Health & Fitness

As the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) prepares to host the three-day, three-night Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination that will be broadcast online October 16 through 18, 2020, the theme we have chosen is “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century,” because at no time in modern history has it been more important for all of us to take a stand and do just that.

This year, the orchestrated actions by governments around the world to restrict or eliminate civil liberties in response to the emergence of a new coronavirus has been unprecedented, and has had profound effects on the global economy and on the physical, mental and emotional health of billions of people.¹

By mid-September 2020, there were about 29 million cases of the new Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS-CoV-2) reported worldwide with about 925,000 associated deaths.

The United States, the third most populated country in the world at 330 million people, had recorded over 7 million cases and 198,000 deaths, with an estimated 598 deaths per million people, which is a higher death rate per million people than Sweden,² where health officials have refused to order masking or lock down the country and allowed the population to acquire natural herd immunity to the virus.^3,⁴

Overall COVID-19 Mortality Is Less Than 1%

According to the World Health Organization, the overall infection mortality rate for the new SARS coronavirus causing COVID-19 is about 0.6%,⁵ although some scientists say it is lower,⁶ while others estimate it can be as high as 1 to 2% in some parts of the world.⁷

Compared to Ebola with a 50% mortality rate⁸ or smallpox that killed 30%,⁹ or tuberculosis that still is a deadly disease killing 20% to 70%,¹⁰ or diphtheria at 5% to 10%,¹¹ or the 1918 influenza pandemic with a 2.5% mortality rate,¹² COVID-19 is near the bottom of the infectious diseases mortality scale with a less than 1% mortality rate in most countries.

Those at highest risk for complications and death include the elderly and those with one or more poor health conditions.¹³

The CDC recently reported that only 6% of COVID-19-related deaths were solely due to coronavirus infection and 94% of the people who died also had influenza or pneumonia; heart, lung or kidney disease; high blood pressure; diabetes, or another underlying poor health condition.¹⁴ Most studies suggest it is rare for children to suffer complications and die from COVID-19.¹⁵

But seven months after the World Health Organization (WHO)¹⁶ declared a coronavirus pandemic,¹⁷ and public health officials persuaded lawmakers to turn the world upside down, a lot of people are asking questions and so are doctors who disagree with each other about the facts. Questions like:

Where did the new respiratory virus come from?

The most popular narratives about the mutated coronavirus is that it either jumped out of a bat or another animal in a Chinese wet food market^18,¹⁹ or escaped out of a biohazard lab in 2019,^20,²¹ but scientists continue to argue about which scenario is more likely.²² And this question:

If I wear a cloth facemask, does it really prevent me from getting infected with or transmitting COVID-19?

There is an ongoing debate in the medical community about whether it is a good idea for all healthy children and adults to wear cloth masks when they leave their home.²³ In March 2020, the U.S. Surgeon General ordered the American public to stop buying and wearing masks because “they are not effective in preventing general public from catching coronavirus”²⁴ and “actually can increase the spread of coronavirus," which was the position of the World Health Organization.²⁵

But in April, the CDC walked back its “do not mask” order and urged all healthy Americans to voluntarily wear homemade cloth face coverings when entering public spaces.²⁶

In June, the WHO was continuing to say that, “At the present time, the widespread use of masks everywhere is not supported by high-quality scientific evidence, and there are potential benefits and harms to consider … Masks on their own will not protect you from COVID-19.”²⁷

But by June, a number of state Governors and local governments had mandated facemask wearing and an epidemic of mask shaming had begun,^28,²⁹ which led to public protests against masking mandates.³⁰ In August, the CDC doubled down and expanded face masking directives to include all children over the age of 2,³¹ while the WHO warned that children under the age of 6 should not wear masks but children over age 12 should.³²

So, confusion reigns. While some scientists are saying that if all healthy people are forced to wear face masks it will not stop the coronavirus pandemic and gives a dangerous and false illusion of safety,³³ other scientists are demonizing the refusers, alleging that people refusing to mask up are “sociopathic” and have lower levels of empathy.³⁴

About 30 U.S. states require masking for young children and adults who enter public spaces,³⁵ and some states are leveling steep fines of up to $1,000 or threatening jail time for anyone who fails to comply.³⁶

Washington state has made not wearing a mask in public a misdemeanor crime³⁷ and central Texas officials say they wish they could put people in prison for refusing to wear a mask.³⁸ More than 50 countries in the world now require people to cover their faces when they leave home and some do fine and imprison people who go outside without wearing a mask.³⁹

So, what about getting tested for COVID-19? The CDC says that people should get tested if they have COVID-19 symptoms or have been in contact with someone who has been diagnosed with the infection. There is also an antibody test to identify whether or not you have been infected in the past.⁴⁰ But lab tests are not always reliable and people are asking this logical question:

If I get a lab test, will it accurately identify if I am currently infected or have been infected with COVID-19 in the past?

Unfortunately, it’s not clear how accurate any of the tests are, especially the antibody test for past infection because the presence of antibodies may not be the only way to measure immunity.⁴¹ The best guess is that the range of reported false negative results for the nasal swab test is between 2% and 50%, and the reported false negative results for the antibody blood test is up to 30%, depending upon when during or after the infection testing is performed.⁴²

In July, a state lab in Connecticut admitted that 90 out of 144 people tested during a 30-day period — most of them nursing home residents — were inaccurately informed they were infected because of faulty, false positive lab tests.⁴³ In August, 77 football players in the National Football League were given false positive test results when, after retesting, all the tests came back negative.⁴⁴ People are also wondering what happens after they get COVID-19, asking this question:

If I recover from COVID-19 will I only get temporary immunity or will I have long-term immunity against reinfection?

The CDC says it is unknown how long immunity lasts or whether you can get the new coronavirus infection twice.⁴⁵ However, last spring researchers found that out of 68 uninfected persons, the blood from one third of them contained helper T-cells that recognized the mutated SARS coronavirus.

They concluded the presence of these defensive helper T cells gives evidence for some residual immunity that may have been produced after common cold infections caused by other types of coronaviruses. This, the scientists said, “bodes well for the development of long-term protective immunity.”⁴⁶

Another important study was published in the medical literature in August providing evidence for robust memory T cell immune responses in people who had recovered from even mild or asymptomatic cases of COVID-19, but had no detectable virus-specific antibodies.⁴⁷

If people can have strong immune responses without symptoms and traditional antibody tests for proof of immunity don’t apply to COVID-19, public health officials may be underestimating the extent of population-level herd immunity that already exists in the U.S., where there have been more cases reported than anywhere else.

COVID-19 Public Health Laws a Public Relations Disaster

While doctors debate the science, it is becoming clearer that the response to the new coronavirus infection by government health officials has been a public relations disaster. The anxiety, fear and chaos created by regulations instituted by most governments after the declaration of a COVID-19 pandemic this year has torn the fabric of societies and affected public opinion about public health laws and vaccination.⁴⁸

Now the people are being told that there is one — and only one — simple solution to resolving the crisis and getting back to normal: that is, the only way we can take off our masks and touch, hug, kiss or come close to each other again^49,^50,^51,^52,^53,⁵⁴ is for every person living in every country to get injected with one of the liability-free COVID-19 vaccines being fast tracked to market.^55,^56,^57,^58,⁵⁹

In April, WHO officials at the United Nations launched a global initiative “to end the COVID-19 pandemic,” proclaiming that “no one is safe until everyone is safe.”⁶⁰ By May, they were warning that if every person in the world doesn’t get injected with a COVID-19 vaccination, the virus “may never go away.”⁶¹

The WHO,⁶² U.S. government^63,^64,^65,⁶⁶ and lawmakers in the European Union,⁶⁷ along with wealthy and politically powerful nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) like the Gates Foundation,^68,^69,⁷⁰ GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance,⁷¹ and Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI)⁷² have given the pharmaceutical industry tens of billions of dollars to develop and fast-track experimental coronavirus vaccines to market and promote their universal use.^73,⁷⁴

At the same time, governments have given pharmaceutical companies a liability shield from lawsuits when COVID-19 vaccines injure or kill people.^75,⁷⁶ The hard sell is on, but a lot of people are NOT buying it.

People Are Rejecting the COVID-19 Vaccine Sales Pitch

Every poll taken this year has revealed that between 40% and 70% of people living in the U.S. and Europe do not plan to get a COVID-19 vaccine when it is licensed.^77,^78,^79,^80,^81,⁸² Populations in developed countries are resisting the siren call for “solidarity,” as doubt about COVID-19 vaccines is becoming more common in developing counties, too.⁸³

The pushback by a wary public has taken government officials by surprise. Apparently, they were banking that the economic and social deprivation, fear and chaos surrounding lockdowns would produce a bull market for experimental mRNA and DNA COVID-19 vaccines using technology that never has been licensed for humans.⁸⁴

It is widely acknowledged now that a solid two-thirds of Americans or more will “just say no” to getting injected with a vaccine containing lab altered parts of a new coronavirus that scientists admit they still don’t know much about,⁸⁵ vaccines that preliminary clinical trials have revealed may well cause more than just a few minor reactions.⁸⁶

A frustrated top U.S. health official has name-called Americans who refuse to go along with public health policies and laws, calling them “anti-science” and “anti-authority.”^87,⁸⁸ The truth is, people in this country and many others just don’t have confidence in the quality and quantity of the science or government health officials they are being told to trust.⁸⁹

Angry that a growing number of people are reluctant to roll up their sleeves for a vaccine that is being rushed to market at “warp speed,” public health officials,⁹⁰ billionaire Silicon Valley technocrats,^91,^92,⁹³ doctors, attorneys and bioethics professors^94,^95,^96,^97,⁹⁸ and politicians⁹⁹ are beating the drum for swift enactment of “no exceptions” mandatory vaccination laws as soon as COVID-19 vaccines are licensed.¹⁰⁰

Already, some cheerleaders at leading universities are banging that drum for approving and using experimental COVID-19 vaccines even before testing is done,¹⁰¹ and are calling for young, healthy people to be the first to get the vaccine because it is their “civic duty” to protect everyone else.¹⁰²

They warn that “herd immunity may not be achieved if people refuse to take the coronavirus vaccine,”^103,¹⁰⁴ and say that, in order to keep society “safe,” laws must be passed to threaten and coerce you and your minor children to get vaccinated or face crippling social sanctions that will effectively take away your liberty and destroy your life.¹⁰⁵

People in US and Other Nations Rise to Defend Freedom

This summer, huge public demonstrations defending freedom in Berlin,¹⁰⁶ London,¹⁰⁷ Paris¹⁰⁸ and Copenhagen saw tens of thousands of citizens gather to protest masking¹⁰⁹ and other oppressive coronavirus lockdown policies, which have severely restricted normal physical contact between people, caused widespread unemployment,¹¹⁰ and harmed their physical, mental and emotional health.¹¹¹

Like in Europe, people living in Canada,¹¹² Australia^113,¹¹⁴ and New Zealand¹¹⁵ also are resisting months of social distancing policies that have eliminated fundamental human rights, such as freedom of speech and assembly.

The U.S. has seen similar but smaller public demonstrations opposing forced masking, social distancing and lockdown laws and defending freedom in Virginia,¹¹⁶ Pennsylvania,¹¹⁷ Wisconsin,¹¹⁸ Michigan,¹¹⁹ California¹²⁰ and other states, as record numbers of Americans struggle with unemployment,^121,¹²² the destruction of small middle class businesses,¹²³ mortgage defaults¹²⁴ and bankruptcy filings;¹²⁵ steep increases in anxiety and depression,^126,¹²⁷ drug and alcohol addiction,¹²⁸ child and spousal abuse,¹²⁹ and divorce.¹³⁰

Social Sanctions for Failure to Get Vaccinated May Align With Lockdown Sanctions

The punishing social sanctions being talked about if you refuse a COVID-19 vaccination are likely to be enforced using government-operated electronic tracking systems linked to digital “immunity passports” that require you to “prove” you are immune to the new SARS coronavirus before you are allowed to work in an office building or enter other public spaces.^131,^132,^133,¹³⁴

These social sanctions for failure to vaccinate may closely resemble the types of social interaction restrictions enforced in the U.S. and other countries over the past year.

In the U.S., most public health laws, including vaccine laws, are enacted by the states,¹³⁵ while the federal government makes vaccine use recommendations and can mandate vaccines for people crossing national or state borders. Local city and county governments also can impose their own public health regulations.¹³⁶ That is why some states and cities have seen very restrictive COVID-19 pandemic masking¹³⁷ and lockdown regulations¹³⁸ and others have been more open.¹³⁹

So, whether or not you will be punished for refusing to get a COVID-19 shot next year primarily will be determined by your state’s governor and the representatives who have been elected to make laws in your state capitol.¹⁴⁰

Depending upon where you live and the political philosophy of the majority of representatives in your state legislature, after the COVID-19 vaccine is licensed by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended by the CDC for use by all children and adults,¹⁴¹ if you refuse to get a COVID-19 shot, you could be blocked from:¹⁴²

Being employed and going to work in an office	Getting an education
Obtaining a driver’s license or passport	Boarding a train or other public transportation
Attending a sports game or concert	Entering a store, restaurant, bar, coffee shop or nail salon
Booking an appointment with a doctor

And you could be prohibited from checking into a hospital for surgery, or visiting a family member in a nursing home, or blocked from obtaining private health insurance and Medicaid or Medicare.

In other words, if you refuse to get a coronavirus vaccination, you could be subjected to the kinds of punitive social sanctions I have been predicting and publicly warned about since 1997,^143,^144,^145,¹⁴⁶ sanctions that are already being applied to Americans who decline to get or give their children dozens of doses of CDC “recommended” liability-free vaccines¹⁴⁷ and already are being denied an education, medical care and employment.^148,¹⁴⁹

Broken Promises Leads to Broken Trust

Doctors and public health officials wondering why people don’t trust what they say about infectious diseases and vaccination, including coronavirus and COVID-19 vaccines, only have to look in the mirror to answer the question.

Since 1982, parents of vaccine injured children have been begging doctors to do the kind of science that will explain why so many highly-vaccinated children, who don’t get measles or chicken pox anymore, are stuck on sick and suffering with brain and autoimmune disorders that never go away.¹⁵⁰ For four decades, we have been asking doctors and government health officials to stop sweeping casualties of inhumane one-size-fits all vaccine policies, under the rug.¹⁵¹

What we get from medical professors in universities receiving lots of money from the government and pharmaceutical companies, and from doctors developing vaccines, and from public health officials pushing “no exceptions” vaccination policies are threats, name-calling, bullying and punishment if we try to exercise informed consent to vaccination.^152,^153,¹⁵⁴ There is no other word for it but abuse.

They order us to obey them but refuse to take responsibility for what happens when we obey the orders they give. They expect us to trust them and refuse to care about the victims of vaccination when the benefits do not outweigh the risks.

Instead, they act to protect the power and profit-making of their business partners: the pharmaceutical industry, medical trade associations, multinational media corporations and Silicon Valley billionaires, and leave vaccine victims to take care of themselves. What’s trust got to do with it?

Broken trust has everything to do with why the majority of people in the U.S. and Europe do not want to roll the dice and find out whether the odds of surviving a COVID-19 vaccination are in their favor.

It is during this extraordinary time of great challenge and opportunity that NVIC is sponsoring the Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination. Our conference will create an expanded base of knowledge about vaccine science, policy, law and ethics brought to you by more than 40 distinguished speakers, who will empower you with information you need to become an effective vaccine freedom advocate.

Go to NVIC.org and register today for this historic conference celebrating freedom of thought, speech and conscience and gain permanent online access to this valuable video library of information. It’s your health, your family, your choice. And our mission continues: No forced vaccination, not in America.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3mGQyBg
via IFTTT

Warp Speed Vaccine Will Be Shielded From Liability

The Health and Human Services' Operation Warp Speed pledges to deliver 300 million doses of a COVID-19 vaccine by 2021.¹ However, developing a safe and effective vaccine normally takes years and begins with animal studies. Given the urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccine makers are rushing into human clinical tests and circumventing lengthy animal trials.

Such fast-tracked vaccines pose unknown risks to humans, which are magnified because governments are granting COVID-19 vaccine makers immunity from liability for all vaccine injuries and deaths that occur after the vaccines are recommended (or mandated) by public health officials.²

In August, AstraZeneca announced that most countries it expects to supply with COVID-19 vaccine will grant the pharmaceutical company liability protection when people are harmed by the new vaccine.

In the U.S., vaccine makers already have something of a "free pass" when it comes to vaccine injury liability and lawsuits through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986³ and the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, passed in 2005 (more on those later.)⁴

The main concern is that the combination of COVID-19 vaccines being fast-tracked to market at "warp speed" with minimal testing, together with blanket liability protection for Pharma for injuries their products cause, is a public health nightmare waiting to happen.

Vaccine Makers Already Enjoy Protection in the US

When the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act became law in 1986, it gave vaccine manufacturers partial liability protection from lawsuits and did not protect doctors or other vaccine providers for vaccine injury malpractice claims.

The 1986 Act established a federal no-fault vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) as an administrative alternative to a lawsuit for injuries caused by vaccines recommended by the CDC for children.

Contested vaccine injury claims are adjudicated by U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C., and there is a Trust Fund out of which claims are paid, sparing insurance companies representing vaccine makers and vaccine providers from costly payouts for vaccine injuries and deaths.⁵

According to Legal Talk Network, the purpose for the 1986 Act was to induce vaccine makers wary of costly vaccine injury lawsuits to stay in the vaccine manufacturing business and create and market vaccines with impunity and no fear of being sued.⁶

Unfortunately, the bottom line is that, today, if you receive an FDA-licensed and state-mandated vaccine that injures or kills you or your child, the vaccine maker and the health care practitioner who administered the vaccine are protected from being sued in civil court. But the story behind it goes far deeper.

The Act Admits That Vaccines Can and Do Cause Injury, Death

Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center, worked closely with Congress⁷ for years before the 1986 Act became law. In the historic federal legislation that was characterized by the pharmaceutical and medical care industries as badly needed "tort reform," the U.S. government acknowledged for the first time that:⁸

1. Federally licensed and recommended vaccines mandated by states for children to attend school can and do cause injury and death

2. Vaccine safety should be a priority for health agencies, vaccine manufacturers, doctors and other vaccine administrators

3. Individuals injured by government recommended and mandated childhood vaccines should have access to a federal vaccine injury compensation program administrative alternative to filing a vaccine injury lawsuit in civil court. Furthermore, they should have access to the civil court system in cases where:

• Federal compensation is denied or is inadequate

• There is evidence a pediatrician or other vaccine administrator negligently administered a vaccine

• A vaccine manufacturer engaged in criminal fraud or negligence

• A vaccine manufacturer could have made a vaccine less harmful (design defect)

New Laws and Rulings Chip Away at the Act

According to NVIC, the safety and compensation provisions in the 1986 law have been chipped away to the point that the law has been fatally compromised. At the time the Act was passed:⁹

"Although vaccine product liability for manufacturers was restricted, it was not completely eliminated, and manufacturers continued to be liable for design defect.

In 1987, medical trade organizations successfully lobbied for inclusion of a one-sentence amendment in an Omnibus funding bill that broadened liability protection for pediatricians and other vaccine administrators, but did not broaden liability protection for vaccine manufacturers when there was evidence the company could have made a vaccine less harmful."^10,¹¹

The erosion of the law continued in 2011 when, in a split decision, the U.S. Supreme Court:

"… blocked the legal right of vaccine injured persons to hold drug companies liable for design defect and failing to improve an FDA licensed vaccine to make it less harmful.¹² This means that, today, even if a drug company could have improved a government licensed and mandated vaccine to make it less reactive, a vaccine injured person cannot sue the company in a civil court in front of a jury of peers."

According to NVIC:¹³

"Neglect and lack of congressional oversight on the Act for more than 30 years has enabled DHHS and the Department of Justice to turn what was supposed to be a non-adversarial, expedited, less expensive, fairer and more predictable federal vaccine injury compensation program, which Congress promised parents in 1986, into a highly adversarial, lengthy, traumatic and unpredictable imitation of a lawsuit in front of a one-person jury."

With No Liability Vaccine Makers Race to Make Vaccines

With the threat of vaccine injury lawsuits removed, more pharmaceutical companies have entered the lucrative vaccine business. For the past three decades, the global vaccine industry has been busy creating hundreds of new experimental vaccines, pushing for some of them to be fast-tracked, even before the recent push for a COVID-19 vaccine.

It doesn't matter how sloppy their work is or whether there is a lack of safety testing because, with no liability, there is no reason for safety testing, Robert Kennedy Jr., founder and chairman of the board of directors of the Children's Health Defense, says in a video.¹⁴

Their biggest cost, "paying liability at the back end," is not there, Kennedy says. "There's no reason to make [vaccines] safe because nobody can sue [them] … there's no consequence of giving you a really dangerous vaccine … it's a goldmine. If you can get a vaccine on the CDC schedule, it's worth a billion dollars a year typically to your company."

Moreover, the public has no redress against potential harm from the vaccine companies. "You cannot sue them for redress," says Kennedy. "There's no discovery; there's no depositions; there's no medical malpractice; there's no class actions."

The PREP Act Also Protects Vaccine Makers

In 2005, the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) was passed as part of Bioshield legislation addressing potential bioterrorism threats after 9/11. The PREP Act shields vaccine makers from lawsuits for injuries caused by vaccines created and used during a declared public health emergency (such as the COVID-19 pandemic).

According to the Department of Health and Human Services, the PREP Act provides immunity from "claims of loss caused" by countermeasures or treatment of:¹⁵

"… diseases, threats and conditions determined by the Secretary to constitute a present, or credible risk of a future public health emergency to entities and individuals involved in the development, manufacture, testing, distribution, administration, and use of such countermeasures.

A PREP Act declaration is specifically for the purpose of providing immunity from liability, and is different from, and not dependent on, other emergency declarations."

Like the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act of 2005, or Prep Act, facilitates the administration of potentially inadequately tested, risky vaccines and drugs by releasing drug manufacturers from all liability for covered "countermeasures."

Moreover, it gives the Secretary of HHS the power to detain, examine and quarantine indefinitely any individual thought to be infected with a communicable disease.

When the Act was passed in 2005, it paved the way for then HHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius to impose quarantines and mandatory vaccinations if deemed necessary for the swine flu pandemic occurring at the time. Today, of course, the PREP Act allows those same scenarios as they relate to the COVID-19 pandemic.

AstraZeneca: Fast-Tracked Vaccines Need Liability Shield

Marketing of a COVID-19 vaccine is developing rapidly, especially in the U.K., where the government has signed vaccine supply pacts with AstraZeneca and Oxford, Pfizer, BioNTech, Valneva, Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline.¹⁶ Yet, a recent article in Stat News asked "would vaccine manufacturers be willing to roll out vaccines on such a slight evidence base" without a liability shield? It's a good question that the article really didn't answer.¹⁷

Experts admit that "fast-tracking" to licensure an experimental vaccine like COVID-19 at "warp-speed" has never been done and is problematical for public safety. In an interview with Harvard Business School, Ken Frazier, chairman and CEO of Merck & Co., said:¹⁸

"I think when people tell the public that there's going to be a vaccine by the end of 2020, they do a grave disservice to the public … first of all, it takes a lot of time. I think the record for the fastest vaccine ever brought to market was Merck in the mumps vaccine. It took about four years. Our most recent vaccine for Ebola took five and a half years …

And here we [don't] even understand the virus itself or how the virus affects the immune system. We're starting there. We're starting with a spike protein as the antigen … we're hoping … to create a vaccine that we can study quickly that can be both safe and effective and … durable … if you're going to use a vaccine in billions of people, you better know what that vaccine does."

Officials at AstraZeneca, the U.K.'s second-largest drug maker, acknowledge that the risks of a hastily-marketed and tested vaccine necessitate a shield from risk which they have sought.

"This is a unique situation where we as a company simply cannot take the risk if in … four years the vaccine is showing side effects," Ruud Dobber, a senior AstraZeneca member, told Reuters.¹⁹ "In the contracts we have in place, we are asking for indemnification. For most countries it is acceptable to take that risk on their shoulders because it is in their national interest," he said.

A Grave Risk Barely Acknowledged by Big Vax

The history of vaccines against coronaviruses has not been encouraging — a paradoxical effect has been seen. Rather than fighting the infection, they can actually trigger what's known as paradoxical immune enhancement.

What this means is that, despite a robust antibody response when you're exposed to the actual virus, rather than protecting you, the vaccine actually enhances the virus' ability to make you sick or even kill you.

This paradoxical effect means that "the most hazardous hurdle for the inoculation is … challenging participants with wild COVID infection," says Kennedy.²⁰ "Past attempts at developing COVID vaccines have always faltered at this stage as both humans and animals achieved robust antibody response, then sickened and died when exposed to the wild virus." He gives a chilling example:

"They tested it [a coronavirus vaccine] on about 35 children, and … the children developed a champion antibody response, robust, durable. It looked perfect, and then the children were exposed to the wild virus and they all became sick. Two of them died. They abandoned the vaccine. It was a big embarrassment to FDA and NIH."

Research published in the Journal of Translational Autoimmunity confirms that treatment with a vaccine may increase the risks associated with a wild type virus rather than protect against it. The researchers call the process pathogenic priming.²¹

"The problem, highlighted in two studies, became obvious following post-vaccination challenge with the SARS virus. [They] found that recombinant SARS spike-protein-based vaccines not only failed to provide protection from SARS-CoV infection [COVID-19], but also that the mice experienced increased immunopathology with eosinophilic infiltrates in their lungs.

Similarly [research] found that ferrets previously vaccinated against SARS-CoV also developed a strong inflammatory response in liver tissue (hepatitis). Both studies suspected a 'cellular immune response.'"

The pathogenic priming is consistent with other autoimmunity actions including the release of proinflammatory cytokines creating a storm, states the research. It has been seen in coronaviruses similar to COVID-19:²²

"Similar to the SARS-CoV animal studies found that mice vaccinated against MERS-CoV (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome) develop[ed] exaggerated pulmonary immunopathology when challenged with the MERS virus following vaccination.

They reported that lung mononuclear infiltrates were observed in all groups after virus challenge, and that increased infiltrates that contained eosinophils and the eosinophil promoting IL-5 and IL-13 cytokines were observed only in the vaccinated animals."

Why would the recombinant vaccines create a greater risk for wild type viruses rather than protect against them? Because, according to the research, immunogenic peptides in viruses have "high local homologous matching"²³ to human proteins, meaning they closely resemble each other allowing opportunistic invasion. The immunogenic peptides have:²⁴

" … a large number of opportunities for expected disturbances in the immune system itself, targeting elements of MHC Class I and Class II antigen presentation, PD-1 signaling, cross-presentation of soluble exogenous antigens and the ER-Phagosome pathway."

The research concludes that such similarity between viruses and human proteins, called homology, likely explains the previous failure of SARS and MERS vaccines in the past and dooms a COVID-19 vaccine as well.

New COVID-19 Vaccine Technology Has Not Been Used Before

There is another risk with at least one of the new COVID-19 vaccine candidates, which uses a type of technology never before used in human vaccines, called mRNA.

According to Dr. Andrew Kaufman, a forensic psychiatrist who formerly served as clinical assistant professor of psychiatry at SUNY Upstate Medical University,²⁵ RNA vaccines actually change the genetic makeup of our own cells in a form of gene therapy.²⁶

While news outlets claim to have debunked²⁷ Kaufman's evaluation, the fact remains that this is a type of vaccine that has never been licensed for use in humans before — so how do the debunkers know for certain that it doesn't change your DNA?

Conventional vaccines train your body to recognize and respond to the proteins of a particular virus by injecting a small amount of the actual viral protein into your body, thereby triggering an immune response and the development of antibodies. But, mRNA vaccines are designed to co-opt your body to force it to produce its own viral protein, which, theoretically your immune system should then attack.

As I said, the danger is that no previous vaccines have had your own cells produce the viral proteins responsible for producing immunity and no one can predict what will happen, especially for individuals genetically and epigenetically predisposed to developing autoimmune disorders.

What might go wrong when you turn your body into a viral protein factory making antibodies on a continual basis? Again, no one knows since no mRNA vaccines are on the market and their first users will be guinea pigs. But, according to researchers at the University of Pennsylvania and Duke University.²⁸

"Potential safety concerns that are likely to be evaluated in future preclinical and clinical studies include local and systemic inflammation, the biodistribution and persistence of expressed immunogen, stimulation of auto-reactive antibodies and potential toxic effects of any non-native nucleotides and delivery system components."

When looking at other research the scientists also worried about blood clots and edema, and some of these effects, such as systemic inflammation and blood clots, resemble severe symptoms of COVID-19 itself. Since the changes work at the genetic level, could this vaccine technology create long-term or even generational effects in the human genome?

Brave New Vaccine Technology

To repeat, mRNA technology has never been approved for use in human vaccines that will function very differently from traditional vaccines. The mRNA technology is not like other viruses where a vaccine is inactivated or simply weakened. In a video Kaufman says:²⁹

"They have to use a special technology. It is not like a regular vaccine where there's just a syringe with one needle and a liquid containing whatever is in the vaccine. This has three needles so the needle in the middle is the typical type that the material would flow through but the other two needles on either side are actually electrodes."

The electrodes generate an electric current inside of our cells called electroporation:

"… the electricity causes the cell membranes to create little holes called pores and then the genetic material can enter the cell through those pores whereas normally the cell membrane would be a barrier."

The bottom line is, Kaufman says, not only is the source of the genetic material found in the vaccine undetermined, but the brave new vaccines could be used for "all sorts of purposes that we may not know about."³⁰

Extending protection from liability to vaccine-makers allows the irresponsible sale and marketing of vaccines that have been poorly tested and formulated because the manufacturers have "nothing to lose." If the mRNA vaccine technology found in many COVID-19 vaccines harms us and permanently alters our genes, unaccountable vaccine manufacturers will be totally off the hook.

from Articles https://ift.tt/32SStKU
via IFTTT

Citrus glow bars that will curb your sugar cravings

Biomarker indicating neurodegeneration identified in the eye

A new study indicates a well-known biomarker that serves as a marker for earlier diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases is now detectable in the eye. Neurofilament light chain, a protein previously detected in cerebrospinal fluid and blood that is being explored as a biomarker to detect neurodegeneration, has now been identified in the vitreous humor, or fluid within the eye.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3kD4cDI

Health & Fitness

Labels

Technology

New Post

The Iconic’s 30% off birthday sale is back again, so run!

The Bachelor Irena’s tragic health battle revealed on cult podcast

Vaccination: What’s Trust Got to Do With It?