hypoxia, coagulopathy, and ARDS, the most common treatments are intubation, injected corticosteroids, and blood thinners. This is not the correct treatment for COVID-19. In severe hypoxia, cellular metabolic shifts cause ATP to break down into hypoxanthine, which, upon the reintroduction of oxygen, causes xanthine oxidase to produce tons of highly damaging radicals that attack tissue. This is called ischemia-reperfusion injury, and it’s why the majority of people who go on a ventilator are dying. In the mitochondria, succinate buildup due to sepsis does the same exact thing; when oxygen is reintroduced, it makes superoxide radicals. Make no mistake, intubation will kill people who have COVID-19.
The end-stage of COVID-19 is severe lipid peroxidation, where fats in the body start to “rust” due to damage by oxidative stress. This drives autoimmunity. Oxidized lipids appear as foreign objects to the immune system, which recognizes and forms antibodies against OSEs, or oxidation-specific epitopes. Also, oxidized lipids feed directly into pattern recognition receptors, triggering even more inflammation and summoning even more cells of the innate immune system that release even more destructive enzymes. This is similar to the pathophysiology of Lupus.
COVID-19’s pathology is dominated by extreme oxidative stress and neutrophil respiratory burst, to the point where hemoglobin becomes incapable of carrying oxygen due to heme iron being stripped out of heme by hypochlorous acid. No amount of supplemental oxygen can oxygenate blood that chemically refuses to bind O2.
The breakdown of the pathology is as follows:
SARS-CoV-2 Spike binds to ACE2. Angiotensin Converting Enzyme 2 is an enzyme that is part of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, or RAAS. The RAAS is a hormone control system that moderates fluid volume in the body and in the bloodstream (i.e. osmolarity) by controlling salt retention and excretion. This protein, ACE2, is ubiquitous in every part of the body that interfaces with the circulatory system, particularly in vascular endothelial cells and pericytes, brain astrocytes, renal tubules and podocytes, pancreatic islet cells, bile duct and intestinal epithelial cells, and the seminiferous ducts of the testis, all of which SARS-CoV-2 can infect, not just the lungs.
SARS-CoV-2 infects a cell as follows: SARS-CoV-2 Spike undergoes a conformational change where the S1 trimers flip up and extend, locking onto ACE2 bound to the surface of a cell. TMPRSS2, or transmembrane protease serine 2, comes along and cuts off the heads of the Spike, exposing the S2 stalk-shaped subunit inside. The remainder of the Spike undergoes a conformational change that causes it to unfold like an extension ladder, embedding itself in the cell membrane. Then, it folds back upon itself, pulling the viral membrane and the cell membrane together. The two membranes fuse, with the virus’s proteins migrating out onto the surface of the cell. The SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid enters the cell, disgorging its genetic material and beginning the viral replication process, hijacking the cell’s own structures to produce more virus.
SARS-CoV-2 Spike proteins embedded in a cell can actually cause human cells to fuse together, forming syncytia/MGCs (multinuclear giant cells). They also have other pathogenic, harmful effects. SARS-CoV- 2’s viroporins, such as its Envelope protein, act as calcium ion channels, introducing calcium into infected cells. The virus suppresses the natural interferon response, resulting in delayed inflammation. SARS-CoV-2 N protein can also directly activate the NLRP3 inflammasome. Also, it suppresses the Nrf2 antioxidant pathway. The suppression of ACE2 by binding with Spike causes a buildup of bradykinin that would otherwise be broken down by ACE2.
This constant calcium influx into the cells results in (or is accompanied by) noticeable hypocalcemia, or low blood calcium, especially in people with Vitamin D deficiencies and pre-existing endothelial dysfunction. Bradykinin upregulates cAMP, cGMP, COX, and Phospholipase C activity. This results in prostaglandin release and vastly increased intracellular calcium signaling, which promotes highly aggressive ROS release and ATP depletion. NADPH oxidase releases superoxide into the extracellular space. Superoxide radicals react with nitric oxide to form peroxynitrite. Peroxynitrite reacts with the tetrahydrobiopterin cofactor needed by endothelial nitric oxide synthase, destroying it and “uncoupling” the enzymes, causing nitric oxide synthase to synthesize more superoxide instead. This proceeds in a positive feedback loop until nitric oxide bioavailability in the circulatory system is depleted.
Dissolved nitric oxide gas produced constantly by eNOS serves many important functions, but it is also antiviral against SARS-like coronaviruses, preventing the palmitoylation of the viral Spike protein and making it harder for it to bind to host receptors. The loss of NO allows the virus to begin replicating with impunity in the body. Those with endothelial dysfunction (i.e. hypertension, diabetes, obesity, old age, African-American race) have redox equilibrium issues to begin with, giving the virus an advantage.
Due to the extreme cytokine release triggered by these processes, the body summons a great deal of neutrophils and monocyte-derived alveolar macrophages to the lungs. Cells of the innate immune system are the first-line defenders against pathogens. They work by engulfing invaders and trying to attack them with enzymes that produce powerful oxidants, like SOD and MPO. Superoxide dismutase takes superoxide and makes hydrogen peroxide, and myeloperoxidase takes hydrogen peroxide and chlorine ions and makes hypochlorous acid, which is many, many times more reactive than sodium hypochlorite bleach.
Neutrophils have a nasty trick. They can also eject these enzymes into the extracellular space, where they will continuously spit out peroxide and bleach into the bloodstream. This is called neutrophil extracellular trap formation, or, when it becomes pathogenic and counterproductive, NETosis. In severe and critical COVID-19, there is actually rather severe NETosis.
Hypochlorous acid building up in the bloodstream begins to bleach the iron out of heme and compete for O2 binding sites. Red blood cells lose the ability to transport oxygen, causing the sufferer to turn blue in the face. Unliganded iron, hydrogen peroxide, and superoxide in the bloodstream undergo the Haber- Weiss and Fenton reactions, producing extremely reactive hydroxyl radicals that violently strip electrons from surrounding fats and DNA, oxidizing them severely.
This condition is not unknown to medical science. The actual name for all of this is acute sepsis.
We know this is happening in COVID-19 because people who have died of the disease have noticeable ferroptosis signatures in their tissues, as well as various other oxidative stress markers such as nitrotyrosine, 4-HNE, and malondialdehyde.
When you intubate someone with this condition, you are setting off a free radical bomb by supplying the cells with O2. It’s a catch-22, because we need oxygen to make Adenosine Triphosphate (that is, to live), but O2 is also the precursor of all these damaging radicals that lead to lipid peroxidation.
The correct treatment for severe COVID-19 related sepsis is non-invasive ventilation, steroids, and antioxidant infusions. Most of the drugs repurposed for COVID-19 that show any benefit whatsoever in rescuing critically-ill COVID-19 patients are antioxidants. N-acetylcysteine, melatonin, fluvoxamine, budesonide, famotidine, cimetidine, and ranitidine are all antioxidants. Indomethacin prevents iron- driven oxidation of arachidonic acid to isoprostanes. There are powerful antioxidants such as apocynin that have not even been tested on COVID-19 patients yet which could defang neutrophils, prevent lipid peroxidation, restore endothelial health, and restore oxygenation to the tissues.
Scientists who know anything about pulmonary neutrophilia, ARDS, and redox biology have known or surmised much of this since March 2020. In April 2020, Swiss scientists confirmed that COVID-19 was a vascular endotheliitis. By late 2020, experts had already concluded that COVID-19 causes a form of viral sepsis. They also know that sepsis can be effectively treated with antioxidants. None of this information is particularly new, and yet, for the most part, it has not been acted upon. Doctors continue to use damaging intubation techniques with high PEEP settings despite high lung compliance and poor oxygenation, killing an untold number of critically ill patients with medical malpractice.
Because of the way they are constructed, Randomized Control Trials will never show any benefit for any antiviral against COVID-19. Not Remdesivir, not Kaletra, not HCQ, and not Ivermectin. The reason for this is simple; for the patients that they have recruited for these studies, such as Oxford’s ludicrous RECOVERY study, the intervention is too late to have any positive effect.
The clinical course of COVID-19 is such that by the time most people seek medical attention for hypoxia, their viral load has already tapered off to almost nothing. If someone is about 10 days post-exposure and has already been symptomatic for five days, there is hardly any virus left in their bodies, only cellular damage and derangement that has initiated a hyperinflammatory response. It is from this group that the clinical trials for antivirals have recruited, pretty much exclusively.
In these trials, they give antivirals to severely ill patients who have no virus in their bodies, only a delayed hyperinflammatory response, and then absurdly claim that antivirals have no utility in treating or preventing COVID-19. These clinical trials do not recruit people who are pre-symptomatic. They do not test pre-exposure or post-exposure prophylaxis.
This is like using a defibrillator to shock only flatline, and then absurdly claiming that defibrillators have no medical utility whatsoever when the patients refuse to rise from the dead. The intervention is too late. These trials for antivirals show systematic, egregious selection bias. They are providing a treatment that is futile to the specific cohort they are enrolling.
India went against the instructions of the WHO and mandated the prophylactic usage of Ivermectin. They have almost completely eradicated COVID-19. The Indian Bar Association of Mumbai has brought criminal charges against WHO Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan for recommending against the use of Ivermectin.
Ivermectin is not “horse dewormer”. Yes, it is sold in veterinary paste form as a dewormer for animals. It has also been available in pill form for humans for decades, as an antiparasitic drug.
The media have disingenuously claimed that because Ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug, it has no utility as an antivirus. This is incorrect. Ivermectin has utility as an antiviral. It blocks importin, preventing nuclear import, effectively inhibiting viral access to cell nuclei. Many drugs currently on the market have multiple modes of action. Ivermectin is one such drug. It is both antiparasitic and antiviral.
In Bangladesh, Ivermectin costs $1.80 for an entire 5-day course. Remdesivir, which is toxic to the liver, costs $3,120 for a 5-day course of the drug. Billions of dollars of utterly useless Remdesivir were sold to our governments on the taxpayer’s dime, and it ended up being totally useless for treating hyperinflammatory COVID-19. The media has hardly even covered this at all.
The opposition to the use of generic Ivermectin is not based in science. It is purely financially and politically-motivated. An effective non-vaccine intervention would jeopardize the rushed FDA approval of patented vaccines and medicines for which the pharmaceutical industry stands to rake in billions upon billions of dollars in sales on an ongoing basis.
The majority of the public are scientifically illiterate and cannot grasp what any of this even means, thanks to a pathetic educational system that has miseducated them. You would be lucky to find 1 in 100 people who have even the faintest clue what any of this actually means.
COVID-19 Transmission:
COVID-19 is airborne. The WHO carried water for China by claiming that the virus was only droplet- borne. Our own CDC absurdly claimed that it was mostly transmitted by fomite-to-face contact, which, given its rapid spread from Wuhan to the rest of the world, would have been physically impossible.
The ridiculous belief in fomite-to-face being a primary mode of transmission led to the use of surface disinfection protocols that wasted time, energy, productivity, and disinfectant.
The 6-foot guidelines are absolutely useless. The minimum safe distance to protect oneself from an aerosolized virus is to be 15+ feet away from an infected person, no closer. Realistically, no public transit is safe.
Surgical masks do not protect you from aerosols. The virus is too small and the filter media has too large of gaps to filter it out. They may catch respiratory droplets and keep the virus from being expelled by someone who is sick, but they do not filter a cloud of infectious aerosols if someone were to walk into said cloud.
The minimum level of protection against this virus is quite literally a P100 respirator, a PAPR/CAPR, or a 40mm NATO CBRN respirator, ideally paired with a full-body tyvek or tychem suit, gloves, and booties, with all the holes and gaps taped.
Live SARS-CoV-2 may potentially be detected in sewage outflows, and there may be oral-fecal transmission. During the SARS outbreak in 2003, in the Amoy Gardens incident, hundreds of people were infected by aerosolized fecal matter rising from floor drains in their apartments.
COVID-19 Vaccine Dangers:
The vaccines for COVID-19 are not sterilizing and do not prevent infection or transmission. They are “leaky” vaccines. This means they remove the evolutionary pressure on the virus to become less lethal. It also means that the vaccinated are perfect carriers. In other words, those who are vaccinated are a threat to the unvaccinated, not the other way around.
All of the COVID-19 vaccines currently in use have undergone minimal testing, with highly accelerated clinical trials. Though they appear to limit severe illness, the long-term safety profile of these vaccines remains unknown.
Some of these so-called “vaccines” utilize an untested new technology that has never been used in vaccines before. Traditional vaccines use weakened or killed virus to stimulate an immune response. The Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines do not. They are purported to consist of an intramuscular shot containing a suspension of lipid nanoparticles filled with messenger RNA. The way they generate an immune response is by fusing with cells in a vaccine recipient’s shoulder, undergoing endocytosis, releasing their mRNA cargo into those cells, and then utilizing the ribosomes in those cells to synthesize modified SARS-CoV-2 Spike proteins in-situ.
These modified Spike proteins then migrate to the surface of the cell, where they are anchored in place by a transmembrane domain. The adaptive immune system detects the non-human viral protein being expressed by these cells, and then forms antibodies against that protein. This is purported to confer protection against the virus, by training the adaptive immune system to recognize and produce antibodies against the Spike on the actual virus. The J&J and AstraZeneca vaccines do something similar, but use an adenovirus vector for genetic material delivery instead of a lipid nanoparticle. These vaccines were produced or validated with the aid of fetal cell lines HEK-293 and PER.C6, which people with certain religious convictions may object strongly to.
SARS-CoV-2 Spike is a highly pathogenic protein on its own. It is impossible to overstate the danger presented by introducing this protein into the human body.
It is claimed by vaccine manufacturers that the vaccine remains in cells in the shoulder, and that SARS- CoV-2 Spike produced and expressed by these cells from the vaccine’s genetic material is harmless and inert, thanks to the insertion of prolines in the Spike sequence to stabilize it in the prefusion conformation, preventing the Spike from becoming active and fusing with other cells. However, a pharmacokinetic study from Japan showed that the lipid nanoparticles and mRNA from the Pfizer vaccine did not stay in the shoulder, and in fact bioaccumulated in many different organs, including the reproductive organs and adrenal glands, meaning that modified Spike is being expressed quite literally all over the place. These lipid nanoparticles may trigger anaphylaxis in an unlucky few, but far more concerning is the unregulated expression of Spike in various somatic cell lines far from the injection site and the unknown consequences of that.
Messenger RNA is normally consumed right after it is produced in the body, being translated into a protein by a ribosome. COVID-19 vaccine mRNA is produced outside the body, long before a ribosome translates it. In the meantime, it could accumulate damage if inadequately preserved. When a ribosome attempts to translate a damaged strand of mRNA, it can become stalled. When this happens, the ribosome becomes useless for translating proteins because it now has a piece of mRNA stuck in it, like a lace card in an old punch card reader. The whole thing has to be cleaned up and new ribosomes synthesized to replace it. In cells with low ribosome turnover, like nerve cells, this can lead to reduced protein synthesis, cytopathic effects, and neuropathies.
Certain proteins, including SARS-CoV-2 Spike, have proteolytic cleavage sites that are basically like little dotted lines that say “cut here”, which attract a living organism’s own proteases (essentially, molecular scissors) to cut them. There is a possibility that S1 may be proteolytically cleaved from S2, causing active S1 to float away into the bloodstream while leaving the S2 “stalk” embedded in the membrane of the cell that expressed the protein.
SARS-CoV-2 Spike has a Superantigenic region (SAg), which may promote extreme inflammation.
Anti-Spike antibodies were found in one study to function as autoantibodies and attack the body’s own cells. Those who have been immunized with COVID-19 vaccines have developed blood clots, myocarditis, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, Bell’s Palsy, and multiple sclerosis flares, indicating that the vaccine promotes autoimmune reactions against healthy tissue.
SARS-CoV-2 Spike does not only bind to ACE2. It was suspected to have regions that bind to basigin, integrins, neuropilin-1, and bacterial lipopolysaccharides as well. SARS-CoV-2 Spike, on its own, can potentially bind any of these things and act as a ligand for them, triggering unspecified and likely highly inflammatory cellular activity.
SARS-CoV-2 Spike contains an unusual PRRA insert that forms a furin cleavage site. Furin is a ubiquitous human protease, making this an ideal property for the Spike to have, giving it a high degree of cell tropism. No wild-type SARS-like coronaviruses related to SARS-CoV-2 possess this feature, making it highly suspicious, and perhaps a sign of human tampering.
SARS-CoV-2 Spike has a prion-like domain that enhances its infectiousness.
The Spike S1 RBD may bind to heparin-binding proteins and promote amyloid aggregation. In humans, this could lead to Parkinson’s, Lewy Body Dementia, premature Alzheimer’s, or various other neurodegenerative diseases. This is very concerning because SARS-CoV-2 S1 is capable of injuring and penetrating the blood-brain barrier and entering the brain. It is also capable of increasing the permeability of the blood-brain barrier to other molecules.
SARS-CoV-2, like other betacoronaviruses, may have Dengue-like ADE, or antibody-dependent enhancement of disease. For those who aren’t aware, some viruses, including betacoronaviruses, have a feature called ADE. There is also something called Original Antigenic Sin, which is the observation that the body prefers to produce antibodies based on previously-encountered strains of a virus over newly- encountered ones.
In ADE, antibodies from a previous infection become non-neutralizing due to mutations in the virus’s proteins. These non-neutralizing antibodies then act as trojan horses, allowing live, active virus to be pulled into macrophages through their Fc receptor pathways, allowing the virus to infect immune cells that it would not have been able to infect before. This has been known to happen with Dengue Fever; when someone gets sick with Dengue, recovers, and then contracts a different strain, they can get very, very ill.
If someone is vaccinated with mRNA based on the Spike from the initial Wuhan strain of SARS-CoV-2, and then they become infected with a future, mutated strain of the virus, they may become severely ill. In other words, it is possible for vaccines to sensitize someone to disease.
There is a precedent for this in recent history. Sanofi’s Dengvaxia vaccine for Dengue failed because it caused immune sensitization in people whose immune systems were Dengue-naive.
In mice immunized against SARS-CoV and challenged with the virus, a close relative of SARS-CoV-2, they developed immune sensitization, Th2 immunopathology, and eosinophil infiltration in their lungs.
We have been told that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines cannot be integrated into the human genome, because messenger RNA cannot be turned back into DNA. This is false. There are elements in human cells called LINE-1 retrotransposons, which can indeed integrate mRNA into a human genome by endogenous reverse transcription. Because the mRNA used in the vaccines is stabilized, it hangs around in cells longer, increasing the chances for this to happen. If the gene for SARS-CoV-2 Spike is integrated into a portion of the genome that is not silent and actually expresses a protein, it is possible that people who take this vaccine may continuously express SARS-CoV-2 Spike from their somatic cells for the rest of their lives.
By inoculating people with a vaccine that causes their bodies to produce Spike in-situ, they are being inoculated with a pathogenic protein. A toxin that may cause long-term inflammation, heart problems, and a raised risk of cancers. In the long-term, it may also potentially lead to premature neurodegenerative disease.
Absolutely nobody should be compelled to take this vaccine under any circumstances, and in actual fact, the vaccination campaign must be stopped immediately.
COVID-19 Criminal Conspiracy:
The vaccine and the virus were made by the same people.
In 2014, there was a moratorium on SARS gain-of-function research that lasted until 2017. This research was not halted. Instead, it was outsourced, with the federal grants being laundered through NGOs.
Ralph Baric is a virologist and SARS expert at UNC Chapel Hill in North Carolina. This is who Anthony Fauci was referring to when he insisted, before Congress, that if any gain-of-function research was being conducted, it was being conducted in North Carolina.
This was a lie. Anthony Fauci lied before Congress. A felony.
Ralph Baric and Shi Zhengli are colleagues and have co-written papers together. Ralph Baric mentored Shi Zhengli in his gain-of-function manipulation techniques, particularly serial passage, which results in a virus that appears as if it originated naturally. In other words, deniable bioweapons. Serial passage in humanized hACE2 mice may have produced something like SARS-CoV-2.
The funding for the gain-of-function research being conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology came from Peter Daszak. Peter Daszak runs an NGO called EcoHealth Alliance. EcoHealth Alliance received millions of dollars in grant money from the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (that is, Anthony Fauci), the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (part of the US Department of Defense), and the United States Agency for International Development. NIH/NIAID contributed a few million dollars, and DTRA and USAID each contributed tens of millions of dollars towards this research. Altogether, it was over a hundred million dollars.
EcoHealth Alliance subcontracted these grants to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a lab in China with a very questionable safety record and poorly trained staff, so that they could conduct gain-of-function research, not in their fancy P4 lab, but in a level-2 lab where technicians wore nothing more sophisticated than perhaps a hairnet, latex gloves, and a surgical mask, instead of the bubble suits used when working with dangerous viruses. Chinese scientists in Wuhan reported being routinely bitten and urinated on by laboratory animals. Why anyone would outsource this dangerous and delicate work to the People’s Republic of China, a country infamous for industrial accidents and massive explosions that have claimed hundreds of lives, is completely beyond me, unless the aim was to start a pandemic on purpose.
In November of 2019, three technicians at the Wuhan Institute of Virology developed symptoms consistent with a flu-like illness. Anthony Fauci, Peter Daszak, and Ralph Baric knew at once what had happened, because back channels exist between this laboratory and our scientists and officials.
December 12th, 2019, Ralph Baric signed a Material Transfer Agreement (essentially, an NDA) to receive Coronavirus mRNA vaccine-related materials co-owned by Moderna and NIH. It wasn’t until a whole month later, on January 11th, 2020, that China allegedly sent us the sequence to what would become known as SARS-CoV-2. Moderna claims, rather absurdly, that they developed a working vaccine from this sequence in under 48 hours.
Stephane Bancel, the current CEO of Moderna, was formerly the CEO of bioMerieux, a French multinational corporation specializing in medical diagnostic tech, founded by one Alain Merieux. Alain Merieux was one of the individuals who was instrumental in the construction of the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s P4 lab.
The sequence given as the closest relative to SARS-CoV-2, RaTG13, is not a real virus. It is a forgery. It was made by entering a gene sequence by hand into a database, to create a cover story for the existence of SARS-CoV-2, which is very likely a gain-of-function chimera produced at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and was either leaked by accident or intentionally released.
The animal reservoir of SARS-CoV-2 has never been found.
This is not a conspiracy “theory”. It is an actual criminal conspiracy, in which people connected to the development of Moderna’s mRNA-1273 are directly connected to the Wuhan Institute of Virology and their gain-of-function research by very few degrees of separation, if any. The paper trail is well- established.
The lab-leak theory has been suppressed because pulling that thread leads one to inevitably conclude that there is enough circumstantial evidence to link Moderna, the NIH, the WIV, and both the vaccine and the virus’s creation together. In a sane country, this would have immediately led to the world’s biggest RICO and mass murder case. Anthony Fauci, Peter Daszak, Ralph Baric, Shi Zhengli, and Stephane Bancel, and their accomplices, would have been indicted and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Instead, billions of our tax dollars were awarded to the perpetrators.
The FBI raided Allure Medical in Shelby Township north of Detroit for billing insurance for “fraudulent COVID-19 cures”. The treatment they were using? Intravenous Vitamin C. An antioxidant. Which, as described above, is an entirely valid treatment for COVID-19-induced sepsis, and indeed, is now part of the MATH+ protocol advanced by Dr. Paul E. Marik.
The FDA banned ranitidine (Zantac) due to supposed NDMA (N-nitrosodimethylamine) contamination. Ranitidine is not only an H2 blocker used as antacid, but also has a powerful antioxidant effect, scavenging hydroxyl radicals. This gives it utility in treating COVID-19.
The FDA also attempted to take N-acetylcysteine, a harmless amino acid supplement and antioxidant, off the shelves, compelling Amazon to remove it from their online storefront.
This leaves us with a chilling question: did the FDA knowingly suppress antioxidants useful for treating COVID-19 sepsis as part of a criminal conspiracy against the American public?
The establishment is cooperating with, and facilitating, the worst criminals in human history, and are actively suppressing non-vaccine treatments and therapies in order to compel us to inject these criminals’ products into our bodies. This is absolutely unacceptable.
COVID-19 Vaccine Development and Links to Transhumanism:
This section deals with some more speculative aspects of the pandemic and the medical and scientific establishment’s reaction to it, as well as the disturbing links between scientists involved in vaccine research and scientists whose work involved merging nanotechnology with living cells.
On June 9th, 2020, Charles Lieber, a Harvard nanotechnology researcher with decades of experience, was indicted by the DOJ for fraud. Charles Lieber received millions of dollars in grant money from the US Department of Defense, specifically the military think tanks DARPA, AFOSR, and ONR, as well as NIH and MITRE. His specialty is the use of silicon nanowires in lieu of patch clamp electrodes to monitor and modulate intracellular activity, something he has been working on at Harvard for the past twenty years. He was claimed to have been working on silicon nanowire batteries in China, but none of his colleagues can recall him ever having worked on battery technology in his life; all of his research deals with bionanotechnology, or the blending of nanotech with living cells.
The indictment was over his collaboration with the Wuhan University of Technology. He had double- dipped, against the terms of his DOD grants, and taken money from the PRC’s Thousand Talents plan, a program which the Chinese government uses to bribe Western scientists into sharing proprietary R&D information that can be exploited by the PLA for strategic advantage.
Charles Lieber’s own papers describe the use of silicon nanowires for brain-computer interfaces, or “neural lace” technology. His papers describe how neurons can endocytose whole silicon nanowires or parts of them, monitoring and even modulating neuronal activity.
Charles Lieber was a colleague of Robert Langer. Together, along with Daniel S. Kohane, they worked on a paper describing artificial tissue scaffolds that could be implanted in a human heart to monitor its activity remotely.
Robert Langer, an MIT alumnus and expert in nanotech drug delivery, is one of the co-founders of Moderna. His net worth is now $5.1 billion USD thanks to Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine sales.
Both Charles Lieber and Robert Langer’s bibliographies describe, essentially, techniques for human enhancement, i.e. transhumanism. Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum and the architect behind the so-called “Great Reset”, has long spoken of the “blending of biology and machinery” in his books.
Since these revelations, it has come to the attention of independent researchers that the COVID-19 vaccines may contain reduced graphene oxide nanoparticles. Japanese researchers have also found unexplained contaminants in COVID-19 vaccines.
Graphene oxide is an anxiolytic. It has been shown to reduce the anxiety of laboratory mice when injected into their brains. Indeed, given SARS-CoV-2 Spike’s propensity to compromise the blood-brain barrier and increase its permeability, it is the perfect protein for preparing brain tissue for extravasation of nanoparticles from the bloodstream and into the brain. Graphene is also highly conductive and, in some circumstances, paramagnetic.
In 2013, under the Obama administration, DARPA launched the BRAIN Initiative; BRAIN is an acronym for Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies®. This program involves the development of brain-computer interface technologies for the military, particularly non-invasive, injectable systems that cause minimal damage to brain tissue when removed. Supposedly, this technology would be used for healing wounded soldiers with traumatic brain injuries, the direct brain control of prosthetic limbs, and even new abilities such as controlling drones with one’s mind.
Various methods have been proposed for achieving this, including optogenetics, magnetogenetics, ultrasound, implanted electrodes, and transcranial electromagnetic stimulation. In all instances, the goal is to obtain read or read-write capability over neurons, either by stimulating and probing them, or by rendering them especially sensitive to stimulation and probing.
However, the notion of the widespread use of BCI technology, such as Elon Musk’s Neuralink device, raises many concerns over privacy and personal autonomy. Reading from neurons is problematic enough on its own. Wireless brain-computer interfaces may interact with current or future wireless GSM infrastructure, creating neurological data security concerns. A hacker or other malicious actor may compromise such networks to obtain people’s brain data, and then exploit it for nefarious purposes.
However, a device capable of writing to human neurons, not just reading from them, presents another, even more serious set of ethical concerns. A BCI that is capable of altering the contents of one’s mind for innocuous purposes, such as projecting a heads-up display onto their brain’s visual center or sending audio into one’s auditory cortex, would also theoretically be capable of altering mood and personality, or perhaps even subjugating someone’s very will, rendering them utterly obedient to authority. This technology would be a tyrant’s wet dream. Imagine soldiers who would shoot their own countrymen without hesitation, or helpless serfs who are satisfied to live in literal dog kennels.
BCIs could be used to unscrupulously alter perceptions of basic things such as emotions and values, changing people’s thresholds of satiety, happiness, anger, disgust, and so forth. This is not inconsequential. Someone’s entire regime of behaviors could be altered by a BCI, including such things as suppressing their appetite or desire for virtually anything on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.
Anything is possible when you have direct access to someone’s brain and its contents. Someone who is obese could be made to feel disgust at the sight of food. Someone who is involuntarily celibate could have their libido disabled so they don’t even desire sex to begin with. Someone who is racist could be forced to feel delight over cohabiting with people of other races. Someone who is violent could be forced to be meek and submissive. These things might sound good to you if you are a tyrant, but to normal people, the idea of personal autonomy being overridden to such a degree is appalling.
For the wealthy, neural laces would be an unequaled boon, giving them the opportunity to enhance their intelligence with neuroprosthetics (i.e. an “exocortex”), and to deliver irresistible commands directly into the minds of their BCI-augmented servants, even physically or sexually abusive commands that they would normally refuse.
If the vaccine is a method to surreptitiously introduce an injectable BCI into millions of people without their knowledge or consent, then what we are witnessing is the rise of a tyrannical regime unlike anything ever seen before on the face of this planet, one that fully intends to strip every man, woman, and child of our free will.
Our flaws are what make us human. A utopia arrived at by removing people’s free will is not a utopia at all. It is a monomaniacal nightmare. Furthermore, the people who rule over us are Dark Triad types who cannot be trusted with such power. Imagine being beaten and sexually assaulted by a wealthy and powerful psychopath and being forced to smile and laugh over it because your neural lace gives you no choice but to obey your master.
The Elites are forging ahead with this technology without giving people any room to question the social or ethical ramifications, or to establish regulatory frameworks that ensure that our personal agency and autonomy will not be overridden by these devices. They do this because they secretly dream of a future where they can treat you worse than an animal and you cannot even fight back. If this evil plan is allowed to continue, it will spell the end of humanity as we know it.
Conclusions:
The current pandemic was produced and perpetuated by the establishment, through the use of a virus engineered in a PLA-connected Chinese biowarfare laboratory, with the aid of American taxpayer dollars and French expertise.
This research was conducted under the absolutely ridiculous euphemism of “gain-of-function” research, which is supposedly carried out in order to determine which viruses have the highest potential for zoonotic spillover and preemptively vaccinate or guard against them.
Gain-of-function/gain-of-threat research, a.k.a. “Dual-Use Research of Concern”, or DURC, is bioweapon research by another, friendlier-sounding name, simply to avoid the taboo of calling it what it actually is. It has always been bioweapon research. The people who are conducting this research fully understand that they are taking wild pathogens that are not infectious in humans and making them more infectious, often taking grants from military think tanks encouraging them to do so.
These virologists conducting this type of research are enemies of their fellow man, like pyromaniac firefighters. GOF research has never protected anyone from any pandemic. In fact, it has now started one, meaning its utility for preventing pandemics is actually negative. It should have been banned globally, and the lunatics performing it should have been put in straitjackets long ago.
Either through a leak or an intentional release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a deadly SARS strain is now endemic across the globe, after the WHO and CDC and public officials first downplayed the risks, and then intentionally incited a panic and lockdowns that jeopardized people’s health and their livelihoods.
This was then used by the utterly depraved and psychopathic aristocratic class who rule over us as an excuse to coerce people into accepting an injected poison which may be a depopulation agent, a mind control/pacification agent in the form of injectable “smart dust”, or both in one. They believe they can get away with this by weaponizing the social stigma of vaccine refusal. They are incorrect.
Their motives are clear and obvious to anyone who has been paying attention. These megalomaniacs have raided the pension funds of the free world. Wall Street is insolvent and has had an ongoing liquidity crisis since the end of 2019. The aim now is to exert total, full-spectrum physical, mental, and financial control over humanity before we realize just how badly we’ve been extorted by these maniacs.
The pandemic and its response served multiple purposes for the Elite:
Concealing a depression brought on by the usurious plunder of our economies conducted by rentier-capitalists and absentee owners who produce absolutely nothing of any value to society whatsoever. Instead of us having a very predictable Occupy Wall Street Part II, the Elites and their stooges got to stand up on television and paint themselves as wise and all-powerful saviors instead of the marauding cabal of despicable land pirates that they are.
Destroying small businesses and eroding the middle class.
Transferring trillions of dollars of wealth from the American public and into the pockets of billionaires and special interests.
Engaging in insider trading, buying stock in biotech companies and shorting brick-and-mortar businesses and travel companies, with the aim of collapsing face-to-face commerce and tourism and replacing it with e-commerce and servitization.
Creating a casus belli for war with China, encouraging us to attack them, wasting American lives and treasure and driving us to the brink of nuclear armageddon.
Establishing technological and biosecurity frameworks for population control and technocratic- socialist “smart cities” where everyone’s movements are despotically tracked, all in anticipation of widespread automation, joblessness, and food shortages, by using the false guise of a vaccine to compel cooperation.
Any one of these things would constitute a vicious rape of Western society. Taken together, they beggar belief; they are a complete inversion of our most treasured values.
What is the purpose of all of this? One can only speculate as to the perpetrators’ motives, however, we have some theories.
The Elites are trying to pull up the ladder, erase upward mobility for large segments of the population, cull political opponents and other “undesirables”, and put the remainder of humanity on a tight leash, rationing our access to certain goods and services that they have deemed “high-impact”, such as automobile use, tourism, meat consumption, and so on. Naturally, they will continue to have their own luxuries, as part of a strict caste system akin to feudalism.
Why are they doing this? Simple. The Elites are Neo-Malthusians and believe that we are overpopulated and that resource depletion will collapse civilization in a matter of a few short decades. They are not necessarily incorrect in this belief. We are overpopulated, and we are consuming too many resources. However, orchestrating such a gruesome and murderous power grab in response to a looming crisis demonstrates that they have nothing but the utmost contempt for their fellow man.
To those who are participating in this disgusting farce without any understanding of what they are doing, we have one word for you. Stop. You are causing irreparable harm to your country and to your fellow citizens.
To those who may be reading this warning and have full knowledge and understanding of what they are doing and how it will unjustly harm millions of innocent people, we have a few more words.
Damn you to hell. You will not destroy America and the Free World, and you will not have your New World Order. We will make certain of that.
* * *
This PDF document contains 14 pages, followed by another 17 pages of references.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Thu Oct 07, 2021 10:04 pm Post subject:
Not long after epidemics of bacterial meningitis, measles and cholera broke out in Kano, Nigeria, Pfizer established a treatment center at the Infectious Disease Hospital in Kano to treat meningitis victims. According to the indictment Pfizer, instead of using safe and effective bacterial meningitis treatments, seized upon the epidemic as an opportunity to conduct biomedical research experiments on Nigerian children involving the company’s “new, untested and unproven” antibiotic, Trovan.
Nigerian government officials last week brought criminal charges against the Pfizer Pharmaceutical Company for the drug giant’s role in the deaths of children who were treated with an unapproved drug during a meningitis epidemic.
This is the first time the Nigerian government has taken action concerning the tragedy. Numerous attempts by the relatives of the victims have been shot down in US courts. But, more than a decade after this tragic incident, there is growing public awareness and outcry over the greedy, unethical and often criminal conduct of multi-national drug companies.
According to a recent Washington Post article, “authorities in Kano, the country’s largest state, filed eight charges related to the 1996 clinical trial, including counts of criminal conspiracy and voluntarily causing grievous harm. They also filed a civil lawsuit seeking more than $2 billion in damages and restitution from Pfizer, the world’s largest drug company.”
In addition to the multinational drug firm itself, the criminal indictment charges Pfizer’s Nigerian subsidiary and eight current or former executives and researchers. If convicted those named could face up to seven years in prison.
Aliyu Umar, the Kano attorney general who filed the charges, said that the prosecution had the backing of the Nigerian government, which provided him with a six-year-old report concluding that Pfizer’s conduct was in violation of both Nigerian and international law. The Nigerian government said that it never gave the corporation permission to dispense the untested drug.
“We realize we are the Third World and we need assistance,” Umar told the Post. “But we frown on people who think they can take advantage of us, especially if it’s for profit. That’s why we decided we needed to take action against Pfizer. Those people responsible should be punished, whether in Nigeria or in the United States, for what they did to our people.”
A description of the 1996 Nigerian event from the perspective of the plaintiffs who tried and failed several times over the years to bring civil charges against Pfizer is harrowing in its detail.
Not long after epidemics of bacterial meningitis, measles and cholera broke out in Kano, Nigeria, Pfizer established a treatment center at the Infectious Disease Hospital in Kano to treat meningitis victims. According to the indictment Pfizer, instead of using safe and effective bacterial meningitis treatments, seized upon the epidemic as an opportunity to conduct biomedical research experiments on Nigerian children involving the company’s “new, untested and unproven” antibiotic, Trovan.
Pfizer is charged with failing to explain to the children’s parents that the proposed treatment was experimental, that they could refuse it, or that other organizations offered more conventional treatments at the same site free of charge. In addition, plaintiffs assert that half of the children who participated in Pfizer’s treatment program were deliberately given inadequate doses of ceftriaxone—an FDA-approved drug shown to be effective in treating meningitis—so that Trovan would look more effective by comparison. Five of the children who received Trovan and six of the children who were “low-dosed” with ceftriaxone died and others treated by Pfizer suffered very serious injuries, including paralysis, deafness and blindness.
One of Pfizer’s own researchers, child disease specialist Dr. Juan Walterspiel, protested in a letter to the company warning that it was improper to test a drug that had “not been tested for its sensitivity before the first child was exposed to a live-or-die experiment.” He was fired by the company for speaking out and subsequently won a settlement in a wrongful dismissal lawsuit.
After the Pfizer test, suspicions ran so high in Kano about the potentially deadly practices of big drug companies that parents last year refused polio immunization for their children, fearing the worst. The program was meant to wipe out the disease in Nigeria, one of its last strongholds.
Pfizer’s response to the case was predictable. The company “continues to emphasize—in the strongest terms—that the 1996 Trovan clinical study was conducted with the full knowledge of the Nigerian government and in a responsible and ethical way consistent with the company’s abiding commitment to patient safety. Any allegations in these lawsuits to the contrary are simply untrue—they weren’t valid when they were first raised years ago and they’re not valid today.”
But it is indisputable that Pfizer was in Nigeria to test drugs. Their activities there were driven by the profit motive. If they saved lives, it was a side result. It would provide them with a touching human interest story to tell at their next leadership conference in order to enable their managers to continue to delude themselves that at heart they are really there to help heal the world—and make a profit! Doctors without Borders, on the other hand, was set up outside at the same pathetically impoverished clinic. It was not treating patients with a new, unproven drug and also dispensing a competitor’s drug (in less than adequate doses no less) in order to do comparisons. They were merely there to try to save lives.
An in-depth Washington Post investigative story in December 2000, inspired in part by the Nigerian tragedy, uncovered the vast use of unregulated corporate drug experiments in the oppressed countries of Africa and Latin America as well as in Eastern Europe. It revealed a “poorly regulated testing system that is dominated by private interests that far too often betrays its promises to patients and consumers.”
“Experiments involving risky drugs proceed with little independent oversight. Impoverished, poorly educated patients are sometimes tested without understanding that they are guinea pigs. And pledges of quality medical care sometimes prove fatally hollow,” the Post found.
“Drug makers hop borders with scant government review. Largely uninspected by the Food and Drug Administration—which has limited authority and few resources to police experiments overseas—US-based drug companies are paying doctors to test thousands of human subjects in the Third World and Eastern Europe.”
It was the 2000 Post article, spelling out the enormity of the problem of drug companies’ avaricious drive to test the potentially next best-selling drug, that led Aliyu Umar to initiate the legal prosecution in Nigeria. But it was the corruption of the Nigerian courts that led the children’s parents to pursue their case in the US in 1997. So it is far from certain that there will be any justice for these impoverished villagers this time around either.
The political power of the big pharmaceuticals in the US itself has served to protect their activities. When California’s Democratic Representative Tom Lantos, in response at least in part to the Nigerian case, introduced a bill called “Safe Overseas Human Testing Act,” which would have supposedly demanded that companies provide US authorities with details of planned overseas drug tests and get approval from an ethics committee for the research, the legislation found only one co-sponsor and quietly died in committee at the end of the 2006 congressional session.
Public awareness of—and outrage over—the practices of the big pharmaceutical corporations in the oppressed countries has grow in part as a result of the success of John le Carré’s novel and the 2006 film The Constant Gardener. The popular Cold War spy novelist’s fictional account of a young woman who is murdered when she uncovers crimes committed by a drug company testing a new tuberculosis vaccine in Kenya is based in large part on the Nigerian tragedy. In “Criminals of Capitalism,” an article he published just before the release of his novel, le Carré condemned “the conviction that, whatever profit-driven corporations do in the short term, they are ultimately motivated by ethical concerns, and their influence on the world is therefore beneficial, and so God help us all.”
Vaccine makers have nothing to lose by marketing their experimental COVID-19 shots.
Story at-a-glance:
A leaked document broken down by Twitter user Ehden reveals the shocking terms of Pfizer’s international COVID-19 vaccine agreements.
Countries that purchase Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot must acknowledge that “Pfizer’s efforts to develop and manufacture the product” are “subject to significant risks and uncertainties.”
In the event that a drug or other treatment comes out that can prevent, treat or cure COVID-19, the agreement stands, and the country must follow through with their vaccine order.
While COVID-19 vaccines are “free” to receive in the U.S., they’re being paid for by taxpayer dollars at a rate of $19.50 per dose — Albania, the leaked contract revealed, paid $12 per dose.
The purchaser of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine must also acknowledge two facts that have largely been brushed under the rug: both their efficacy and risks are unknown.
Purchasers must also “indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pfizer … from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses … arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the Vaccine.”
Vaccine makers have nothing to lose by marketing their experimental COVID-19 shots, even if they cause serious injury and death, as they enjoy full indemnity against injuries occurring from COVID-19 vaccines or any other pandemic vaccine under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, passed in the U.S. in 2005.
The full extent of their COVID-19 vaccine indemnification agreements with countries, however, is a closely guarded secret, one that has remained highly confidential — until now. A leaked document broken down by Twitter user Ehden reveals the shocking terms of Pfizer’s international COVID-19 vaccine agreements.
“These agreements are confidential, but luckily one country did not protect the contract document well enough, so I managed to get a hold of a copy,” he wrote. “As you are about to see, there is a good reason why Pfizer was fighting to hide the details of these contracts.”
An ironclad agreement, all on Pfizer’s terms
The alleged indemnification agreement, reportedly between Pfizer and Albania, was originally posted in snippets on Twitter, but Twitter now has them marked as “unavailable.” Copies of the tweets are available on Treadreader, however.
The Albania agreement appears very similar to another contract, published online, between Pfizer and the Dominican Republic. It covers not only COVID-19 vaccines, but any product that enhances the use or effects of such vaccines.
Countries that purchase Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot must acknowledge that “Pfizer’s efforts to develop and manufacture the Product” are “subject to significant risks and uncertainties.”
And in the event that a drug or other treatment comes out that can prevent, treat or cure COVID-19, the agreement stands, and the country must follow through with their order. Ivermectin, for instance, is not only safe, inexpensive and widely available but has been found to reduce COVID-19 mortality by 81%. Yet, it continues to be ignored in favor of more expensive, and less effective, treatments and mass experimental vaccination.
“If you were wondering why #Ivermectin was suppressed,” Ehden wrote, “well, it is because the agreement that countries had with Pfizer does not allow them to escape their contract, which states that even if a drug will be found to treat COVID19 the contract cannot be voided.”
Even if Pfizer fails to deliver vaccine doses within their estimated delivery period, the purchaser may not cancel the order. Further, Pfizer can make adjustments to the number of contracted doses and their delivery schedule, “based on principles to be determined by Pfizer,” and the country buying the vaccines must “agree to any revision.”
It doesn’t matter if the vaccines are delivered severely late, even at a point when they’re no longer needed, as it’s made clear that “Under no circumstances will Pfizer be subject to or liable for any late delivery penalties.” As you might suspect, the contract also forbids returns “under any circumstances.”
Tell Schools/Universities No Vaccine Mandates for Children/Young Adults!
The big secret: Pfizer charged U.S. More Than Other Countries
While COVID-19 vaccines are “free” to receive in the U.S., they’re being paid for by taxpayer dollars at a rate of $19.5011 per dose. Albania, the leaked contract revealed, paid $12 per dose, while the EU paid $14.70 per shot. While charging different prices to different purchases is common in the drug industry, it’s often frowned upon.
In the case of the price disparity between the U.S. and the EU, Pfizer is said to have given a price break to the EU because it financially supported the development of their COVID-19 vaccine. Still, Ehden noted, “U.S. taxpayers got screwed by Pfizer, probably also Israel.” Also, Pfizer makes a point to note that countries have no right to withhold payment to the company for any reason.
Apparently, this includes in the case of receiving damaged goods. Purchasers of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines are not entitled to reject them “based on service complaints,” unless they do not conform to specifications or the FDA’s Current Good Manufacturing Practice regulations. And, Ehden adds, “This agreement is above any local law of the state.”
While the purchaser has virtually no way of canceling the contract, Pfizer can terminate the agreement in the event of a “material breach” of any term in their contract.
Safety and efficacy ‘not currently known’
The purchaser of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine must also acknowledge two facts that have largely been brushed under the rug: Both their efficacy and risks are unknown. According to section 5.5 of the contract:
“Purchaser acknowledges that the Vaccine and materials related to the Vaccine, and their components and constituent materials are being rapidly developed due to the emergency circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and will continue to be studied after provision of the Vaccine to Purchaser under this Agreement.
Urologists Stunned: Forget the Blue Pill, This Fixes Your ED
Urologists Stunned: Forget the Blue Pill, This Fixes Your ED
Health Reports
“Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known.”
Indemnification by the purchaser is also explicitly required by the contract, which states, under section 8.1:
“Purchaser hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pfizer, BioNTech, each of their Affiliates, contractors, sub-contractors, licensors, licensees, sub-licensees, distributors, contract manufacturers, services providers, clinical trial researchers, third parties to whom Pfizer or BioNTech or any of their respective Affiliates may directly or indirectly owe an indemnity based on the research …
“from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees and other expenses of an investigation or litigation … arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the Vaccine …”
Meanwhile, the purchaser must also keep the terms of the contract confidential for a period of 10 years.
Purchasers must protect and defend Pfizer
Not only does Pfizer have total indemnification, but there’s also a section in the contract titled, “Assumption of Defense by Purchaser,” which states that in the event Pfizer suffers losses for which it is seeking indemnification, the purchaser “shall promptly assume conduct and control of the defense of such Indemnified Claims on behalf of the Indemnitee with counsel acceptable to Indemnitee(s), whether or not the Indemnified Claim is rightfully brought.” Ehden notes:
“Pfizer is making sure the country will pay for everything: ‘Costs and expenses, including … fees and disbursements of counsel, incurred by the Indemnitee(s) in connection with any Indemnified Claim shall be reimbursed on a quarterly basis by Purchaser.’”
Buried in the March 17, 2020, Federal Register — the daily journal of the U.S. government — in a document titled, “Declaration Under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act for Medical Countermeasures Against COVID-19,” is language that establishes a new COVID-19 vaccine court — similar to the federal vaccine court that already exists.
In the U.S., vaccine makers already enjoy full indemnity against injuries occurring from this or any other pandemic vaccine under the PREP Act. If you’re injured by a COVID vaccine (or a select group of other vaccines designated under the act), you’d have to file a compensation claim with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), which is funded by U.S. taxpayers via Congressional appropriation to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).
While similar to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), which applies to nonpandemic vaccines, the CICP is even less generous when it comes to compensation. As reported by Dr. Meryl Nass,25 the maximum payout you can receive — even in cases of permanent disability or death — is $250,000 per person; however, you’d have to exhaust your private insurance policy before the CICP gives you a dime.
The CICP also has a one-year statute of limitations, so you have to act quickly, which is also difficult since it’s unknown if long-term effects could occur more than a year later.
Pfizer accused of abuse of power
As is apparent in Pfizer’s confidential contract with Albania, the drug giant wants governments to guarantee the company will be compensated for any expenses resulting from injury lawsuits against it. Pfizer has also demanded that countries put up sovereign assets, including bank reserves, military bases and embassy buildings, as collateral for expected vaccine injury lawsuits resulting from its COVID-19 inoculation.
New Delhi-based World Is One News (WION) reported in February 2021 that Brazil rejected Pfizer’s demands, calling them “abusive.” The demands included that Brazil:
“Waives sovereignty of its assets abroad in favor of Pfizer.”
Not apply its domestic laws to the company.
Not penalize Pfizer for vaccine delivery delays.
Exempt Pfizer from all civil liability for side effects.
STAT News also referred to concerns by legal experts, who also suggested Pfizer’s demands were an abuse of power. Mark Eccleston-Turner, a lecturer in global health law at Keele University in England, told STAT:
“[Pfizer] is trying to eke out as much profit and minimize its risk at every juncture with this vaccine development then this vaccine rollout. Now, the vaccine development has been heavily subsidized already. So there’s very minimal risk for the manufacturer involved there.”
Signs of COVID vaccine failure, adverse effects rise
Pfizer continues to sign lucrative secret vaccine deals across the globe. In June 2021, they signed one of their biggest contracts to date — with the Philippine government for 40 million doses.
Meanwhile, COVID-19 “breakthrough cases,” which used to be called vaccine failures, are on the rise. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as of July 19, 5,914 people who had been fully vaccinated for COVID-19 were hospitalized or died from COVID-19.
In the U.K., as of July 15, 87.5% of the adult population had received one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and 67.1% had received two. Yet, symptomatic cases among partially and fully vaccinated are on the rise, with an average of 15,537 new infections a day being detected, a 40% increase from the week before.
In a July 19 report from the CDC, the agency also reported that the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) had received 12,313 reports of death among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine — more than doubling from the 6,079 reports of death from the week before.
Soon after the report, however, they reverted the number to the 6,079 from the week before, indicating by default that no deaths from the vaccine had occurred that week,34 raising serious questions about transparency and vaccine safety.
Many other adverse events are also appearing, ranging from risks from the biologically active SARS-CoV-2 spike protein used in the vaccine to blood clots, reproductive toxicity and myocarditis (heart inflammation). As you can see in the confidential indemnification agreements, however, even if the vaccine turns out to be a dismal failure — and a risk to short- and long-term health — countries have no recourse, nor does anyone who received the experimental shots.
One question that we should all be asking is this: If the COVID-19 vaccines are, in fact, as safe and effective as the manufacturers claim, why do they require this level of indemnification?
Originally published by Mercola. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 11:54 pm Post subject:
All Cathay Pacific staff were forced to vax by 1 Nov. or lose job.
Vaxxed pilots then test positive - and  have to quarantine for 21 days.
Wife of 1 pilot, a teacher - 120 children at her school forced into 3 day quarantine.
Quarantine is at a government facility called Penny Bay - looks like a concentration camp - huts - and wire fencing guarded.
Banker JP Morgan only has to to 32 HOUR quarantine in Luxury HOTEL ROOM. All normal people entering HK have to do a 21 day quarantine.
references below
“Three Cathay Pacific cargo pilots tested positive for the virus after returning from Frankfurt earlier this month. Health authorities suspect a cluster outbreak may have occurred in the hotel where they stayed.
As a result, authorities ordered 130 Cathay cargo pilots, who had stayed in the same hotel in Germany after November 1, to go into quarantine for 21 days, a decision which Lam said has already affected the supply of goods to the territory.
….Meanwhile, Lam confirmed that the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, Jamie Dimon, was given approval to skip quarantine on economic grounds to stay in Hong Kong for 32 hours.Â
“Last Wednesday, health officials said two other Cathay cargo pilots had also tested preliminary positive for Covid-19 upon their return from Frankfurt on November 6. Their household members and close contacts were quarantined, including 13 close contacts and 120 students at Discovery Bay International School, where the wife of one of the pilots teaches and their two sons attend.
Sixty friends and colleagues of the other pilot were also quarantined.Â
“Discovery Bay International School must suspend classes as its 120 students have to complete a three-day quarantine, health authorities said.Â
Hong Kong reported five new imported cases on Thursday, including three cases involving crew members.Â
Two of them, aged 29 and 57, were Cathay Pacific pilots. Both left Hong Kong on October 31 for Germany and returned to Hong Kong on November 6 on the same flight (CX2066) from Frankfurt.Â
Their specimens collected upon arrival at Hong Kong International Airport tested negative. However, samples collected on Monday tested positive.Â
The 57-year-old westerner lived with his wife and his two sons at a house in Headline Village, Discovery Bay.Â
His wife teaches at Discovery Bay International School, and the two children also study there. All their schoolmates must complete a three-day quarantine, during which the school will close.Â
The 29-year-old's infection triggered a lockdown at Harbour Pinnacle, Tsim Sha Tsui on Tuesday night. No cases were identified.Â
Covid vaccinations ‘not sufficient’ in preventing Delta variant spread, almost equal to unvaccinated – UK study
A new study has found that though Covid-19 vaccinations lower the chance of hospitalization and death in the case of infections, those inoculated can spread the Delta variant as easily as those not.
Researchers looked at over 600 people in the UK over the course of a year for the study, done by Imperial College London and the UK Health Security Agency (HSA) and published this week in The Lancet Infectious Diseases journal.
“Although vaccines remain highly effective at preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19, our findings suggest that vaccination is not sufficient to prevent transmission of the Delta variant in household settings with prolonged exposures,” the study declares.
ALSO ON RT.COM
‘I’ve been fired for not being vaxxed, even though I have natural immunity and getting it may cause me severe medical problems’
In their analysis of “densely sampled household contacts exposed to the Delta variant,” researchers found 38% of those unvaccinated got Covid, while 25% of those vaccinated got it.
Vaccinations are more effective at stopping the spread of other variants, such as Alpha, reducing spread by approximately 40 to 50%, according to the study.
The study also claims that the viral load, the amount of a virus in one’s body, is similar among the vaccinated and unvaccinated, though the virus dissipates quicker in vaccinated individuals, according to the findings.
“Fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts. Host–virus interactions early in infection may shape the entire viral trajectory,” the paper reads.
Health officials have continuously warned the public the Delta variant is the most deadly and transmittable coronavirus variant and even vaccinated individuals can spread it.
Researchers behind the Lancet study claimed ‘booster’ programs and approved vaccinations for younger individuals will help curb the spread of the virus going into the winter months, “but analysis suggests that direct protection of individuals at risk of severe outcomes, via vaccination and non-pharmacological interventions, will remain central to containing the burden of disease caused by the Delta variant.”
ALSO ON RT.COM
‘Fully vaccinated’ definition could change in the future thanks to approved Covid-19 booster shots, CDC acknowledges
Ajit Lalvani, co-lead of the study and professor of infectious diseases at Imperial College London, claims vaccinations alone are not enough to protect from the Delta variant, and this new data shows it, though he also encouraged unvaccinated individuals to get inoculated.
“Our findings show that vaccination alone is not enough to prevent people from being infected with the Delta variant and spreading it in household settings,” Lavlani said.
Quote:
Community transmission and viral load kinetics of the SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) variant in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in the UK: a prospective, longitudinal, cohort study
Anika Singanayagam, PhD *
Seran Hakki, PhD *
Jake Dunning, PhD *
Kieran J Madon, MSc
Michael A Crone, MBBCh
Aleksandra Koycheva, BSc
et al.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)006 48-4/fulltext
Open AccessPublished:October 29, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00648-4
PlumX Metrics
Previous Article
What is the vaccine effect on reducing transmission in the …
Next Article
Antibiotic treatment of urinary tract infection and its impact …
Summary
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
Data sharing
Declaration of interests
Supplementary Material
References
Article Info
Figures
Tables
Linked Articles
Related Specialty Collections
Advertisement
Summary
Background
The SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) variant is highly transmissible and spreading globally, including in populations with high vaccination rates. We aimed to investigate transmission and viral load kinetics in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with mild delta variant infection in the community.
Methods
Between Sept 13, 2020, and Sept 15, 2021, 602 community contacts (identified via the UK contract-tracing system) of 471 UK COVID-19 index cases were recruited to the Assessment of Transmission and Contagiousness of COVID-19 in Contacts cohort study and contributed 8145 upper respiratory tract samples from daily sampling for up to 20 days. Household and non-household exposed contacts aged 5 years or older were eligible for recruitment if they could provide informed consent and agree to self-swabbing of the upper respiratory tract. We analysed transmission risk by vaccination status for 231 contacts exposed to 162 epidemiologically linked delta variant-infected index cases. We compared viral load trajectories from fully vaccinated individuals with delta infection (n=29) with unvaccinated individuals with delta (n=16), alpha (B.1.1.7; n=39), and pre-alpha (n=49) infections. Primary outcomes for the epidemiological analysis were to assess the secondary attack rate (SAR) in household contacts stratified by contact vaccination status and the index cases’ vaccination status. Primary outcomes for the viral load kinetics analysis were to detect differences in the peak viral load, viral growth rate, and viral decline rate between participants according to SARS-CoV-2 variant and vaccination status.
Findings
The SAR in household contacts exposed to the delta variant was 25% (95% CI 18–33) for fully vaccinated individuals compared with 38% (24–53) in unvaccinated individuals. The median time between second vaccine dose and study recruitment in fully vaccinated contacts was longer for infected individuals (median 101 days [IQR 74–120]) than for uninfected individuals (64 days [32–97], p=0·001). SAR among household contacts exposed to fully vaccinated index cases was similar to household contacts exposed to unvaccinated index cases (25% [95% CI 15–35] for vaccinated vs 23% [15–31] for unvaccinated). 12 (39%) of 31 infections in fully vaccinated household contacts arose from fully vaccinated epidemiologically linked index cases, further confirmed by genomic and virological analysis in three index case–contact pairs. Although peak viral load did not differ by vaccination status or variant type, it increased modestly with age (difference of 0·39 [95% credible interval –0·03 to 0·79] in peak log10 viral load per mL between those aged 10 years and 50 years). Fully vaccinated individuals with delta variant infection had a faster (posterior probability >0·84) mean rate of viral load decline (0·95 log10 copies per mL per day) than did unvaccinated individuals with pre-alpha (0·69), alpha (0·82), or delta (0·79) variant infections. Within individuals, faster viral load growth was correlated with higher peak viral load (correlation 0·42 [95% credible interval 0·13 to 0·65]) and slower decline (–0·44 [–0·67 to –0·18]).
Interpretation
Vaccination reduces the risk of delta variant infection and accelerates viral clearance. Nonetheless, fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts. Host–virus interactions early in infection may shape the entire viral trajectory.
Funding
National Institute for Health Research.
• View related content for this article
Introduction
While the primary aim of vaccination is to protect individuals against severe COVID-19 disease and its consequences, the extent to which vaccines reduce onward transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is key to containing the pandemic. This outcome depends on the ability of vaccines to protect against infection and the extent to which vaccination reduces the infectiousness of breakthrough infections.
Research in context
Evidence before this study
The SARS-CoV-2 delta variant is spreading globally, including in populations with high vaccination coverage. While vaccination remains highly effective at attenuating disease severity and preventing death, vaccine effectiveness against infection is reduced for delta. Determining the extent of transmission from vaccinated delta-infected individuals to their vaccinated contacts is a public health priority. Comparing the upper respiratory tract (URT) viral load kinetics of delta infections with those of other variants gives insight into potential mechanisms for its increased transmissibility. We searched PubMed and medRxiv for articles published between database inception and Sept 20, 2021, using search terms describing "SARS-CoV-2, delta variant, viral load, and transmission". Two studies longitudinally sampled the URT in vaccinated and unvaccinated delta variant-infected individuals to compare viral load kinetics. In a retrospective study of a cohort of hospitalised patients in Singapore, more rapid viral load decline was found in vaccinated individuals than unvaccinated cases. However, the unvaccinated cases in this study had moderate-to-severe infection, which is known to be associated with prolonged shedding. The second study longitudinally sampled professional USA sports players. Again, clearance of delta viral RNA in vaccinated cases was faster than in unvaccinated cases, but only 8% of unvaccinated cases had delta variant infection, complicating interpretation. Lastly, a report of a single-source nosocomial outbreak of a distinct delta sub-lineage in Vietnamese health-care workers plotted viral load kinetics (without comparison with unvaccinated delta infections) and demonstrated transmission between fully vaccinated health-care workers in the nosocomial setting. The findings might therefore not be generalisable beyond the particular setting and distinct viral sub-lineage investigated.
Added value of this study
The majority of SARS-CoV-2 transmission occurs in households, but transmission between fully vaccinated individuals in this setting has not been shown to date. To ascertain secondary transmission with high sensitivity, we longitudinally followed index cases and their contacts (regardless of symptoms) in the community early after exposure to the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, performing daily quantitative RT-PCR on URT samples for 14–20 days. We found that the secondary attack rate in fully vaccinated household contacts was high at 25%, but this value was lower than that of unvaccinated contacts (38%). Risk of infection increased with time in the 2–3 months since the second dose of vaccine. The proportion of infected contacts was similar regardless of the index cases’ vaccination status. We observed transmission of the delta variant between fully vaccinated index cases and their fully vaccinated contacts in several households, confirmed by whole-genome sequencing. Peak viral load did not differ by vaccination status or variant type but did increase modestly with age. Vaccinated delta cases experienced faster viral load decline than did unvaccinated alpha or delta cases. Across study participants, faster viral load growth was correlated with higher peak viral load and slower decline, suggesting that host–virus interactions early in infection shape the entire viral trajectory. Since our findings are derived from community household contacts in a real-life setting, they are probably generalisable to the general population.
Implications of all the available evidence
Although vaccines remain highly effective at preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19, our findings suggest that vaccination is not sufficient to prevent transmission of the delta variant in household settings with prolonged exposures. Our findings highlight the importance of community studies to characterise the epidemiological phenotype of new SARS-CoV-2 variants in increasingly highly vaccinated populations. Continued public health and social measures to curb transmission of the delta variant remain important, even in vaccinated individuals.
Vaccination was found to be effective in reducing household transmission of the alpha variant (B.1.1.7) by 40–50%,1 and infected, vaccinated individuals had lower viral load in the upper respiratory tract (URT) than infections in unvaccinated individuals,2 which is indicative of reduced infectiousness.3, 4 However, the delta variant (B.1.617.2), which is more transmissible than the alpha variant,5, 6 is now the dominant strain worldwide. After a large outbreak in India, the UK was one of the first countries to report a sharp rise in delta variant infection. Current vaccines remain highly effective at preventing admission to hospital and death from delta infection.7 However, vaccine effectiveness against infection is reduced for delta, compared with alpha,8, 9 and the delta variant continues to cause a high burden of cases even in countries with high vaccination coverage. Data are scarce on the risk of community transmission of delta from vaccinated individuals with mild infections.
Here, we report data from a UK community-based study, the Assessment of Transmission and Contagiousness of COVID-19 in Contacts (ATACCC) study, in which ambulatory close contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases underwent daily, longitudinal URT sampling, with collection of associated clinical and epidemiological data. We aimed to quantify household transmission of the delta variant and assess the effect of vaccination status on contacts’ risk of infection and index cases’ infectiousness, including (1) households with unvaccinated contacts and index cases and (2) households with fully vaccinated contacts and fully vaccinated index cases. We also compared sequentially sampled URT viral RNA trajectories from individuals with non-severe delta, alpha, and pre-alpha SARS-CoV-2 infections to infer the effects of SARS-CoV-2 variant status—and, for delta infections, vaccination status—on transmission potential.
Methods
Study design and participants
ATACCC is an observational longitudinal cohort study of community contacts of SARS-CoV-2 cases. Contacts of symptomatic PCR-confirmed index cases notified to the UK contact-tracing system (National Health Service Test and Trace) were asked if they would be willing to be contacted by Public Health England to discuss participation in the study. All contacts notified within 5 days of index case symptom onset were selected to be contacted within our recruitment capacity. Household and non-household contacts aged 5 years or older were eligible for recruitment if they could provide written informed consent and agree to self-swabbing of the URT. Further details on URT sampling are given in the appendix (p 13).
The ATACCC study is separated into two study arms, ATACCC1 and ATACCC2, which were designed to capture different waves of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. In ATACCC1, which investigated alpha variant and pre-alpha cases in Greater London, only contacts were recruited between Sept 13, 2020, and March 13, 2021. ATACCC1 included a pre-alpha wave (September to November, 2020) and an alpha wave (December, 2020, to March, 2021). In ATACCC2, the study was relaunched specifically to investigate delta variant cases in Greater London and Bolton, and both index cases and contacts were recruited between May 25, and Sept 15, 2021. Early recruitment was focused in West London and Bolton because UK incidence of the delta variant was highest in these areas.10 Based on national and regional surveillance data, community transmission was moderate-to-high throughout most of our recruitment period.
This study was approved by the Health Research Authority. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants before enrolment. Parents and caregivers gave consent for children.
Data collection
Demographic information was collected by the study team on enrolment. The date of exposure for non-household contacts was obtained from Public Health England. COVID-19 vaccination history was determined from the UK National Immunisation Management System, general practitioner records, and self-reporting by study participants. We defined a participant as unvaccinated if they had not received a single dose of a COVID-19 vaccine at least 7 days before enrolment, partially vaccinated if they had received one vaccine dose at least 7 days before study enrolment, and fully vaccinated if they had received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine at least 7 days before study enrolment. Previous literature was used to determine the 7-day threshold for defining vaccination status.11, 12, 13 We also did sensitivity analyses using a 14-day threshold. The time interval between vaccination and study recruitment was calculated. We used WHO criteria14 to define symptomatic status up to the day of study recruitment. Symptomatic status for incident cases—participants who were PCR-negative at enrolment and subsequently tested positive—was defined from the day of the first PCR-positive result.
Laboratory procedures
SARS-CoV-2 quantitative RT-PCR, conversion of ORF1ab and envelope (E-gene) cycle threshold values to viral genome copies, whole-genome sequencing, and lineage assignments are described in the appendix (pp 13–14).
Outcomes
Primary outcomes for the epidemiological analysis were to assess the secondary attack rate (SAR) in household contacts stratified by contact vaccination status and the index cases’ vaccination status. Primary outcomes for the viral load kinetics analysis were to detect differences in the peak viral load, viral growth rate, and viral decline rate between participants infected with pre-alpha versus alpha versus delta variants and between unvaccinated delta-infected participants and vaccinated delta-infected participants.
We assessed vaccine effectiveness and susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection stratified by time elapsed since receipt of second vaccination as exploratory analyses.
Statistical analysis
To model viral kinetics, we used a simple phenomenological model of viral titre15 during disease pathogenesis. Viral kinetic parameters were estimated on a participant-specific basis using a Bayesian hierarchical model to fit this model to the entire dataset of sequential cycle threshold values measured for all participants. For the 19 participants who were non-household contacts of index cases and had a unique date of exposure, the cycle threshold data were supplemented by a pseudo-absence data point (ie, undetectable virus) on the date of exposure. Test accuracy and model misspecification were modelled with a mixture model by assuming there was a probability p of a test giving an observation drawn from a (normal) error distribution and probability 1 – p of it being drawn from the true distribution.
The hierarchical structure was represented by grouping participants based on the infecting variant and their vaccination status. A single-group model was fitted, which implicitly assumes that viral kinetic parameters vary by individual but not by variant or vaccination status. A four-group model was also explored, where groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 represent pre-alpha, alpha, unvaccinated delta, and fully vaccinated delta, respectively. We fitted a correlation matrix between participant-specific kinetic parameters to allow us to examine whether there is within-group correlation between peak viral titre, viral growth rate, and viral decline rate. Our initial model selection, using leave-one-out cross-validation, selected a four-group hierarchical model with fitted correlation coefficients between individual-level parameters determining peak viral load and viral load growth and decline rates (appendix p 5). However, resulting participant-specific estimates of peak viral load (but not growth and decline rates) showed a marked and significant correlation with age in the exploratory analysis, which motivated examination of models where mean peak viral load could vary with age. The most predictive model overall allowed mean viral load growth and decline rates to vary across the four groups, with mean peak viral load common to all groups but assumed to vary linearly with the logarithm of age (appendix p 5). We present peak viral loads for the reference age of 50 years with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). 50 years was chosen as the reference age as it is typical of the ages of the cases in the whole dataset and the choice of reference age made no difference in the model fits or judgment of differences between the groups.
We computed group-level population means and within-sample group means of log peak viral titre, viral growth rate, and viral decline rate. Since posterior estimates of each of these variables are correlated across groups, overlap in the credible intervals of an estimate for one group with that for another group does not necessarily indicate no significant difference between those groups. We, therefore, computed posterior probabilities, pp, that these variables were larger for one group than another. For our model, Bayes factors can be computed as pp/(1–pp). We only report population (group-level) posterior probabilities greater than 0·75 (corresponding to Bayes factors >3) as indicating at least moderate evidence of a difference.
For vaccine effectiveness, we defined the estimated effectiveness at preventing infection, regardless of symptoms, with delta in the household setting as 1 – SAR (fully vaccinated) / SAR (unvaccinated).
Role of the funding source
The funder of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report.
Results
Between Sept 13, 2020, and Sept 15, 2021, 621 community-based participants (602 contacts and 19 index cases) from 471 index notifications were prospectively enrolled in the ATACCC1 and ATACCC2 studies, and contributed 8145 URT samples. Of these, ATACCC1 enrolled 369 contacts (arising from 308 index notifications), and ATACCC2 enrolled 233 contacts (arising from 163 index notifications) and 19 index cases. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 163 (26%) of the 621 participants. Whole-genome sequencing of PCR-positive cases confirmed that 71 participants had delta variant infection (18 index cases and 53 contacts), 42 had alpha variant infection (one index case and 41 contacts), and 50 had pre-alpha variant infection (all contacts; figure 1A).
Figure thumbnail gr1
Figure 1Recruitment, SARS-CoV-2 infection, variant status, and vaccination history for ATACCC study participants
Show full caption
View Large ImageFigure ViewerDownload Hi-res imageDownload (PPT)
Of 163 PCR-positive participants, 89 (55%) were female and 133 (82%) were White. Median age was 36 years (IQR 26–50). Sex, age, ethnicity, body-mass index (BMI) distribution, and the frequency of comorbidities were similar among those with delta, alpha, and pre-alpha infection, and for vaccinated and unvaccinated delta-infected participants, except for age and sex (appendix pp 2–3). There were fewer unvaccinated females than males (p=0·04) and, as expected from the age-prioritisation of the UK vaccine roll-out, unvaccinated participants infected with the delta variant were significantly younger (p<0·001; appendix p 3). Median time between exposure to the index case and study enrolment was 4 days (IQR 4–5). All participants had non-severe ambulatory illness or were asymptomatic. The proportion of asymptomatic cases did not differ among fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated, and unvaccinated delta groups (appendix p 3).
No pre-alpha-infected and only one alpha-infected participant had received a COVID-19 vaccine before study enrolment. Of 71 delta-infected participants (of whom 18 were index cases), 23 (32%) were unvaccinated, ten (14%) were partially vaccinated, and 38 (54%) were fully vaccinated (figure 1A; appendix p 3). Of the 38 fully vaccinated delta-infected participants, 14 had received the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech), 23 the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 adenovirus vector vaccine (Oxford–AstraZeneca), and one the CoronaVac inactivated whole-virion vaccine (Sinovac).
It is highly probable that all but one of the 233 ATACCC2 contacts were exposed to the delta variant because they were recruited when the regional prevalence of delta was at least 90%, and mostly 95–99% (figure 1B).10 Of these, 206 (89%) were household contacts (in 127 households), and 26 (11%) were non-household contacts. Distributions of age, ethnicity, BMI, smoking status, and comorbidities were similar between PCR-positive and PCR-negative contacts (appendix p 4). The median time between second vaccine dose and study recruitment in fully vaccinated contacts with delta variant infection was 74 days (IQR 35–105; range 16–201), and this was significantly longer in PCR-positive contacts than in PCR-negative contacts (101 days [IQR 74–120] vs 64 days [32–97], respectively, p=0·001; appendix p 4). All 53 PCR-positive contacts were exposed in household settings and the SAR for all delta variant-exposed household contacts was 26% (95% CI 20–32). SAR was not significantly higher in unvaccinated (38%, 95% CI 24–53) than fully vaccinated (25%, 18–33) household contacts (table 1). We estimated vaccine effectiveness at preventing infection (regardless of symptoms) with delta in the household setting to be 34% (bootstrap 95% CI –15 to 60). Sensitivity analyses using a 14 day threshold for time since second vaccination to study recruitment to denote fully vaccinated did not materially affect our estimates of vaccine effectiveness or SAR (data not shown). Although precision is restricted by the small sample size, this estimate is broadly consistent with vaccine effectiveness estimates for delta variant infection based on larger datasets.9, 16, 17
Table 1SAR in contacts of delta-exposed index cases recruited to the ATACCC2 study
Total PCR positive PCR negative SAR (95% CI) p value
Contacts
All 231 53 178 23 (18–29) NA
Fully vaccinated 140 31 109 22 (16–30) 0·16
Unvaccinated 44 15 29 34 (22–49) ..
Partially vaccinated 47 7 40 15 (7–2 NA
Household contacts
All 205 53 152 26 (20–32) NA
Fully vaccinated 126 31 95 25 (18–33) 0·17
Unvaccinated 40 15 25 38 (24–53) ..
Partially vaccinated 39 7 32 18 (9–33) NA
χ2 test was performed to calculate p values for differences in SAR between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated cases. One PCR-negative contact who withdrew from the study without vaccination status information was excluded. NA=not applicable. SAR=secondary attack rate.
Open table in a new tab
The vaccination status of 138 epidemiologically linked index cases of 204 delta variant-exposed household contacts was available (figure 1B, table 2). The SAR in household contacts exposed to fully vaccinated index cases was 25% (95% CI 15–35; 17 of 69), which is similar to the SAR in household contacts exposed to unvaccinated index cases (23% [15–31]; 23 of 100; table 2). The 53 PCR-positive contacts arose from household exposure to 39 PCR-positive index cases. Of these index cases who gave rise to secondary transmission, the proportion who were fully vaccinated (15 [38%] of 39) was similar to the proportion who were unvaccinated (16 [41%] of 39). The median number of days from the index cases’ second vaccination to the day of recruitment for their respective contacts was 73 days (IQR 38–116). Time interval did not differ between index cases who transmitted infection to their contacts and those who did not (94 days [IQR 62–112] and 63 days [35–117], respectively; p=0·43).
Table 2Comparison of vaccination status of the 138 epidemiologically linked PCR-positive index cases for 204 delta variant-exposed household contacts
All household contacts (n=204)* Fully vaccinated contacts (n=125) Partially vaccinated contacts (n=39) Unvaccinated contacts (n=40)
PCR positive (n=31) PCR negative (n=94) PCR positive (n=7) PCR negative (n=32) PCR positive (n=15) PCR negative (n=25)
Fully vaccinated index cases (n=50) 69 12 31 1 8 4 13
Partially vaccinated index cases (n=25) 35 7 12 3 10 3 0
Unvaccinated index cases (n=63) 100 12 51 3 14 8 12
Non-household exposed contacts (n=24, all PCR negative) were excluded. One PCR-negative household contact who withdrew from the study without vaccination status information was excluded. One PCR-negative household contact who could not be linked to their index case was also excluded.
* The rows below show the number of contacts exposed to each category of index case.
Open table in a new tab
18 of the 163 delta variant-infected index cases that led to contact enrolment were themselves recruited to ATACCC2 and serial URT samples were collected from them, allowing for more detailed virology and genome analyses. For 15 of these, their contacts were also recruited (13 household contacts and two non-household contacts). A corresponding PCR-positive household contact was identified for four of these 15 index cases (figure 1B). Genomic analysis showed that index–contact pairs were infected with the same delta variant sub-lineage in these instances, with one exception (figure 2A). In one household (number 4), an unvaccinated index case transmitted the delta variant to an unvaccinated contact, while another partially vaccinated contact was infected with a different delta sub-lineage (which was probably acquired outside the household). In the other three households (numbers 1–3), fully vaccinated index cases transmitted the delta variant to fully vaccinated household contacts, with high viral load in all cases, and temporal relationships between the viral load kinetics that were consistent with transmission from the index cases to their respective contacts (figure 2B).
Figure thumbnail gr2
Figure 2Virological, epidemiological, and genomic evidence for transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant (B.1.617.2) in households
Show full caption
View Large ImageFigure ViewerDownload Hi-res imageDownload (PPT)
Inclusion criteria for the modelling analysis selected 133 participant's viral load RNA trajectories from 163 PCR-positive participants (49 with the pre-alpha variant, 39 alpha, and 45 delta; appendix p 14). Of the 45 delta cases, 29 were fully vaccinated and 16 were unvaccinated; partially vaccinated cases were excluded. Of the 133 included cases, 29 (22%) were incident (ie, PCR negative at enrolment converting to PCR positive subsequently) and 104 (78%) were prevalent (ie, already PCR positive at enrolment). 15 of the prevalent cases had a clearly resolvable peak viral load. Figure 3 shows modelled viral RNA (ORF1ab) trajectories together with the viral RNA copy numbers measured for individual participants. The E-gene equivalent is shown in the appendix (p 2). Estimates derived from E-gene cycle threshold value data (appendix pp 5, 7, 9, 11) were similar to those for ORF1ab.
Figure thumbnail gr3a
Figure 3ORF1ab viral load trajectories from 14 days before to 28 days after peak for 133 participants infected with pre-alpha or alpha variants (uncaccinated), or the delta variant (vaccinated and unvaccinated) variants
Show full caption
View Large ImageFigure ViewerDownload Hi-res imageDownload (PPT)
Figure thumbnail gr3b
Figure 3ORF1ab viral load trajectories from 14 days before to 28 days after peak for 133 participants infected with pre-alpha or alpha variants (uncaccinated), or the delta variant (vaccinated and unvaccinated) variants
Show full caption
View Large ImageFigure ViewerDownload Hi-res imageDownload (PPT)
Although viral kinetics appear visually similar for all four groups of cases, we found quantitative differences in estimated viral growth rates and decline rates (Table 3, Table 4). Population (group-level) estimates of mean viral load decline rates based on ORF1ab cycle threshold value data varied in the range of 0·69–0·95 log10 units per mL per daxes 4; appendix p 10), indicating that a typical 10-day period was required for viral load to decline from peak to undetectable. A faster decline was seen in the alpha (pp=0·93), unvaccinated delta (pp=0·79), and fully vaccinated delta (pp=0·99) groups than in the pre-alpha group. The mean viral load decline rate of the fully vaccinated delta group was also faster than those of the alpha group (pp=0·84) and the unvaccinated delta group (pp=0·85). The differences in decline rates translate into a difference of about 3 days in the mean duration of the decline phase between the pre-alpha and delta vaccinated groups.
Table 3Estimates of VL growth rates for pre-alpha, alpha, and delta (unvaccinated and fully vaccinated) cases, derived from ORF1ab cycle threshold data
VL growth rate (95% CrI), log10 units per day Posterior probability estimate is less than pre-alpha Posterior probability estimate is less than alpha Posterior probability estimate is less than delta (unvaccinated) Posterior probability estimate is less than delta (fully vaccinated)
Pre-alpha (n=49) 3·24 (1·78–6·14) .. 0·44 0·27 0·21
Alpha (n=39) 3·13 (1·76–5·94) 0·56 .. 0·32 0·25
Delta, unvaccinated (n=16) 2·81 (1·47–5·47) 0·73 0·68 .. 0·44
Delta, fully vaccinated (n=29) 2·69 (1·51–5·17) 0·79 0·75 0·56 ..
VL growth rates are shown as within-sample posterior mean estimates. Remaining columns show population (group-level) posterior probabilities that the estimate on that row is less than an estimate for a different group. Posterior probabilities are derived from 20 000 posterior samples and have sampling errors of <0·01. VL=viral load. CrI=credible interval.
Open table in a new tab
Table 4Estimates of VL decline rates for pre-alpha, alpha, and delta (unvaccinated and fully vaccinated) cases, derived from ORF1ab cycle threshold data
VL decline rate (95% CrI), log10 units per day Posterior probability estimate is larger than pre-alpha Posterior probability estimate is larger than alpha Posterior probability estimate is larger than delta (unvaccinated) Posterior probability estimate is larger than delta (fully vaccinated)
Pre-alpha (n=49) 0·69 (0·58–0·81) .. 0·07 0·21 0·01
Alpha (n=39) 0·82 (0·67–1·01) 0·93 .. 0·60 0·16
Delta, unvaccinated (n=16) 0·79 (0·59–1·04) 0·79 0·40 .. 0·15
Delta, fully vaccinated (n=29) 0·95 (0·76–1·1 0·99 0·84 0·85 ..
VL decline rates are shown as within-sample posterior mean estimates. Remaining columns show population (group-level) posterior probabilities that the estimate on that row is less than an estimate for a different group. Posterior probabilities are derived from 20 000 posterior samples and have sampling errors of <0·01. VL=viral load. CrI=credible interval.
Open table in a new tab
Viral load growth rates were substantially faster than decline rates, varying in the range of 2·69–3·24 log10 units per mL per day between groups, indicating that a typical 3-day period was required for viral load to grow from undetectable to peak. Our power to infer differences in growth rates between groups was more restricted than for viral decline, but there was moderate evidence (pp=0·79) that growth rates were lower for those in the vaccinated delta group than in the pre-alpha group.
We estimated mean peak viral load for 50-year-old adults to be 8·14 (95% CrI 7·95 to 8·32) log10 copies per mL, but peak viral load did not differ by variant or vaccination status. However, we estimated that peak viral load increases with age (pp=0·96 that the slope of peak viral load with log[age] was >0), with an estimated slope of 0·24 (95% CrI –0·02 to 0·49) log10 copies per mL per unit change in log(age). This estimate translates to a difference of 0·39 (–0·03 to 0·79) in mean peak log10 copies per mL between those aged 10 years and 50 years.
Within-group individual participant estimates of viral load growth rate were positively correlated with peak viral load, with a correlation coefficient estimate of 0·42 (95% CrI 0·13 to 0·65; appendix p . Hence, individuals with faster viral load growth tend to have higher peak viral load. The decline rate of viral load was also negatively correlated with viral load growth rate, with a correlation coefficient estimate of –0·44 (95% CrI –0·67 to –0·1, illustrating that individuals with faster viral load growth tend to experience slower viral load decline.
Discussion
Households are the site of most SARS-CoV-2 transmission globally.19 In our cohort of densely sampled household contacts exposed to the delta variant, SAR was 38% in unvaccinated contacts and 25% in fully vaccinated contacts. This finding is consistent with the known protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination against infection.8, 9 Notwithstanding, these findings indicate continued risk of infection in household contacts despite vaccination. Our estimate of SAR is higher than that reported in fully vaccinated household contacts exposed before the emergence of the delta variant.1, 20, 21 The time interval between vaccination and study recruitment was significantly higher in fully vaccinated PCR-positive contacts than fully vaccinated PCR-negative contacts, suggesting that susceptibility to infection increases with time as soon as 2–3 months after vaccination—consistent with waning protective immunity. This potentially important observation is consistent with recent large-scale data and requires further investigation.17 Household SAR for delta infection, regardless of vaccination status, was 26% (95% CI 20–32), which is higher than estimates of UK national surveillance data (10·8% [10·7–10·9]).10 However, we sampled contacts daily, regardless of symptomatology, to actively identify infection with high sensitivity. By contrast, symptom-based, single-timepoint surveillance testing probably underestimates the true SAR, and potentially also overestimates vaccine effectiveness against infection.
We identified similar SAR (25%) in household contacts exposed to fully vaccinated index cases as in those exposed to unvaccinated index cases (23%). This finding indicates that breakthrough infections in fully vaccinated people can efficiently transmit infection in the household setting. We identified 12 household transmission events between fully vaccinated index case–contact pairs; for three of these, genomic sequencing confirmed that the index case and contact were infected by the same delta variant sub-lineage, thus substantiating epidemiological data and temporal relationships of viral load kinetics to provide definitive evidence for secondary transmission. To our knowledge, one other study has reported that transmission of the delta variant between fully vaccinated people was a point-source nosocomial outbreak—a single health-care worker with a particular delta variant sub-lineage in Vietnam.22
Daily longitudinal sampling of cases from early (median 4 days) after exposure for up to 20 days allowed us to generate high-resolution trajectories of URT viral load over the course of infection. To date, two studies have sequentially sampled community cases of mild SARS-CoV-2 infection, and these were from highly specific population groups identified through asymptomatic screening programmes (eg, for university staff and students23 and for professional athletes24).
Our most predictive model of viral load kinetics estimated mean peak log10 viral load per mL of 8·14 (95% CrI 7·95–8·32) for adults aged 50 years, which is very similar to the estimate from a 2021 study using routine surveillance data.25 We found no evidence of variation in peak viral load by variant or vaccination status, but we report some evidence of modest but significant (pp=0·95) increases in peak viral load with age. Previous studies of viral load in children and adults4, 25, 26 have not used such dense sequential sampling of viral load and have, therefore, been restricted in their power to resolve age-related differences; the largest such study25 reported a similar difference between children and adults to the one we estimated. We found the rate of viral load decline was faster for vaccinated individuals with delta infection than all other groups, and was faster for individuals in the alpha and unvaccinated delta groups than those with pre-alpha infection.
For all variant vaccination groups, the variation between participants seen in viral load kinetic parameter estimates was substantially larger than the variation in mean parameters estimated between groups. The modest scale of differences in viral kinetics between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with delta infection might explain the relatively high rates of transmission seen from vaccinated delta index cases in our study. We found no evidence of lower SARs from fully vaccinated delta index cases than from unvaccinated ones. However, given that index cases were identified through routine symptomatic surveillance, there might have been a selection bias towards identifying untypically symptomatic vaccine breakthrough index cases.
The differences in viral kinetics we found between the pre-alpha, alpha, and delta variant groups suggest some incremental, but potentially adaptive, changes in viral dynamics associated with the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 towards more rapid viral clearance. Our study provides the first evidence that, within each variant or vaccination group, viral growth rate is positively correlated with peak viral load, but is negatively correlated with viral decline rate. This finding suggests that individual infections during which viral replication is initially fastest generate the highest peak viral load and see the slowest viral clearance, with the latter not just being due to the higher peak. Mechanistically, these data suggest that the host and viral factors determining the initial growth rate of SARS-CoV-2 have a fundamental effect on the trajectory throughout infection, with faster replication being more difficult (in terms of both peak viral load and the subsequent decline of viral load) for the immune response to control. Analysis of sequentially sampled immune markers during infection might give insight into the immune correlates of these early differences in infection kinetics. It is also possible that individuals with the fastest viral load growth and highest peaks contribute disproportionately to community transmission, a hypothesis that should be tested in future studies.
Several population-level, single-timepoint sampling studies using routinely available data have found no major differences in cycle threshold values between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with delta variant infection.10, 27, 28 However, as the timepoint of sampling in the viral trajectory is unknown, this restricts the interpretation of such results. Two other studies longitudinally sampled vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with delta variant infection.23, 29 A retrospective cohort of hospitalised patients in Singapore29 also described a faster rate of viral decline in vaccinated versus unvaccinated individuals with delta variant, reporting somewhat larger differences in decline rates than we estimated here. However, this disparity might be accounted for by the higher severity of illness in unvaccinated individuals in the Singaporean study (almost two-thirds having pneumonia, one-third requiring COVID-19 treatment, and a fifth needing oxygen) than in our study, given that longer viral shedding has been reported in patients with more severe illness.30 A longitudinal sampling study in the USA reported that pre-alpha, alpha, and delta variant infections had similar viral trajectories.24 The study also compared trajectories in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, reporting similar proliferation phases and peak cycle threshold values, but more rapid clearance of virus in vaccinated individuals. However, this study in the USA stratified by vaccination status and variant separately, rather than jointly, meaning vaccinated individuals with delta infection were being compared with, predominantly, unvaccinated individuals with pre-alpha and alpha infection. Moreover, sampling was done as part of a professional sports player occupational health screening programme, making the results not necessarily representative of typical community infections.
Our study has limitations. First, we recruited only contacts of symptomatic index cases as our study recruitment is derived from routine contact-tracing notifications. Second, index cases were defined as the first household member to have a PCR-positive swab, but we cannot exclude the possibility that another household member might already have been infected and transmitted to the index case. Third, recording of viral load trajectories is subject to left censoring, where the growth phase in prevalent contacts (already PCR-positive at enrolment) was missed for a proportion of participants. However, we captured 29 incident cases and 15 additional cases on the upslope of the viral trajectory, providing valuable, informative data on viral growth rates and peak viral load in a subset of participants. Fourth, owing to the age-stratified rollout of the UK vaccination programme, the age of the unvaccinated, delta variant-infected participants was lower than that of vaccinated participants. Thus, age might be a confounding factor in our results and, as discussed, peak viral load was associated with age. However, it is unlikely that the higher SAR observed in the unvaccinated contacts would have been driven by younger age rather than the absence of vaccination and, to our knowledge, there is no published evidence showing increased susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection with decreasing age.31 Finally, although we did not perform viral culture here—which is a better proxy for infectiousness than RT-PCR—two other studies27, 32 have shown cultivable virus from around two-thirds of vaccinated individuals infected with the delta variant, consistent with our conclusions that vaccinated individuals still have the potential to infect others, particularly early after infection when viral loads are high and most transmission is thought to occur.30
Our findings help to explain how and why the delta variant is being transmitted so effectively in populations with high vaccine coverage. Although current vaccines remain effective at preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19, our findings suggest that vaccination alone is not sufficient to prevent all transmission of the delta variant in the household setting, where exposure is close and prolonged. Increasing population immunity via booster programmes and vaccination of teenagers will help to increase the currently limited effect of vaccination on transmission, but our analysis suggests that direct protection of individuals at risk of severe outcomes, via vaccination and non-pharmacological interventions, will remain central to containing the burden of disease caused by the delta variant.
This online publication has been corrected. The corrected version first appeared at thelancet.com/infection on November 2, 2021
Contributors
AS, JD, MZ, NMF, WB, and ALal conceptualised the study. AS, SH, JD, KJM, AK, JLB, MGW, ND-F, RV, RK, JF, CT, AVK, JC, VQ, EC, JSN, SH, EM, TP, HH, CL, JS, SB, JP, CA, SA, and NMF were responsible for data curation and investigation. AS, SH, KJM, JLB, AC, NMF, and ALal did the formal data analysis. MAC, AB, DJ, SM, JE, PSF, SD, and ALac did the laboratory work. RV, RK, JF, CT, AVK, JC, VQ, EC, JSN, SH, EM, and SE oversaw the project. AS, SH, JD, KJM, JLB, NMF, and ALal accessed and verified the data. JD, MZ, and ALal acquired funding. NMF sourced and oversaw the software. AS and ALal wrote the initial draft of the manuscript. AS, JD, GPT, MZ, NMF, SH, and ALal reviewed and edited the manuscript. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.
The ATACCC Study Investigators
Anjna Badhan, Simon Dustan, Chitra Tejpal, Anjeli V Ketkar, Janakan Sam Narean, Sarah Hammett, Eimear McDermott, Timesh Pillay, Hamish Houston, Constanta Luca, Jada Samuel, Samuel Bremang, Samuel Evetts, John Poh, Charlotte Anderson, David Jackson, Shahjahan Miah, Joanna Ellis, and Angie Lackenby.
Data sharing
An anonymised, de-identified version of the dataset can be made available upon request to allow all results to be reproduced. Modelling code will also be made publicly available on the GitHub repository.
Declaration of interests
NMF reports grants from UK Medical Research Council, UK National Institute of Health Research, UK Research and Innovation, Community Jameel, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; consulting fees from the World Bank; payment or honoraria from the Wellcome Trust; travel expenses from WHO; advisory board participation for Takeda; and is a senior editor of the eLife journal. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR200927),
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
NA