Children as young as five are to be offered the bivalent Covid booster vaccine ahead of the winter.

The  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recommended five to 11-year-olds get a single dose of Pfizer’s updated shot.

Children aged six and above can get Moderna’s bivalent booster. Both new vaccines offer better protection against the new Omicron variants than previous jabs.

Officials are now ‘encouraging’ parents to get their children vaccinated before schools go back from the fall break.

But many experts have repeatedly rallied against plans to inoculate the youngest in society, pointing out they are already at a vanishingly low risk of death.

Official estimates suggest more than eight in 10 children under 17 already have antibodies against Covid – either from a jab or previous infection.

It comes amid a sluggish booster rollout among adults.

Before today’s announcement, just six per cent of Americans 12 and older who were eligible for the bivalent boosters had come forward for one. 

Read more



A senior Pfizer executive has admitted under oath that the company never tested their Covid “vaccine” to see if it prevented transmission.

As Jack Phillips reports via The Epoch Times, member of the European Parliament, Rob Roos, asked during a session: 

“Was the Pfizer COVID vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market? Did we know about stopping immunization before it entered the market?”

Pfizer’s Janine Small, president of international developed markets, said in response:

“No … You know, we had to … really move at the speed of science to know what is taking place in the market.”

Roos, of the Netherlands, argued in a Twitter video Monday that following Small’s comments to him, millions of people around the world were duped by pharmaceutical companies and governments.

“Millions of people worldwide felt forced to get vaccinated because of the myth that ‘you do it for others,’” Roos said.

“Now, this turned out to be a cheap lie” and “should be exposed,” he added.

“If you don’t get vaccinated, you’re anti-social. This is what the Dutch Prime Minister and Health Minister told us,” Roos said.

“You don’t get vaccinated just for yourself, but also for others—you do it for all of society. That’s what they said.”

But that argument no longer holds, Roos explained.

“Today, this turns out to be complete nonsense. In a COVID hearing in the European Parliament, one of the Pfizer directors just admitted to me—at the time of introduction, the vaccine had never been tested on stopping the transmission of the virus.”

The Epoch Times has contacted Pfizer for comment.

What Was Said

The Food and Drug Administration wrote in late 2020 that there was no data available to determine whether the vaccine would prevent transmission and for how long it would protect against transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.

“At this time, data are not available to make a determination about how long the vaccine will provide protection, nor is there evidence that the vaccine prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from person to person,” the agency specifically noted.

Meanwhile, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, around the same time, said his firm was “not certain” if those who receive its mRNA vaccine will be able to transmit COVID-19 to other people.

”I think this is something that needs to be examined. We are not certain about that right now,” Bourla told NBC News in December 2020 in response to a question about transmissibility.

Former White House medical adviser Dr. Deborah Birx in June revealed that there was evidence in December 2020 that individuals who received COVID-19 vaccines, including Pfizer’s, could still transmit the virus.

“We knew early on in January of 2021, in late December of 2020, that reinfection was occurring after natural infection,” Birx, the White House COVID-19 response coordinator during the Trump administration, told members of Congress this year.

‘Not Going to Get COVID’

A number of officials in the United States and around the world had claimed COVID-19 vaccines could prevent transmission. Among them, President Joe Biden in July 2021 remarked that “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”

President Joe Biden speaks, flanked by White House Chief Medical Adviser on COVID-19 Dr. Anthony Fauci, during a visit to the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md., on Feb. 11, 2021. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)

Chief Biden administration medical adviser Anthony Fauci in May 2021 said in a CBS interview that vaccinated people are “dead ends” for COVID-19, suggesting they cannot transmit the virus.

“When you get vaccinated, you not only protect your own health and that of the family but also you contribute to the community health by preventing the spread of the virus throughout the community,” Fauci said.

Two months later, in late July of that year, Fauci said that vaccinated people are capable of transmitting the virus.

In the coming months, Fauci, Biden, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, and others pivoted to say the vaccine prevents severe disease, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19.



Thousands of people in the U.K. have reported suffering serious adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccine Injured and Bereaved U.K. (VIBUK) is a group of individuals injured or bereaved by the Covid vaccines (with medical or coroners reports confirming this) campaigning for a change to the current Government vaccine damage payment scheme (VDPS) scheme to create a bespoke COVID-19 compensation scheme that ensures the adversely affected are appropriately compensated and supported. They also want people similarly affected by the vaccines to know that help is available and want their stories to be heard and not ignored. This is Tony’s story as told by VIBUK and reprinted here. VIBUK can be found on Twitter and contacted here.

Back in March 2021, 58 year-old father of two Anthony Shingler from Northwood was getting on with life enjoying his job as a security manager (admittedly stressful at times, he says, but it came with the job and he learned to live with it). He received a text from his doctors surgery with the date and time for his Covid vaccination, which he duly attended. Little did he know of the consequences that would unfold as he followed the Government advice that the vaccine would “protect yourself and others”.

Tony had his first and only AstraZeneca vaccine on March 5th 2021.

Within the first week following his vaccination he started to feel aches and pains, mostly in his legs. During the second week things were getting worse. He managed with work commitments up to the Friday, the end of his working week, but that Friday morning he was really having trouble walking and developed pins and needles and numbness in his feet and hands.

Tony was sent home by ‘Heath and Safety’ to get checked out by his GP. After ringing the surgery and being told they would contact him the next day, Tony and his wife Nicola decided to attend the local walk-in centre, who assessed him sent and him to hospital A&E. Following assessment, the hospital sent him home, saying he had an allergy. Tony has never had an allergy in his life, so found this odd. The next day he started to decline even further. Nicola called an ambulance which took Tony to hospital again; this time they discharged him with sciatica. He’d had sciatica before, so knew how this felt, which was not what he was experiencing, and what to do to diagnose it, which no one in the hospital had done.

Tony returned home, still not knowing why he was feeling so ill and could hardly walk. That same night he had tremendous lower back pain and by the morning he could hardly walk or breathe and could barely talk. Another ambulance was called; on this occasion they encountered a very abrupt and argumentative female paramedic, who didn’t want to listen to Nicola, which caused avoidable stress. On Tony’s third visit to hospital they finally admitted him after Nicola begged an A&E doctor over the phone to investigate transverse myelitis – she had researched and found this had temporarily halted the AstraZeneca trials. He was put on an assessment ward and monitored.

An MRI scan and lumber puncture revealed high proteins in CSF fluid. After asking the doctor what could cause this, he replied: “Double the amount of proteins leads me to believe the vaccine.” Doctors then examined Tony’s medical records and informed Tony: “We believe after reading thoroughly through your medical records and seeing that you have not suffered any previous viral infections, we’ve come to the conclusion that it is a vaccine related illnesses called GBS or Guillain-Barré Syndrome.”

After five days in the assessment ward and having intravenous immune globulin (IVIG), Tony continued to deteriorate; the condition was now massively affecting his arms and lungs. Tony was assisted to phone home and was told to “say what you’ve got to say, as it may be the last time you see them” – words no one ever wants to hear.

Tony was rushed into ICU and fitted with a tracheotomy and ventilated, along with the insertion of a feeding peg and catheter. Tony pulled through but the battle wasn’t over.

This was the beginning of eight and half months in ICU. During Tony’s stay he had a collapsed lung, pneumonia and MRSA numerous times, all whilst being paralysed from the chin down, unable to talk or move. It was a constant battle which played havoc with his mental well-being, on top of the Guillain-Barré Syndrome which caused burning pain all over his body as nerves throughout had been stripped of their protective cover.

One evening, during the summer of 2021, Tony noticed one of the fire escape doors in ICU was slightly ajar. He didn’t give it a second thought as the nurses did this on a regular basis whilst it was warm weather, and he always needed a fan on next to his bed due to the burning hot sensations he was suffering. Out of nowhere, a man walked in through the fire escape and walked towards his bed. At the foot of his bed he was met by a nurse and Tony heard him say, “You made me do this”. He then proceeded to stick a knife into his own chest and died. Later, a nurse was asked to speak with Tony to find out what he saw; the same nurse also spoke with Nicola, saying there had been an incident and they were concerned about Tony’s well-being. Tony told his wife about it; he didn’t think much about it at the time as he was in so much pain, but looking back at that moment, Tony was very vulnerable, he couldn’t defend himself and this continues to haunt him.

On another occasion, a stand-in nurse entered the room to see if Tony was alright and introduce herself. She checked his tracheotomy and Tony then realised she had placed a plastic cap on it; she didn’t realise but she had blocked his airway. As Tony couldn’t move or talk, panic set in and he quickly became stressed as he couldn’t breathe, but the nurse only realised after she heard him gasping for air. Fortunately, she stayed in the room and hadn’t just walked out not seeing him struggling to breathe. These traumatic events will haunt Tony forever.

IVIG treatment initially had no effect on bringing Tony out of the syndrome, and after some discussion between Nicola and the doctors, plasma exchange was the next treatment to be tried to stop the GBS from travelling above his bottom lip.

After seven and a half months, Tony was transferred to ICU respiratory. He was told by one of the doctors they were looking for a long term respiratory unit for him because he was still ventilated and there’s usually not much recovery of the lungs after that amount of time being ventilated. He still doesn’t know how it happened, but his body started to react to the tracheotomy, he started to cough past it, which the physio said shouldn’t be happening. He had nerve tests on his lungs and eventually, after a lot of hard work by the physios, he finally had the tracheotomy removed and could eat and drink again. After eight months of not tasting anything he says his first taste of hospital food was fantastic – and he never thought he would say that!

It was now November 2021 and he had a date to move to a physio rehab hospital. At this point he was still being hoisted out of bed because of his paralysed state. Eventually he started to twitch his fingers and raise his hand slightly whilst resting his arm on his leg. Over the months this progressed, and he remembers the day the physios wanted him to stand with the help of a standing hoist. The pain in his calf muscles was horrendous, but he says he just kept thinking to himself, “no pain no gain”.

The months went by, the physio kept coming, and over time Tony managed to sit on the edge of the bed then progressed to standing with different lifting equipment and frames.

The day came after 14 months in hospital care for Tony to return home for good, after first going home on the odd days and then returning to hospital. One hiccup was that the local council said it was unable to pay for or fit a stair lift for him, without which doctors said it would be an unsafe discharge, but eventually one was supplied by a charity.

Tony’s discharge date was decided. He was in a ward on his own until two days before his discharge when they admitted two new patients. Unbeknown to Tony the one next to him had Covid and Tony caught it. He had two days of headaches and a temperature but then began recovering, although he had to stay in for a further 10 days in isolation.

Tony finally got home on May 17th 2022. He is still using walking aides to get round the house, getting used to the things he used to be able to do but now can’t.

After eight weeks, Tony walked on the outside patio with his frame, but unfortunately lost his balance and fell to the floor. After waiting an extraordinary 14 hours for an ambulance, which arrived the following day(!), he was taken to hospital again. An X-ray revealed a fractured hip; a metal plate and three screws later he was back in a hospital bed. Luckily, he was home within a week and he is now fully recovered from his fractured hip. However the GBS remains and physio carries on. His hands have suffered some form of osteoporosis and his knuckles have locked and don’t move so he has trouble holding most things – pens, coins, clothing etc. He still has nerve damage in the bottom of his legs and feet, for which he has to wear orthopaedic straps to hold his feet in place as the muscles and nerves are still weak and cause drop foot. He suffers with swelling of the lower limbs due to the insufficient working of the pumps in the legs to remove fluid.

He has progressed to crutches and a wheelchair for longer distances as he gets fatigued really easily. Tony takes one day at a time now and those precious moments he says he embraces more than ever before. Without the support of Nicola and his family he’s sure he would not have made it.

Nicola then had to begin the battle with the Government vaccine damage payment scheme (VDPS), which dragged on for 16 months before he was finally awarded a payout. Tony and Nicola were shocked to learn he wasn’t alone and how many people have been affected by all sorts of adverse reactions after having the vaccine. It infuriates Tony to know how hard Nicola had to fight for any recognition and compensation. This is a battle all VIBUK members are having to fight.

Nicola now plays a huge part in VIBUK, collating medical reports, new findings and news articles for research purposes which aids the group in offering advice, guidance and support. Since Tony was discharged from hospital he has been keen to speak to journalists and media sources about the trauma that he and his family have faced, but has been saddened by how few journalists are willing to tell his story and report on Covid vaccine injuries, though some newspapers, particularly tabloids, have done so. He was glad of the opportunity to appear on a special edition of the Mark Steyn show on GB News, where Mark was joined by fellow presenters Neil Oliver, Dan Wootton and Michelle Dewberry and Sir Christopher Chope MP, to hear members of VIBUK tell their stories.



Marvel has come under criticism for producing a paid for comic book to promote Pfizer’s mRNA COVID vaccines.

The comic features The Avengers characters, comparing them to “everyday heroes who fight to protect their community” by dutifully taking Pfizer vaccines and campaigning for others to do the same.

A LinkedIn post by Pfizer announced “Today, Pfizer and BioNTech announced our new collaboration with Marvel Comics.”

The post continues, “Together we created a custom comic book featuring the Avengers who fight to protect their community. We hope that people around the world enjoy reading the comic book… At Pfizer, we encourage people to come together to help protect themselves by staying up to date with COVID-19 vaccinations.”

Within the comic, which is available online, one page states “You’re among everyday heroes every day! The Construction worker, the florist, the painter… everyday heroes are everywhere in your community.”

“What makes them everyday heroes?” the comic asks before explaining how they all take the vaccines.

“We all need to do our part,” the comic further notes, adding “So, vaccinate, stay up to date with the latest recommended booster for you. And be an everyday hero!”

The comic contains a weak plot about a super villain (the virus) called Ultron who “keeps changing and evolving,” meaning that the Avengers “keep adapting and re-strategizing,” (taking booster shots).

“Everyday heroes don’t wear capes!” the comic states, explaining “But they do wear a small bandage on their upper arm after they get their latest Covid vaccination — because everyday heroes are concerned about their health.”

Twitter users reacted to the development:

The development comes amid Twitter removing and then reinstating a tweet from Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo who noted that a new analysis of mRNA vaccines “showed an increased risk of cardiac-related death among men 18-39.”

Ladapo further wrote “FL will not be silent on the truth.” 

———————————————————————————————————————

ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.

Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, we urgently need your financial support here. ———————————————————————————————————————



The Florida Department of Health released the findings of a self-controlled case series showing there was a massive spike in heart-related deaths among young men within a month after taking the COVID mRNA injection.

The analysis, which “studied mortality risk following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination,” found that “there is an 84% increase in the relative incidence of cardiac-related death among males 18-39 years old within 28 days following mRNA vaccination.”

“Today, we released an analysis on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines the public needs to be aware of. This analysis showed an increased risk of cardiac-related death among men 18-39. FL will not be silent on the truth,” Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo tweeted Friday with a link to the study.

Additionally, the findings showed “Males over the age of 60 had a 10% increased risk of cardiac-related death within 28 days of mRNA vaccination.”

It also noted that vaccines without new mRNA technology did not show the same increased mortality risk.

“Non-mRNA vaccines were not found to have these increased risks among any population,” the analysis revealed.

This comes after the Florida Department of Health issued guidance in March recommending against use of the Covid mRNA vaccines for “healthy children and adolescents 5 years old to 17 years old,” citing reports of increased incidence of myocarditis in 16 and 17 year olds who took the experimental injection.

Twitter had reportedly censored Ladapo’s health guidance tweet on Sunday, claiming he “violated” its rules, but the tweet has since been restored after online backlash.

Florida is not an outlier in its COVID vaccine recommendations.

Sweden and the UK also recommended against vaccinating children between 5-11, and Denmark recommended against vaccinating children under 18.

Read the Florida Health guidance:


Twitter: @WhiteIsTheFury

Truth Social: @WhiteIsTheFury

Gettr: @WhiteIsTheFury

Gab: @WhiteIsTheFury

Minds: @WhiteIsTheFury

Parler: @WhiteIsTheFury



While most children who present in Boston Children’s Hospital’s gender clinic know their gender “usually around the age of puberty,” many others come out of the womb knowing they were born into the wrong body, psychologist Kerry McGregor explains in a since-deleted video posted in August by the Harvard-affiliated medical facility. The clip resurfaced this week, drawing even more controversy to the scandal-plagued institution.

“A good portion of children do know as early as seemingly from the womb and they will usually express their gender identity as very young children, some as soon as they can talk,” McGregor says in the video before revealing that the clinic sees children from “ages two and three up to the age of nine” and instructing parents on how to “just be supportive” of their supposedly “gender-diverse” children by “giving them the space and support to explore their gender.”

While Boston Children’s is not the only hospital to offer gender transition services from counseling to surgery to kids – as of August, some 13 US hospitals perform gender transition surgeries on minors – the Harvard-affiliated facility attracted unwanted attention in August after it was called out by conservatives for its videos advertising those services.

Blaming a “right-wing misinformation campaign” for what it claimed was an avalanche of death threats and bomb scares, the clinic attempted to memory-hole evidence it provided such procedures to children, deleting dozens of videos – including the “babies know they’re trans” clip – from its YouTube account

However, while Boston Children’s now claims to only perform the procedures on patients over 18 years of age, 65 of the 204 gender-affirmation surgeries performed by its Center for Gender Surgery from January 2017 to August 2020 were done on patients under 18, according to a peer-reviewed study published earlier this year in the Journal on Clinical Medicine.

The paper describes the Harvard facility as “the first pediatric center in the United States to offer gender-affirming chest surgeries for individuals over 15-years-old and genital surgeries for those over 17 years of age.”




The prestigious Vanderbilt University has suspended gender altering surgeries at its medical center after outrage over claims the hospital ‘chemically castrates’ minors for financial gain.

Vanderbilt University Medical Center [VUMC] confirmed it was freezing all ‘gender affirmation surgery’ on underage patients pending a review of their processes, in response to calls from Tennessee lawmaker to investigate the hospital.

VUMC came under fire last month after conservative activist Matt Walsh released a 2018 video showing Dr. Shayne Taylor – an LGBTQ specialist at the hospital – touting the lucrative financial business of performing transgender surgeries.

‘Some of our VUMC financial folks in October of 2016 put down some costs of how much money we think each patient would bring in,’ Taylor can be heard saying. ‘And this is only including top surgery, this isn’t including any bottom surgery, and it’s a lot of money.’ 

Walsh also sent a report following his own investigation into VUMC’s trans program which found the hospital ‘drugs, chemically castrates and performs double mastectomies on minors.’

Read more




After the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of COVID-19 vaccines, blood clots were some of the earliest adverse events observed, and abnormal coagulation continues to be one of the most frequent and serious problems reported.

As of mid-September, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) — notorious for capturing only a minuscule proportion of adverse events — had received notification of more than 43,000 blood clotting disorders, including acute-onset problems in young children.

Clotting disorders make the blood clot “too easily,” generating clots that can travel through the bloodstream and increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes, among other potential complications.

Funeral directors and embalmers in the U.S. and U.K. have gone public with shocking descriptions of highly unusual blood clots in up to 85% of the bodies coming under their care — a “massive increase” compared to pre-COVID-19 vaccine times when ordinary-looking clots might be found in 5% to 10% of the deceased.

“In all my years of embalming, we would run across clots from time to time,” said Richard Hirschman, an experienced funeral director in Alabama, “but since May last year [2021], something about the blood has changed. It’s not normal. It’s drastic.”

The rampant clotting and the clots’ disturbing sci-fi appearance — “long fibrous entities that can completely block a vein or artery,” which Hirschman likens to calamari, rubber bands, spaghetti, worms or parasites — are just some of the concerns prompting questions about blood supply safety.

No ‘safety risks?’

About 55% of blood is plasma — which, among other functions, supplies proteins “for blood clotting and immunity” — with the remaining 45% consisting of red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets suspended in the plasma.

Depending on their blood type, individuals who give blood can choose to donate whole blood, plasma or platelets, or they can make a “Power Red” donation (a “concentrated dose” of red blood cells).

The American Red Cross says it will not accept blood from someone whose blood “does not clot normally,” but — following guidance from the same branch of the FDA that oversees vaccines — welcomes immediate donations from anyone who received one of the mRNA or other COVID-19 vaccines available in the U.S., as long as the person says he is “symptom-free and feeling well.”

The Red Cross claims to be independent but openly celebrates its “special relationship” with the federal government — a relationship that includes periodic appropriations and contracts.

In a recent tweet directed at potential blood transfusion recipients, the Red Cross clarified:

The tweet generated numerous responses from the public accusing the Red Cross of disseminating “misinformation” and directing the organization’s attention to peer-reviewed publications contradicting its languid attitude.

In one of the most alarming studies, published in August in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research, Italian surgeons described atypical clumping of red blood cells and the presence of “extraordinarily anomalous structures and substances” of “various shapes and sizes of unclear origin” in over 94% of symptomatic, COVID-19-vaccinated individuals whose blood they examined.

The 1,006 study participants, ranging in age from 15 to 85, received a first (14%), second (45%) or third (41%) dose of a Pfizer or Moderna mRNA vaccine about a month before the analysis of their blood.

Pointing to other studies that found foreign materials in the blood of COVID-19 vaccine recipients and in COVID-19 vaccine vials — materials “that the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] and the many promoters of the experimental injections claimed were not in them at all” — the Italian authors concluded the vaccine-induced blood alterations were “likely … to be involved in producing the coagulation disorders commonly reported after anti-COVID injections.”

Putting the matter even more plainly, they stated:

“[S]uch abrupt changes as we have documented in the peripheral blood profile of 948 patients have never been observed after inoculation by any vaccines in the past according to our clinical experience. The sudden transition … from a state of perfect normalcy to a pathological one … is unprecedented. …

“In our collective experience, and in our shared professional opinion, the large quantity of particles in the blood of mRNA injection recipients is incompatible with normal blood flow especially at the level of the capillaries.”

Another study by Romanian researchers, sent to the Red Cross by the tweeting public, not only reported that Pfizer’s “vaccine-associated synthetic mRNA persists in systemic circulation for at least 2 weeks” but also noted, “extended plasma clearance times compared to estimates presented by mRNA vaccine manufacturers.”

Meanwhile, a case report from Germany presenting autopsy results for a man who died after receiving three “gene-based” COVID-19 vaccine doses (one AstraZeneca, two Pfizer) over a seven-month period conclusively revealed the presence of COVID-19 vaccine spike protein in both brain and heart — and particularly in small blood vessel cells.

These and other studies may be why members of the public like “Mary” incredulously tweeted back to the Red Cross, “Are you kidding? There is proof it enters other body cells like the heart, causing myocarditis; how do you think it gets to the heart from the injection site???”

The FDA has refused to release autopsy results in its possession for people who died following COVID-19 vaccination.

Out, damned clot

As early as May 2021, vaccine researchers were disclosing the “unexpected” entry into the bloodstream of the vaccines’ synthetic spike protein, while other pharmaceutical industry consultants admitted, “Some of the vaccine dose is going to make it into the bloodstream, of course.”

Around the same time, figures like Canadian physician Dr. Charles Hoffe were warning that technologies like CT scans and MRIs, which can identify large blood clots, would not find the “microscopic” clots affecting many of the COVID-19-vaccinated, who might “have no idea they are even having these microscopic blood clots.”

Hoffe was able to ascertain the widespread presence of micro-blood clots in his mRNA-vaccinated patient population using D-dimer tests that look for protein fragments associated with clots.

The Canadian doctor also cautioned that when blood clots damage the brain, spinal cord, heart or lungs, “those tissues … are permanently damaged.”

A year after these admissions, in May 2022, the FDA finally acknowledged the risk of “potentially life-threatening blood clots” in recipients of the Janssen/Johnson & Johnson (J&J) COVID-19 vaccine.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) issued similar advisories about AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine.

Other countries such as India and Denmark admitted to blood clot risks while trying to blame them on “faulty injection technique.”

Neither the FDA nor the EMA said a word about the clotting risks of the more widely used Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 shots, even though nearly 7 in 10 (69%) of the clotting disorders reported to VAERS as of mid-September were attributed to Pfizer’s shot, with another 22% linked to Moderna’s and only 9% to the J&J jab.

Although no VAERS reports thus far blame blood clots on the more recently authorized Novavax vaccine, the far-from-traditional nanoparticle concoction not only delivers premade spike proteins — “consistently shown to create clotting issues” — but also residual insect and viral proteins and DNA contaminants.

Large risks from nanoparticles?

Nanoparticle technology is a prominent feature of the two mRNA injections and the Novavax vaccine, and biodistribution of the injected nanoparticles has been a growing cause for concern.

Well before COVID-19, mainstream news outlets alerted the public to nanoparticles’ tendency to “get into the bloodstream and accumulate elsewhere in the body” following oral ingestion — with “unintended effects on cells and organs” — and described how inhaled nanoparticles “work their way through the lungs and into the bloodstream where they can raise the risk of heart attack and stroke.”

On a website for laypeople, the European Commission discloses that nanoparticles “will move with the circulation into all the organs and tissues of the body,” also noting animal model evidence showing “that very small nanoparticles can transfer from a pregnant rat to the fetus.”

In their analysis of vaccinated individuals’ blood, the Italian authors quoted earlier noted their suspicion that some of the foreign materials they detected are “graphene-family particles,” materials that “have been intensively studied by researchers for decades and increasingly so since COVID-19.”

A comprehensive and hardly reassuring 2016 study in Particle and Fibre Toxicology described “toxic side effects” of graphene-family nanomaterials in many biological applications, reporting that they “can induce acute and chronic injuries in tissues by penetrating through the blood-air barrier, blood-testis barrier, blood-brain barrier, and blood-placenta barrier etc.”

That study also noted that long-term toxicity data are lacking.

Many unanswered questions

Recently, a Washington State couple, Cornelia Hertzler and Ron Bly came forward to tell the tragic story of their hospitalized infant son’s death-by-blood-clot last February.

The death occurred two weeks after the hospital administered an unauthorized blood transfusion to the baby, despite claims that, “Patients are free to refuse transfusions for any reason.”

According to the parents, who had clearly articulated their wish to use blood from directed blood donors, the hospital pooh-poohed their concerns and used “random blood” instead.

The infant’s eventually fatal blood clot became evident the very next day, with the clot, by his mother’s account, getting “worse and worse and slowly … inching closer to his heart.”

Although there is no way to know the COVID-19 vaccination status of those who donated the blood used in the baby’s transfusion, the fact that “most of the nation’s blood supply is now coming from donors who have been inoculated [against COVID-19]” raises many questions.

Existing blood banks may prefer to dismiss those questions as the fevered imaginings of “COVID skeptics” — arguing that requests for blood from unvaccinated donors “would be an operational can of worms for a medically unjustifiable request” — but farsighted entrepreneurs interested in providing such a service might not have to worry about battling for clients.


Deadly COVID Vaccines and the Mysterious Downward Spiral



Genocide Alert: Hospitals Profit From Massive Spike In COVID Vaccine-Induced Heart Damage In Children




A new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report highlights a record number of children are now being hospitalised with common colds due to weakened immune systems.

The Daily Mail reports that the CDC found that a historically high number of inpatients under 18 years old were struggling with common viruses during August 2021, after lockdowns, masks and social distancing hit a peak.

The figures show the highest levels of children with respiratory illnesses ever recorded in summer. The levels were more consistent with December of previous years.

The data was compiled from hospitals in seven different states including Washington, Texas, New York and Ohio.

Commenting on the findings, Dr Scott Roberts, a medical director at Yale University stated that lockdowns impacted the ability of children to build up immunity to common illnesses.

“There are two implications to this,” the doctor said, explaining “First, the gap gives time for the viruses to mutate even further to cause more severe disease.”

“And second, whatever immunity was built up to those viruses’ it will have waned making the immune response now much less potent,” Roberts added.

The doctor also noted that children, including his own son are now getting “constant infections.”

The CDC data is consistent with research by scientists at Yale who warned that it is not normal to see children with combinations of seven common viruses, including adenovirus, rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), human metapneumovirus, influenza and parainfluenza, as well as COVID-19.

As we previously highlighted, there has also been a global outbreak of hepatitis cases in children, with the media asserting the cause is “unknown.”

Biden administration officials have continuously pushed for children to keep wearing masks in schools, and there are still hordes of hypochondriacs forcing their children to do so, despite COVID posing virtually no risk to the health of children.

Some even cite the rise in hospitalisations of children as a reason to bring mask mandates back:

As we have previously highlighted, lockdowns and masking in particular have had massively detrimental impacts upon children.

A study in Britain found that many children entering elementary school have severely underdeveloped verbal skills, with many are unable to even say their own name.

According to speech therapists, mask wearing has caused a 364% increase in patient referrals of babies and toddlers.

Another study revealed how mean IQ scores of young children born during the pandemic have tumbled by as much as 22 points while verbal, motor and cognitive performance have all suffered as a result of lockdown.

study published in the Royal Society Open Science journal found that lockdowns in the UK caused around 60,000 children to suffer clinical depression.

Figures show that 400,000 British children were referred to mental health specialists last year for things like eating disorders and self-harm.

Education experts have asserted that forcing schoolchildren to wear face masks has caused long lasting psychological trauma.

An Ofsted report also warned of serious delays in learning caused by lockdown restrictions.

“Children turning two years old will have been surrounded by adults wearing masks for their whole lives and have therefore been unable to see lip movements or mouth shapes as regularly,” states the report.

Another study out of Germany which found that the reading ability of children has plummeted compared to pre-COVID times thanks to lockdown policies that led to the closure of schools.

———————————————————————————————————————

ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.

Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, we urgently need your financial support here. ———————————————————————————————————————



There is now no shortage of evidence that the coronavirus had begun spreading undetected all over the world by autumn 2019 at the latest. However, the 2019-20 flu season was mild in most places. For instance, here is U.S. mortality, with the 2019-20 flu season circled.

And here is England and Wales, with the unremarkable end of winter 2019-20 on the left hand side (before week 10). The contrast with the spring surge (and subsequent waves) is obvious.

This leads to a mystery: why did COVID-19 only start killing lots of people come spring 2020 if it had been hanging around quietly all winter?

Some sceptics argue that it’s because Covid isn’t really a more severe virus than flu, but the excess deaths were all caused by how we started responding to it in February and March 2020. For example, the overuse of ventilators particularly in New York City and the surrounding states in the first wave has been suggested by some to account for tens of thousands of additional deaths. However, while a ventilator panic in and around NYC will explain some of the additional deaths that spring, it wouldn’t explain the deadly outbreaks elsewhere, or the deadly outbreaks that kept coming in subsequent waves even as the use of ventilators was scaled back.

The fact that deadly Covid outbreaks kept coming over the ensuing months and years (see the U.S. chart above) is a powerful objection to the idea that what was causing most of the deaths was anything peculiar about the treatments used in, say, New York in March 2020. After all, many states including Florida had deadly waves during summer 2021 as the Delta variant surged. But Florida had not had a large wave the previous winter (despite famously ending its statewide restrictions in autumn 2020). It’s clearly not the case that medics in Florida started going big on the ventilators again just as Delta appeared, and then stopped using them again afterwards. This is not an adequate explanation for the patterns of deaths we see. Early on there was a high level of variation in how many deaths occurred in different U.S. states, just as there was in different countries, for example, between Eastern and Western Europe. However, over time the number of excess deaths tended to converge, putting a limit on how much of the variation can be pinned on things specific to localities or time periods, such as poor treatment protocols early on in the north-eastern United States.

Below is the picture in the U.S. at the end of May 2020 – a real patchwork, though with clear concentrations of excess deaths around New York and around Michigan, Illinois and Indiana, plus Louisiana and one or two other states.

By the following winter, however, excess deaths were high almost everywhere, meaning specific local treatment protocols or policies cannot be blamed for bringing the deaths.

One suggestion is that the simultaneous surge of deaths across the regions of England in March 2020 is indicative of a cause other than an infectious virus. However, data from the ONS, displayed below, suggest that flu deaths typically surge across the country simultaneously, so this is not unusual or unexpected. While the data below are by registration date, which creates artificial synchronicity (e.g. from bank holidays – the sharp dips), nonetheless the regional patterns are so tight they leave no room to think the picture by date of occurrence would be vastly different.

In other words, the main driver of Covid deaths appears, in fact, to be COVID-19, a disease caused by a virus which Dr. John Ioannidis has estimated from antibody surveys to have an infection fatality rate (IFR) of around 0.3-0.4% in Europe and the Americas. This rate, he says, varies between and within countries and over time, and some of that variation will be due to poor treatment protocols. However, the consistency of the values across different contexts suggests this is the right ballpark, at least for those with no specific immunity to the virus and pre-Omicron. Dr. Ioannidis writes:

Even correcting inappropriate exclusions/inclusion of studies, errors and seroreversion, IFR still varies substantially across continents and countries. Overall average IFR may be ~0.3%- 0.4% in Europe and the Americas (~0.2% among community-dwelling non-institutionalised people) and ~0.05% in Africa and Asia (excluding Wuhan). Within Europe, IFR estimates were probably substantially higher in the first wave in countries like Spain, U.K. and Belgium and lower in countries such as Cyprus or Faroe Islands (~0.15%, even case fatality rate is very low), Finland (~0.15%) and Iceland (~0.3%)… Differences exist also within a country; for example within the USA, IFR differs markedly in disadvantaged New Orleans districts versus affluent Silicon Valley areas. Differences are driven by population age structure, nursing home populations, effective sheltering of vulnerable people, medical care, use of effective… treatments, host genetics, viral genetics and other factors.

But if a virus with an overall IFR of around 0.3% was spreading throughout the winter, why were deaths so low until March and April?

I had thought this may be due to a more deadly variant emerging in, say, Lombardy and spreading to New York and elsewhere. However, it is now clear to me that the main reason for the lack of deaths was the lack of spread, particularly in care homes. Yes, the virus had spread around the world, but it had not displaced flu and the other viruses, and did not have any explosive outbreaks. It just moved around at a low level alongside other viruses, infecting some people but not in huge numbers. This may seem strange given what has happened since spring 2020 and the series of large waves with explosive surges and no flu anywhere to be seen. But the evidence on this is completely clear, as summarised below. Winter 2019-20 was an ordinary winter, despite SARS-CoV-2 lurking and circulating incognito.

Take a look at these charts from the U.K. flu surveillance report in early March 2020. The flu season arrived early but it was not particularly severe.

The proportion of influenza-like illness testing positive for flu was normal, if early.

GP consultations for influenza-like illness were normal.

ICU admission rate for confirmed flu was also normal.

Other known causes of influenza-like illness were also at normal levels.

While many hospital tests for the cause of influenza-like illness came back, as usual, for an unknown pathogen – one of which would have been SARS-CoV-2, of course – the proportion for SARS-CoV-2 couldn’t have been that high as overall deaths were not, as we have seen, elevated as they would have been if SARS-CoV-2, which has a higher IFR than flu (~0.3% vs ~0.1%), was rife.

This limited spread of SARS-CoV-2 that winter is also confirmed by early antibody testing. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya’s antibody survey of Santa Clara County in California on April 4th-6th 2020 found 2.8% of the population with antibodies. This puts an upper limit on how many of the general U.S. population can have been infected during that winter.

Antibody evidence from England also shows a low level of spread throughout the winter before an explosive outbreak at the end of February. The following chart was created by researchers who asked those who tested positive for COVID-19 antibodies when their symptoms began. The pattern of infections it gives is striking – and supports the picture above of a virus circulating at low level over the winter before suddenly going big.

So the evidence all points to a picture of SARS-CoV-2 being widespread in the winter of 2019-20 but not being the dominant virus, circulating at a low level, before exploding into a large outbreak – and getting into the care homes – in the spring. It was thus this explosion in spread that primarily caused the explosion in deaths (though some were caused by poor treatment protocols of course, and a sizeable number of care home deaths were due to mistreatment of residents). The deadliness of the virus didn’t change a great deal; the IFR didn’t suddenly leap up; it’s just that suddenly many more people were catching it and spreading it, and it was getting into many more care homes. (Discharging hundreds of infectious hospital patients into care homes to free up beds won’t have helped with this of course.)

So why did the virus suddenly become much more infectious in February 2020; why did it go from circulating at a low level alongside flu and other viruses to displacing them and infecting a relatively large proportion of the population in a space of weeks? What’s more, it has stayed in this infectious mode, with successive variants driving new surges and waves. Though not everywhere, notably. In some countries, such as Japan, South Korea and other East Asian countries, it remained in its low-spread pre-2020 mode until Omicron came along (which has so many mutations it is a substantially different virus).

So why? This, I think, is one of the big outstanding mysteries of the virus. Why is its behaviour at different times and places so variable, so hard to predict? My feeling is still that this has a lot to do with the genetics of the virus and how it interacts with the genetics and other features of the populations it infects. Variants, in other words. Not more deadly variants necessarily (though Omicron is significantly less deadly than earlier variants). But variants that are more transmissible among certain populations, or certain sections of the population. After all, new waves are often caused by new variants, which seem to be able to infect (or re-infect) a different group of people to the previous ones. So why couldn’t the first big waves also be explained by a similar shift in variants?

Thus what may have happened in February 2020 is a new more transmissible variant emerged (or at least more transmissible among certain subgroups of people) which was then able to spread much more readily. But for some reason it wasn’t able to become dominant everywhere at once, or get into care homes everywhere, thus the early patchwork of deaths, the staggered start, and also the gradual convergence. Possible evidence in support of this is that one of the only interventions that some studiesfound to reduce deaths in the first wave was early border closures, which may be because it kept the new more transmissible variants out for longer.

Well, that’s my current best guess. You might have a better one (though please don’t try to pin it all on the treatment protocols in New York or wherever, that really doesn’t explain what we see). But whether my guess is right or wrong, the question of why a virus circulating over the winter at a low level suddenly started spreading fast and wide and causing successive waves of deaths is not yet resolved. The virus still keeps its secrets.