Category: Vaccines

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.  A study from the Imperial College of London was behind the garbage COVID study that led to US shutdowns which ultimately never should have happened.  Now this same college has a legion of individuals behind a garbage study that the CDC is using force killer vaccines on children. 

Doctors Fauci and Birx used a BS study from Imperial College to convince President Trump to shut down the economy in 2020.  This faulty advice led to the suffering of millions of people around the world after many nations followed the US’s lead.  It was wrong and based on a BS study.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/unreal-college-behind-bogus-study-used-support-shutdowns-behind-bs-study-used-force-covid-vaccines-us-children/

(Tom: I had wondered about this some time ago, for all the conditions for which medication is of assistance, is the average result from medication not detrimental.)

Less than 6 percent of medical drugs have high-quality evidence to support their benefits, according to a recent study by the University of Oxford.

The study found that, of the 1,567 eligible medications approved under the Cochrane Reviews from 2008 to 2021, more than 94 percent were not supported by high-quality evidence.

Cochrane Reviews is a leading international journal and database combining all available and relevant evidence about treatments and health care policies. It is often referenced in national and international health care guidelines, and is especially prominent in Europe.

Reviewing Cochrane Reviews’ 35 percent of research papers, researchers found less than half of the drugs approved from 2008 to 2021 had moderate to high-quality evidence. Further, harms were underreported, with around 37 percent of interventions found with harm and 8.1 percent had significant evidence of harm.

“It is particularly worrying that the harms of healthcare interventions are rarely quantified,” wrote Dr. Jeremy Howick, one of the co-authors of the study, in The Conversation.

“For a doctor or patient to decide whether to use a treatment, they need to know whether the benefits outweigh the harms. If the harms are inadequately measured, an ‘informed choice’ is not possible.”

According to Howick, the “cut-off” year was 2008, as that was when Cochrane Reviews incorporated a system called grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations (GRADE) to assess the quality of evidence.

The GRADE system used by Cochrane, is a transparent framework for developing and presenting summaries of evidence and provides a systematic approach for making clinical practice recommendations.

It is a widely adopted tool for grading the quality of evidence and for making recommendations with over 100 organizations worldwide endorsing GRADE.

Although authors of the Oxford study speculated that the poor findings for drugs backed up by high-quality evidence may be because the sample studies were “unrepresentative” of the population, Howicks argued that it was unlikely given the strictness of Cochrane Reviews.

A 2020 U.S. study published in JAMA also indicated the problem of medications being approved without rigorous testing and causing harm. The study examined drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration from 1983 to 2018 and found that whilst the number of novel biologics approved increased, the review period by the organization decreased.

The authors wrote in the study that, the FDA “increasingly accepted less data and more surrogate measures,” clinical measures that show a correlation but may not necessarily guarantee a relationship.

Dr. David Light from Harvard University argued that currently, 80 percent of drugs being prescribed that are known to work are still generic drugs, with experienced physicians recommending to not take new drugs for at least five years.

Light wrote in his 2014 article that the majority of newly approved drugs bring little to no improvements, with 1 in 5 new prescriptions causing severe adverse events. At the same time, pharmaceutical prices for new drugs have soared with drug median release prices growing 85 times higher from 2008 to 2022.

“Potential harms should be measured with the same rigor as potential benefits,” concluded Howick. “The evidence-based medicine community is correct to continue calling for higher-quality research, and also justified in their skepticism that high-quality evidence for medical treatments is common or even improving.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/94-percent-of-medication-not-supported-by-high-quality-evidence-harms-underreported-study_4541149.html

Interesting when you look at how the narrative has altered over time yet some propagandists still claim vaccines are safe and effective.

On Friday, the journal Andrology published a peer-reviewed paper showing large decreases in sperm counts among men after the second dose of Pfizer’s mRNA Covid jab.

Based on counts from men who donated sperm to three fertility clinics in Israel, this finding is devastating – medically and politically.

It cuts to the heart of the hottest button question of all about the mRNA shots, whether they have hidden fertility risks. That issue has simmered since early 2021, following my reporting that data showed the shots had caused excess miscarriages in rats – and other reports showing that measurable amounts of vaccine reached the ovaries and testes in test rats.

Ever since media “fact-checkers” and public health authorities have dismissed and mocked the concerns and anyone who raises them:

Now – after a half-billion men have received mRNA shots – the skeptics appear to be right. Again. The Israeli paper offers hard evidence that the vaccines may present a systemic risk to men’s sperm counts. What was a conspiracy theory is now just a theory. AGAIN.

The paper raises questions about the mechanism of action that must be answered immediately. And on top of the myocarditis risk, the finding is more evidence that encouraging – much less forcing – men under 40 to take the mRNA vaccines was a catastrophic mistake.

—

However, the authors qualified their findings by reporting that after five months, sperm levels recovered. Thus the decreases were only temporary, they wrote.

Put aside the fact that a five-month decrease hardly qualifies as temporary for someone trying to start a family – or compared to a “vaccine” that loses effectiveness against Omicron within weeks or months.

As other writers have pointed out, the actual data in the paper do not really support the argument that sperm levels returned to normal after five months. In fact, by some measures, levels continued to decline.

Rather than acknowledging this fact, the authors offered the best possible spin on their data, while at the same time publishing the figures themselves near the end of the paper so that other researchers could see the reality for themselves.

This tactic is now commonplace among researchers putting out data that might raise concerns about the mRNA shots. It is likely a response to the overwhelming political pressure to hide the deepening crisis around the safety and efficacy of shots that governments have given to over a billion people worldwide.

Below is the crucial chart, which shows that “total motile count” – the number of sperm in the ejaculated semen – plunged 22 percent three to five months after the second shot (T2) and barely recovered during the final count (T3), when it was still 19 percent below the pre-shot level.

Even more importantly, the fall in sperm counts CAN NOT be blamed on short- or even medium-term inflammation as mRNA-generated spike proteins cause our immune cells to ramp up the systemic production of anti-spike antibodies. If that were the case, one would expect to see a short-term decrease in sperm count that reverses over time. Instead, total sperm counts are unaffected shortly after the mRNA shots, then decrease months later and hardly recover.

To play down this unpleasant reality, the researchers instead focused on the fact that median rather than average counts did recover after five months. (The median is the numerical midpoint of a series; If a series goes 1, 2, 3, 4, 20, the median will be 3, but the average will be 30 divided by 5, or 6.)

Both the median and the average can be valuable statistics. Using the median rather than the average will hide extreme outliers. In this case, the fact that the average fell much more than the median is a sign that some of the men probably had near-zero sperm counts in both the second and third time periods – and that fact is arguably more important than the median change.

All of which is to say that this data cannot be easily explained away and should not be ignored, as badly as the media would like to do so. The fall in sperm counts is part of an emerging and increasingly dark picture about the long-term health impacts of the mRNA shots – and should all by itself convince parents not to risk exposing their children to these powerful biotechnologies.

https://anonymouswire.com/study-pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-reduces-male-fertility-and-its-worse-than-it-looks/

A nurse shares her story of being misled on the safe and effective lie that most in the profession are still operating on the lies they were told.

https://rumble.com/v18lw20-vaccine-carnage-in-the-er-a-nurse-speaks-out.html

According to a scientific study published in 1988, it’s virtually impossible to distinguish between monkeypox and chickenpox. And chickenpox is caused by the varicella-zoster virus, and just like its close relative the herpes simplex virus, it becomes a lifelong resident in the body.

And like its other cousin, genital herpes, varicella may be silent for many years, hiding out inside nerve cells and can reactivate later, wreaking havoc in the form of the excruciating skin disorder, shingles, which is a blistering, burning skin rash.

Now, data made available by the U.S. Government, but more specifically the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) strongly suggests we’re not witnessing a monkeypox outbreak at all, but we’re instead witnessing a coverup of Covid-19 vaccine-induced shingles.

According to the CDC Wonder Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database, as of June 3rd 2022, the CDC has processed 18,026 reports relating to herpes and shingle infections that have occurred as adverse reactions to the Covid-19 injections.

And the vast majority of these reports have been a result of the mRNA Covid-19 injections by Moderna and Pfizer. The Janssen viral vector vaccine has had just 693 reports of herpes/shingles infections made against it. Whilst the Moderna vaccine has had 5,321, and the Pfizer jab a shocking 12,507.

Meanwhile, according to the same VAERS database, the CDC only received 1,052 reports relating to herpes/shingle infections that have occurred as adverse reactions to all available Flu jabs between the years 2008 and 2020.

This figure alone shows there has been a 1,614% increase in adverse events related to herpes/shingles because of the Covid-19 injections.

Many would try to argue this increase is simply because so many Covid-19 injections have been administered. But anyone who argues this would be entirely wrong because official CDC data shows nearly 3 times as many Flu jabs were administered between 2008 and 2020 than Covid-19 injections administered as of June 3rd 2022.

According to the CDC, 1.7 billion Flu jabs were administered between 2008 and 2020.

But according to ‘Our World in Data’, only 588.04 million Covid-19 jabs have been administered in the USA as of May 27th 2022.

Now that we know these figures we can use them to calculate the rate of adverse events related to herpes/shingles infections per 1 million doses administered.

Based on official data available for 2008 to 2020, there were 0.6 adverse events relating to herpes/shingles infections per 1 million doses of Flu vaccine administered in the USA.

But based on official data available up to 3rd June 2022, there have been 30.7 adverse events relating to herpes/shingles infections per 1 million doses of Covid-19 vaccine administered in the USA.

However, it’s important to note that the CDC have admitted they believe just 1 to 10% of adverse events are actually reported to VAERS, therefore the rates per 1 million doses could be significantly higher for both jabs.

But the available data shows the rate of adverse events relating to herpes/shingles infections per 1 million doses of Covid-19 injection administered is 4,925% higher than the rate of adverse events relating to herpes/shingles infections per 1 million doses of Flu vaccine administered.

Therefore, this official U.S. Government data proves that Covid-19 vaccination increases a person’s risk of developing Shingles by 4,925% at the very least.

The Emergency Committee of the World Health Organization is set to meet on Thursday 23rd June 2022, to assess whether the alleged monkeypox outbreak represents a public health emergency of international concern.

But it looks like they may actually be meeting to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the end of June 2022 over Covid-19 vaccine-induced shingles.