In this post I’d like to reiterate the basic facts about the past three years we all agree on. I think it’s a good reminder about what unites us all, whether we took the transfection (vaccine) or not. From there, we may differ on details stemming from these basic facts.
This post comes from my conversations about why I didn’t take the transfection (vaccine). When people ask, I give my reasons based on my risk/benefit ratio; covid has the death rate of the flu, the transfections have an absolute efficacy of less than 1%, and have unknown long term side effects (doctors, nurses and others were speaking out about the side effects they were seeing). I then ask the same question of them; why did you take it? Most seem a little embarrassed to answer. After hearing the basic undisputed facts, they realize they were uninformed, misinformed or took it because “they were told to”.
A few are agitated by these basic facts and demand my thoughts about an “agenda.” Things don’t add up, and they know it. This accessible post gives some details about how these facts were easily available, and how people were misled. The post is too long for email, so go to the stack to read it in full.
So here we go:
ASSESSING RISK/BENEFIT is standard when deciding to take a pharmaceutical product
*This involves the risk of disease vs. risks and benefits of the pharmaceutical product.
The covid pharmaceutical products – “covid vaccines” – are actually transfections. Most people have never heard of this type of product before. Transfection is “the process of artificially introducing genetic material (DNA or RNA) into cells to alter the properties of the cell”. Our genes (DNA, RNA) are what directs our cells to produce certain proteins depending on their function. Liver cells produce different proteins than lung cells, and the proteins produced to carry out their function in our body are determined by the message from our DNA to RNA. ”Just like a chef reads a recipe to make a dish, cells read a gene to make a protein. Each gene makes a specific protein that does a specific job”.
Transfections have never been given to healthy people before 2020, and people have different levels of comfort putting them in their body. Our cells have protective mechanisms that don’t allow foreign genetic material inside, for obvious reasons. The lipid nanoparticles in the covid transfections are designed to breach this protection and allow foreign genetic material into our cells, They then produce a foreign protein they would not naturally produce, then are destroyed by our immune system.
RISK OF SEVERE DISEASE - Same as flus + pneumonias
The death rate of covid has always equaled the death rate of PNI-flu like illness (flu, pneumonia).
This was simple math that many did, and anyone could have done at any time during the viral outbreak. *Deaths from covid / US population = deaths in a bad flu year *Hospitalizations / US population = hospitalizations in a bad flu year. This was the death rate in 2020, before the transfection vaccines, and after 2020. (Bill Gates admits this here in May, 2022 at min 24).
US covid death rate by Dec 2020 in US = 0.1% Before transfections, 305,000 people reportedly died from covid / 335 million = .1% (this is a .02% increase in respiratory deaths compared to 2019).
Reported covid deaths were in steep decline in January 2021 as we moved through our flu season, unaffected by the rates of transfections - the US only reached 50% by July 2021. Covid deaths were counted “liberally” as anyone dying with a positive PCR test within 28 days, no matter their symptoms.
There was a 99.9% survival rate before the transfection vaccines - thank you natural immune systems! We already live with coronaviruses every day and our immune systems are used to handling them. Pre-existing immunity was shown by the passengers on the Diamond Princess right in the beginning, where people rooming with those ill did not get ill themselves. If you think lockdowns and masks curbed deaths in 2020, 1) studies would overwhelmingly show it (they don’t), 2) Africa would have been devastated (it still has the lowest covid death and severe illness rate by far), and 3) countries like Sweden would have significant differences in covid and deaths compared to others (they did better than many other European countries, and today is tied for the lowest all cause mortality, which takes into account harmful effects of lockdowns). If vaccines “saved millions of lives” and kept death rate low like the flu, we would have seen downward trends of illness and deaths in most all highly vaccinated countries (in reality there’s been wave after wave of illness and death, and for the past two years many of these highly vaccinated countries have had elevated all cause mortality - not a good sign). Maybe you thought a Lancet study showing “vaccines saved millions of lives” proves vaccination kept the death rate low. If media was honest about their source, they would tell you the “study” is really a model, comparing faulty early “estimations” with reality, and the authors admitting conflicts of interest (with compensation from pharma company GlaxoSmithKline, on the board of Moderna, compensation from the WHO and HSBS bank).
If you thought the death rate was higher, how did that happen? Models wrongly predicted higher death rates, “case or infection fatality rates” inflated perception of risk and cannot be determined accurately, and corporate media fear-mongered.
It is now well accepted that covid has always had the death rate of flu-like illness. People may say “we didn’t know that at first” but we obviously did.
The death rate worldwide today is .08%; April 2023 - sadly 6,893,190 covid deaths / 8 billion = .08%. US covid hospitalizations before transfections = .2% of US population (924,936 / 335 million = 0.2%).
Benefits of pharmaceutical transfection - less than 1% absolute efficacy, not tested for transmission.
In phase one of Pfizer's trial of 44,000 mostly young healthy people, only 170 had PCR confirmed covid as reported in the NYT and BMJ: 8 were vaccinated and 162 were not. Risk of infection = 0.7% if you didn’t take their product, and 0.04% if you did. 170 / 22,000 = 0.7% 8 / 22,000 = .04 *In the trial there were no overnight hospitalizations.
This means that risk infection is less than 1% without their pharmaceutical product, and still less than 1% with their product, with no severe disease in healthy people. The absolute efficacy of their covid vaccine is less than 1%.
When the transfections were given to the public, the "95% effective" claim was relative, comparing 8 transfected-vaccinated people to 162 not transfected-vaccinated. Paying attention to only relative efficacy is like wearing a metal helmet outside every day to protect from space junk falling on you. Yes, you would have 100% greater protection relative to someone else without the helmet who also got hit by space junk (relative efficacy), but it doesn't make sense unless you consider your overall absolute risk! (Absolute efficacy).
Reporting relative measures may be sufficient to summarize evidence of a study for comparisons with other studies, but absolute measures are also necessary for applying study findings to specific clinical or public health circumstances [22]. Omitting absolute risk reduction findings in public health and clinical reports of vaccine efficacy is an example of outcome reporting bias, which ignores unfavorable outcomes and misleads the public’s impression and scientific understanding of a treatment’s efficacy and benefits [30]. Furthermore, the ethical and legal obligation of informed consent requires that patients are educated about the risks and benefits of a healthcare procedure or intervention [31].
https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/57/3/199
If you thought the efficacy was higher, how did that happen? Media and government officials repeated the relative efficacy rate of 95% over and over. Behavioral and psychological messaging was used to increase covid vaccine uptake. The claim that a majority - of the less than 1% of people getting severely ill - did not take the transfection, sometimes using cumulative data when nobody was transfected. Early treatment protocols that include antivirals were also sometimes withheld, and those not transfected may have been more likely to take early treatments.
The FDA wrote the transfection was not tested for transmission in Dec 2020. Transmission was emphasized even though our natural immune systems protected us from severe illness 99.8% of the time. The inability of vaccines to stop transmission of mutating respiratory viruses was never a surprise to vaccine makers; there are longstanding hurdles and they’ve never been successful.
Risks of pharmaceutical transfections labeled covid vaccines - risk rate is unknown to this day.
Efficacy and safety trials lasted 10 months then were stopped. Safety trials will never be completed.
Pfizer’s clinical trials started in April 2020, and they gave their placebo group the vaccine 10 months later in February 2021. Moderna and J&J followed suit. We will never find out side effect rates from a randomized controlled study. This is the first time synthetic mRNA has been used in people, and the first time lipid nanoparticles have been used in healthy people without cancer - and randomized safety trials will NEVER be completed for these transfections. Pfizer biodistribution studies showed the transfections do not stay in the arm, (news media now reports they “mostly” stay in the arm) so lipid nanoparticles, mRNA and synthetic spike are being found around the body.
Pfizer’s documents reported over 42,000 different adverse effects to the FDA in their trial, and we have yet to hear how the transfections are involved. Reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and Europe’s Yellow Card System skyrocketed after the transfections were given to the public. Side effects fall into 3 main categories:
Inflammation- a) low level systemic causing fatigue, worsening symptoms for inflammatory conditions of arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, Lyme’s, Lupus, inflammatory bowl, b) organ specific - heart (myo- and pericarditis causing chest pain, arrhythmias), POTS; brain-causing fog, cognitive issues, encephalitis, other inflamed organs too depending on lipid nanoparticle uptake.
Blood clotting- a) capillaries causing fatigue, malaise, early aging, erectile and menstrual difficulty, b) major clots causing amputations, heart attacks, strokes, pulmonary emboli, c) fibrous blood clots
Immune system dysregulation- a) vulnerability to cancers, shingles, herpes, graves (thyroid), bad colds, flus, and covid, b) autoimmunity causing Guillain-Barre, transverse myelitis, paralysis, neuropathies.
Doctors & nurses (below), pathologists, embalmers, funeral directors, and insurance industry executives have been talking about side effects on video. So are the people injured (I will post those in a subsequent stack).
Doctor and nurse reports: Dr. Hoffe (15 min), April 2021; Nurse news interview (2min), June 2021; Dr. Teryn Clark, neurologist, talks about memory issues, brain clots in even her younger patients (9min), June 2021; Nicole Landers RN (2min), July 2021; Dr Ryan Cole (2 min, from this 30 min interview), Aug 2021; Katie Kirn, RN (2min), Aug 2021; Dr. Anne McCloskey (9min), Aug 2021; Debra Conrad, NP (1hr), Sept 2021; RN (2min), Oct 2021; Nathan Thompson, naturopath (16min), Oct 2021; Nurse in audience (2min), Nov 2021; Australian nurse at protest (6min), Nov 2021; Dr. Long talks about cardiac events in service men and women at 12 min (3min), Nov 2021; New Zealand nurse (4min), Nov 2021; Dr. Aseem Malhotra (4min), Nov 2021; Dr Patricia Lee through lawyer Aron Siri, beginning at 4.30 (5min), and an article with a copy of her letter to the FDA. Nov 2021; Collette Martin, RN: “I’ve been a nurse for 17 years. I'm extremely concerned about mandating this vaccine for our children. The side effects we are seeing in adults are terrifying and they are being ignored” (3min), Dec 2021; Article (2 min. read), Dec 2021; Tauny Buettner, RN (17min), Jan 2022; Dr. Robert Jackson (best info in first 7 min), May 2022; Sean Taylor, RN (6min), Aug 2022; Dr. Cartland begins speaking about risk/benefit and apparent side effects at 33 min. (4 min), Aug 2022.
If you thought there were almost no side effects, how did that happen? The corporate and public media repeated the simple phrase “safe and effective” without evidence or even realizing more people died of all causes in the transfection group of Pfizer’s trial. The doctors and nurses warning the public were largely censored from corporate and public media. Pharma is the biggest advertiser on media outlets and pandemic training exercises emphasized controlling the narrative.
Things don’t add up, do they?
All of the heightened danger, coercion, dividing people over transfections, vaccine passports to travel, preventing people caring for sick loved ones, prohibiting people from public spaces, and police brutality in some areas, all don’t make sense considering the risk/benefit ratio. Masking, social distancing and school closures don’t make sense considering how good Africa (lowest transfection rate by far) and Sweden (no restrictions) came out of the past three years with the lowest covid illness rates and lowest excess deaths - particularly since we knew from the beginning this had the death rate of the flu, and the risk/benefit ratio didn’t clearly favor the transfections-vaccines.
I can only guess as to any organizations and people coordinating during this viral outbreak to advance their interests. But here is my guess.
In the least, profiteering is an obvious influence. We all know that pharmaceutical companies spread their immense wealth to governments through lobbying, news media through advertising, universities through research grants, and non-profits through donations. Beyond that, my best guess about a coordinated agenda would be the SARS CoV2 virus and damaging interventions (lockdowns, masking, transfections, limiting known early treatment protocols for viruses and covid) were used to damage and weaken individual nations in order to give international organizations more power. The WEF has openly-stated their desire for a one-world government in the WEF’s “great reset,” and WEF’s partners and young global leader’s are already working in governments, health organizations, news media and transnational corporations all over the world.
These powerful and un-democratically elected international organizations already have established international systems that mirror those in individual nations: health care-WHO, government & economic-WEF, banking-World bank and IMF, judicial & military-United Nations, non-profits (connected to WEF with multi million to billion dollar budgets)- Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, BRAC, Ashoka, Mercy Corps, JA Worldwide, Landesa, and news media companies (worth hundreds of billions)- Thompson Reuters, Paramount Global, News Corporation, Comcast, and Sony (all which operate globally and control 90% of news media in the US). Other interesting details are 1) signs of bioweapon release in hard hit cities without the ability to cause a true world-wide pandemic. 2) department of defense involvement in EUA transfections labeled vaccines, 3) the use of covid restrictions and climate change interventions to usher in the things needed for a world-wide government to have influence and some control over the world’s people; digital id (from covid passports), digital money (that can be tracked and restricted digitally), and smart cities with constant surveillance.