donderdag 26 mei 2022

New studies show that the COVID vaccines damage your immune system, likely permanently


The vaccines are making it more likely you'll be infected with Omicron 90 days after you are fully vaccinated. 

To keep vaccine effectiveness high against omicron, vaccination every 30 days is needed.

  Dec 25, 2021

Update Jan 7, 2022: The numbers in the Denmark study described below are now confirmed by government data from Germany showing that vaccinated people are 8X more likely to develop Omicron than unvaccinated people. This is not surprising since a paper from Germany showed the same thing: the more you vaccinate, the worse it gets.

Worried about Omicron? Guess what? After 90 days, the vaccine they gave you is going to make you MORE likely to get infected from Omicron, not less. The longer you stay on the vaccine treadmill, the harder to get off in the future and the easier you’ll make it for the virus.

In short, we’ve been lied to about the vaccine. It is protecting you less and less over time. While you may get a benefit for earlier variants, the benefit for other variants (and likely other diseases) is going to be negative. In short, you are getting a short term benefit against Delta, but at the expense of a degradation of your overall immunity to everything else.

These vaccines may help you win the war against a variant that may soon be rare, but the price you pay is that you make your immunity to everything else worse. It’s a dumb tradeoff (especially since early treatments work so well). But the people making the laws won’t believe any of the science referenced in this article, so it will continue.

Alix Mayer alerted me to this game changing tweet about a study in Denmark which instantly went viral as you can see from the number of retweets:


Ezra Levant 🍁 @ezralevant

Holy moly. This study shows that after three months the vaccine effectiveness of Pfizer & Moderna against Omicron is actually negative. Pfizer customers are 76.5% more likely and Moderna customers are 39.3% more likely to be infected than unvaxxed people. medrxiv.org/content/10.110…


10,584 Retweets19,863 Likes

 

I want to tell you what this really means and how it is being attacked.

Summary: Refuse to comply with mandates. Now.

This paper means we will need to inject people every 30 days if we want to “protect” them. Based on the harm that the vaccines do to our immune system, it’s likely that the needed interval will shorten with each booster.

If people don’t get boosted as required, they will be MORE vulnerable to Delta and Omicron than if they weren’t vaccinated. That’s what NEGATIVE vaccine efficacy means. It doesn’t mean the protection wears off (like we were told). It means the OPPOSITE of what you were told: it means the vaccines helps the virus to infect you (by suppressing your immune system, probably permanently each time we are injected according to Dr. Ryan Cole). It means we were lied to.


In short, the vaccine is like a heroin addiction: once you’ve had a taste of it, you are hooked: you have to continue it for life if you want protection. If you stop it, you’re a sitting duck for the virus.

What’s worse is our government is mandating this now. In light of this paper, they will change the vaccine mandates to force you to get vaccinated every month or you will be fired from your job. Their next move could well be to make it illegal not to be vaccinated. This seems like where things are headed based on what is happening in other countries where they are quickly stripping away your rights to do anything without a vaccination.

And we have no clue what monthly (and later weekly) vaccination will do to your body. This has never been tested.

My advice is simple. If you have been vaccinated, you need to stop now. Do not get the booster. My friend Dr. Robert Malone is fond of repeating the old adage, “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.”

Sadly, most people cannot afford to lose their jobs, so they will get vaccinated and medical professionals will not speak out since doing so will cause them to lose their license.

The faster, safer, lower cost way to end the pandemic

Everyone needs to stop listening to the CDC ( Center for Disease Control nvdr.) now and start listening to people who have been saying to ditch the vaccines and aggressively promote early treatment with repurposed drugs.

The entire pandemic will end as soon as the CDC stops ignoring the existing early treatment protocols which have been available since March 2020 (Fareed and Tyson protocol was first available back then). Masking, vaccines, mandates, lockdowns, and social distancing were never needed. We could have (and still can) end the hospitalization and death with just one thing: early treatment. Just like Japan has done. But the CDC refused to listen.

What the paper said in detail

First, the link in the tweet is to the outdated version of the paper. The current version can be found here.

Start at the comments, both from social media and also from medrxiv readers.

Check out the social media portion of the comments

Here are some comments (on old and new version of the paper):

·  So assume the results you like (high VE for recent vaccination) are causal, but hand wave confounders at results you don't like (negative VE for distant vaccination)? Science?

·  This is a superb paper, especially the careful approach to CNV calling and the Bayesian methods used throughout.

·  Looking at the graphs, I see both vaccines lose all effectiveness at 90 days, but worse, actually drop into strong negative effectiveness after that time.

This would mean that these vaccines *increase* one's chances of infection after the initial 90 days "honeymoon" period.

Am I getting this right?

If so, why are governments pushing third doses as Omicron is becoming dominant?

The key material is in the full PDF:


The graphs above tell the story. Negative VE means the vaccine is helping the virus, not you.

So at 60 days, the protection is close to zero, so if you want to maintain protection, getting vaccinated every 30 days is required.

This isn’t a vaccine at all. This is basically stimulating your immune system so it is already “geared up” to fight the virus. That’s not what a vaccine is supposed to do.

Furthermore, the negative VE after 90 days means you are hooked for life and I would guess (based on the mechanism of action), that we will need shorter and shorter dosing intervals for every booster you get (since it kills off your immune system every time).

So it could very well be monthly boosters after the 2nd dose, weekly boosters after the 3rd dose, and perhaps daily boosters after the 4th dose to maintain your “immunity.”

You can’t stop after that because if you stop, you’re in worse shape than if you never started.

The stunning conclusion of the paper

In light of the exponential rise in Omicron cases, these findings highlight the need for massive rollout of vaccinations and booster vaccinations.

All I can say is “wow.” The people who wrote this paper are clearly drinking the Kool-Aid on their interpretation of what their study means.

They also wrote this (which is purely speculative with no data behind it as noted in the italics were my addition):

The negative estimates in the final period arguably suggest different behaviour and/or exposure patterns in the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts causing underestimation of the VE. This was likely the result of Omicron spreading rapidly initially through single (super-spreading) events causing many infections among young, vaccinated individuals.

This paper should be a wake up call: the vaccines do not work. Stop repeating the insanity.

Early treatments like the Fareed and Tyson protocol are 10X better than any new therapy, they don’t “hook you,” and they don’t cause disability or death.

If doctors started prescribing the Fareed and Tyson protocol, we’d have virtually no deaths, and few hospitalizations. But they can’t do that since medical board will take away the licenses of any physicians who prescribe ivermectin, etc. This is happening now.

We are in this mess because the NIH, CDC, FDA are corrupt and incompetent and they will not hold themselves accountable in an open debate. This has been going on for 20 years in the vaccine space… it’s nothing new. The book “Evidence of harm” documents all of this. Kirby was deliberately neutral in his presentation (being non-judgmental like reporters are supposed to be), but any neutral thinking person will side against the authorities.

Why the paper went viral

So, the reason this paper went viral is because

1.      It is well done,

2.      It was done by PhDs in infectious disease and epidemiology,

3.      The results show what is really happening, and

4.      Nobody has been able to attack the paper with a credible argument, even on Twitter.

5.      It confirms what my team of experts has been saying about negative VE

Here are some of the ridiculous attempts to discredit the paper:

@ezralevant The article says that it's not peer reviewed and is not published in any scientific journals. So without verification there are all kinds of claims out there about all kinds of things. We go by those principles that have passed peer review to separate fact and fiction.

1 Retweet126 Likes

 


SwingTrader @SwingTrader1114

@ezralevant It is impossible to have a negative VE. You cannot have a negative VE. The absolute lowest VE is zero, which infers no protection whatsoever. Your statement is completely false, including the data table that isn’t even in the study you cited.

1 Retweet81 Likes

 

Supporting evidence

The paper isn’t a fluke. There is lots of other evidence in support of the negative VE (and not supporting their speculative explanation for it).

Here’s the data from Canada which shows that we have it backwards. We should be mandating “no vaccines” in order to keep your job and fire all the vaccinated people because these people are the most risky.

In Ontario in the last few days, cases per capita among the vaccinated have skyrocketed above cases per capita among the unvaccinatedClearly, mandates are nonsensical at this point, because the entire case for restricting unvaccinated people is their presumed higher per capita infection rate.

Here’s the UK data showing the same thing. We need to flip around the mandates ASAP.


Robert W Malone, MD @RWMaloneMD

It looks like the U.K. data may support the vaccine-enhanced infection issue both FDA and I have raised.


Triple-Vaccinated More Than FOUR Times As Likely to Test Positive For Omicron Than Unvaccinated, Data Shows – The Daily ScepticAccording to new ONS data, the triple-vaccinated are 4.5 times more likely to test positive for Omicron than the unvaccinated. The double-vaccinated, meanwhile, are 2.3 times more likely to have Omicron.dailysceptic.org

1,257 Retweets2,039 Likes

 

Other supporting data:

1.      On COVID vaccines: why they cannot work, and irrefutable evidence of their causative role in deaths after vaccination and the video about that paper. If the vaccines don’t kill you, they will leave you weaker. Over 90% of the deaths investigated after vaccination were found to have been caused by the vaccines. There is no other explanation.

2.      The BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 reprograms both adaptive and innate immune responses
An excellent article by Jessica Rose which explains the underlying mechanism for why we are seeing the effect that the more you vaccinate, the more you make things worse for people. The vaccine damages both your adaptive and innate immune systems.

3.      Vaccine efficacy declines to be negative in the UK (Expose article)

4.      Booster protection fades within 10 weeks against Omicron: UK study

5.      Booster shots protect against symptomatic Omicron infection for about 10 weeks, study finds — which could mean more doses for some in 2022

6.      This substack article looks at the Danish study (described here) and the UK data. Note that the VE numbers in the two studies are different because if you separate our Omicron, you get a very different picture of VE compared to analyses that don’t separate out VE by variant.

7.      Dr. Ron Brown – Opinion Editorial

December 23, 2021

Ontario, Canada reported 5,790 new COVID-19 cases on Thursday, December 23, 2021, setting the province’s one-day record for new cases since the beginning of the pandemic: Ontario: Case numbers | COVID-19. Thursday’s numbers include 971 unvaccinated new cases compared to 4,392 fully vaccinated new cases—a rapidly rising trend over the past several weeks clearly showing that most new cases are now occurring in fully vaccinated people.

Please help us to spread the word by sharing this article on social media.

Subscribe to Steve Kirsch's newsletter

Thousands of paid subscribers

I write about COVID vaccine safety and efficacy, corruption, censorship, mandates, masking, and early treatments. America is being misled by formerly trusted authorities.

https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/new-study-shows-vaccines-must-be?s=r

No, covid vaccines are NOT “safe and effective” – these 10 surveys reveal the truth

Tuesday, May 24, 2022 by: Ethan Huff

Tags: badhealthbadmedicineBig Pharmabiological weaponCOVIDDangerous Medicinepharmaceutical fraudPlandemicspike proteinSteve KirschSurveystruthvaccine damageVaccine deathsvaccine injuryvaccines

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

5,680VIEWS


(Natural News) Investigative reporter Steve Kirsch put together a series of surveys that show beyond a shadow of a doubt that Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines” are anything but “safe and effective” as the government claims.

Polling his readers as part of a biased sampling, Kirsch asked various questions about how people who got jabbed fared after the fact. The results are truly mind-blowing, especially if you are someone who believes that the jabs are generally nothing about which to worry.

Kirsch admits that his surveys are biased, which is why he is encouraging everyone to replicate them with their own friends, family members, coworkers, schoolmates and others, depending on one’s walk in life.

Peer review Kirsch’s surveys for yourself, if you want to verify them

The questions Kirsch asked addressed both adverse events and deaths rates. Here is what he concluded based on preliminary results:

1) Covid jabs have already killed at least the same number of Americans as the covid virus supposedly has.

2) Covid jabs are killing 336 children aged 5-11 for every one that is supposedly “saved” because of the injections. (Related: Check out this earlier article from Kirsch showing that 28 million children would have to get jabbed in order to supposedly “save” just 14 of them from testing “positive” for covid.)

3) Getting jabbed a second time is the most dangerous part of the process, increasing all-cause mortality rates by at least 800 percent within 30 days (the first and third injections increase it 600 percent and 480 percent respectively

4) The true number of covid-related deaths, jab deaths, and annual deaths from heart attack are relatively comparable with one another since January 2020 to the present.

“This suggests that only around 700,000 people actually died from COVID and a comparable number from the COVID vaccines,” Kirsch writes about this specific data point.

“This is in line with our VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) minimum estimate of excess deaths caused by the vaccine: 12,000 VAERS excess deaths in the US * 41 (the minimum under-reporting factor) = 492,000 deaths minimum.”

5) If you survive covid vaccination and previously had cancer, you are 80 percent more likely to see your cancer worsen post-injection.

“For half the people who got the shot, their cancer got dramatically worse after the shot,” Kirsch writes. “Nobody’s cancer got better after the shot. That is really stunning. How will the CDC explain that one?”

6) Since VAERS underreports by a massive amount, the true number of covid jab deaths could easily be 100 times more than what is officially logged in the system.

“What we can say is that it appears that at least 0.7% of all deaths and vaccine-related miscarriages were reported to VAERS,” Kirsch explains. “None of the 15 deaths of kids 18 and under were reported to VAERS.”

7) Taking into account survey biases, there is clearly no scenario in which any child (let alone any person, period) should ever take any covid injection.

8) If anyone out there thinks that Kirsch is wrong with his assessments, they are encouraged to conduct their own surveys and publish the results for comparative purposes.

9) None of this will ever be published in a medical journal because it runs counter to the official narrative. However, Kirsch will be allowing his readers, starting on May 23, 2022, to conduct their own independent peer reviews of the data to look for errors, similar to what a journal would do.

10) “I encourage you to replicate the surveys yourself if you don’t believe me and publish them,” Kirsch writes as his 10th note to readers.

The 10 surveys themselves are all listed and linked on Kirsch’s Substack. Take the time to go through each one and see what you think.

More stories about the negative health effects of covid “vaccines” can be found at VaccineDamage.news.

Sources for this article include:

SteveKirsch.substack.com

NaturalNews.com

https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-05-24-covid-vaccines-not-safe-effective-ten-surveys.html 

WHO corruption is one of the biggest threats to public health – and its power may be about to expand like never before

 Tuesday, May 24, 2022 by: Cassie B.

Tags: badhealthbadmedicinebig governmentconspiracydeceptiondeep stateenslavedfreedomglobalistshealth freedomIHRinsanitynational securityobeyprivacy watchpublic health emergencysurveillancetraitorsTyrannyWHO

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

6,420VIEWS


 

(Natural News) In recent years, many problems have been presented as posing the biggest threat to public health of our time, from antibiotic resistance to the pandemic and the effects of vaccines. However, we can’t ignore another threat that has the potential to do far more damage than any of those issues on their own: the World Health Organization.

By now, it is clear that the WHO colluded with China to spread misinformation about COVID-19. Their slow response and initial downplaying of the pandemic are being blamed for the disease’s quick spread in the early days. Initially, they echoed the official party line from Beijing that there was little to no risk of the virus being transmitted among humans, despite there being plenty of evidence to contrary. Even when nearby Taiwan warned about the disease’s propensity to spread, they refused to take action. Millions of people traveled to and from Wuhan at the time, and we all know how that ended up.

Despite hospitals in Wuhan overflowing with patients and medical supplies running out, the WHO claimed it was too early to declare it a public health emergency, refusing to restrict travel and trade. It wouldn’t be until several months later, on March 11, that they declared coronavirus a pandemic, even while continuing to praise China for its handling of the disease. The situation was so appalling that President Trump directed his administration to stop funding the organization while reviewing its handling of the pandemic and then pulled the U.S. out of the WHO altogether.

However, one of Joe Biden’s first acts as president was retracting that withdrawal, recommitting the country to full participation in the WHO and the financial obligations that come with it. Unfortunately, this gives them the power to continue to threaten public health in many ways.

Proposed amendments to International Health Regulations are causing major concerns

One of the biggest concerns right now, however, are amendments proposed by the WHO to the International Health Regulations, or IHR, to set up a globalist architecture of health surveillance, reporting and management. The public, not surprisingly, will not be allowed to provide any input regarding the amendments, in direct violation of the basic concept of democracy.

The IHR, which were adopted by the WHO’s 194 member states in 2005, allow the body to declare what is known as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, or PHEIC, if an infectious disease outbreak takes place in a member state, but it currently must be done with the consent of the state in question.

The proposed amendments, however, allow the WHO Director-General to control the declaration of public health emergencies in any member state, even if they object, completely ignoring the sovereignty of the nations involved.

The amendments would also give WHO regional directors authority to declare a Public Health Emergency of Regional Concern (PHERC) wherever they choose. The Director-General will also be granted the power to declare an Intermediate Public Health Alert.

Increased surveillance and secret sources among the proposed amendments

Part of the proposal is an amendment to Article 5 of the IHR that will increase surveillance to develop risk assessments, using the types of predictions and modeling that exaggerated Covid risks a few years ago and sent the world into panic mode.

Article 9, meanwhile, allows WHO to rely on undisclosed sources for the information they use to declare public health emergencies. There are fears that pharmaceutical companies and major WHO donors like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation could have undue power over how countries operate. This influence is already seen in the body’s biased drug recommendations and lists of “essential medicines.”

The significant influence of private money at the corrupt WHO prompted a review in the Journal of Integrative Medicine & Therapy to declare the body’s corruption the “biggest threat to the world’s public health of our time” – and it may be about to get worse.

Sources for this article include:

Expose-News.com

USAToday.com

https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-05-24-who-corruption-biggest-threat-public-health.html

Roemenië: EU/NAVO-criticus wint presidentsverkiezingen

25/11/2024   Historische politieke verrassing in Roemenië: een kandidaat die geen kans had in de peilingen won de eerste verkiezingsronde. R...