Is It Okay for Docs to Refuse to Treat Unvaccinated Patients?

Some say yes:

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/958434

Others not so sure:

(Written in response to above statement, submitted by MD to Medscape.com)

It is hard for me to understand the “ethics” being espoused by this “ethicist” as well the physician who wants to refuse to see patients and cloaks it in virtue signaling.  It is easy to understand how pumped up fear can be directed in a biased and bigoted way–it happens all the time.  But the science about this decision as presented  is all wrong.  Because this is a leaky vaccine that does not produce sterilizing immunity, the vaccinated continue to harbor the virus in their upper airways and can infect others.  This is incontrovertible: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02187-1  So the doctor who thinks he is protecting himself, his staff and his patients by refusing to see the unvaccinated is just ill-informed. But this is probably not his fault as part of the problem is the complete destruction of a robust medical education.   If he wants to be scientifically consistent, he should give every prospective patient a rapid COVID test in an anteroom as many of his “vaccinated” would be positive. Then, at least when he discriminates against them he would have some sort of “valid” reason.

But this misses the points this case expose:  1) science died in 2020.  This is not about science at all but about “faith”.  It has become a religious war based on faith and it only matters in whom and in what you place your faith.  Logic will not prevail.  To many, faith in Fauci is all that matters.  NIH grants showing his signature on gain of function in Wuhan make absolutely no difference.  2)  Keyed into this is the complete loss of credibility of the medical “experts”.  It will take decades to restore.  3)  ditto with formerly respected medical journals.  Everything is spin and political propaganda now.  4)  HIPAA and the hypocrisy around it will never be enforceable again.  We see that the wrong politics can completely cancel any “rights” we so piously intoned belonged to patients.  

Perhaps the thing that I find the most reprehensible is that most of those same individuals who intone their right to discriminate agains the unvaccinated (even those with robust REAL immunity from having recovered from COVID) also feel it is perfectly fine, and indeed virtuous, to deny informed consent regarding the early treatment of individuals, even those “good people” who are vaccinated, with effective, safe and cheap drugs we already have, purely because Fauci refuses to accept the data, including RCT’s.  Accepting the “science” would require questioning why Uttar Pradesh eradicated COVID using ivermectin if it was worthless.  But, as I said, this is not a scientific or medical controversy now.  It is religious, and the heretics must be destroyed.

I am sick of these self-righteous bigots who have let so many people die because of their strange, unscientific beliefs that they insist the rest of us live by.  Maybe someday this will be put behind us, but the lessons must never be forgotten.  Perhaps if we paid attention to this: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/whitewashing-aids-history_b_4762295  we could have avoided this mess.  Maybe this ancient history (from 1987) should be the subject that medical ethicists examine and teach to today’s professionals.  

Practical Reasons Why Vaccine Injuries Are Rarely Reported

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Deborah Conrad, a physician’s assistant, is blowing the whistle on COVID jab injuries, and the fact that these injuries are rarely reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) as required by law
  • The purpose of VAERS is to detect possible signals of adverse events associated with vaccines
  • Collecting data on side effects is particularly crucial when dealing with a never before used medical product such as mRNA and DNA-based COVID injections
  • Conrad saw a dramatic rise in several different health problems as the COVID jabs were rolled out. One of the most surprising problems has been a sudden rise in cancers among vaccinated patients whose cancer had gone into remission before the jab
  • Other conditions that have dramatically risen among vaccinated patients include heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, pneumonia, sepsis, gastrointestinal complaints and bleeds, appendicitis and pancreatitis

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked October 08, 2021

In a Highwire exclusive, Deborah Conrad, a physician’s assistant (PA), blows the whistle on COVID jab injuries, and the fact that these injuries, by and large, are not being reported.

According to Conrad, shortly after the mass vaccination campaign began, she started seeing a surprising number of hospital patients who had recently received a COVID shot and were now testing positive for COVID-19.

In particular, patients were coming in with pneumonia, and this was happening even in the middle of the summer. It’s become so common, Conrad refers to 2021 as “the year of pneumonia.” Sepsis cases have also increased.

After the COVID jab rollout, she also noticed a marked increase in heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, gastrointestinal complaints and bleeds, appendicitis, pancreatitis and recurrent cancers. All of these were “noticeably increased,” she says, and “everybody seemed to notice it.”

Tomorrow, I will publish yet another bombshell video — a documentary called “Vaccine Secrets: COVID Crisis.” It’s the first episode of “The False Narrative Takedown Series,” produced by Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund. You won’t want to miss that one, as it complements and supports everything Conrad shared in this interview.

Most Health Care Workers Know Nothing about VAERS

Conrad, who has worked as a PA for 17 years, admits she knew nothing about the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) prior to the COVID vaccination campaign. This is the case with most health care providers. None of them were ever educated on how to identify potential vaccine injuries, how to report them, or that they have a legal requirement to report all emergency use vaccine injuries.

When it comes to conventional vaccines, reporting to VAERS is voluntary. Not so with emergency use vaccines, however. Vaccine injuries caused by a vaccine under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) MUST be reported to VAERS by law. However, as noted by Conrad, there’s been absolutely no training on how to do so.

She was shocked to realize health care providers are actually required by law to report suspected EUA vaccine injuries, as none of the hospital staff had been instructed to do so. But on page 12 of Pfizer’s “Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine,” it states that:1

“The vaccination provider is responsible for mandatory reporting of the following to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS):

  • vaccine administration errors whether or not associated with an adverse event,
  • serious adverse events (irrespective of attribution to vaccination),
  • cases of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome (MIS) in adults and children, and
  • cases of COVID-19 that result in hospitalization or death.

Complete and submit reports to VAERS online at vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html. For further assistance with reporting to VAERS call 1-800-822-7967. The reports should include the words ‘Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine EUA’ in the description section of the report.”

Doctors Have a Public Health Duty to Report Side Effects

In addition to a lack of education about VAERS, one of the reasons why so few physicians report suspected vaccine injuries is because there are no penalties for failing to fulfill your legal responsibilities. It’s essentially not enforced.

It’s worth noting that it is not the doctor’s job to decide whether an injury is caused by a vaccine or not. The language in VAERS is very clear on this. They are simply to report any adverse health condition that occurs after a vaccination has been given.

Over time, as reports accumulate, the FDA and CDC can then start to see potential associations, and if a particular condition occurs at high frequency after a particular vaccine is given, the link would then, theoretically at least, be investigated further. In short, VAERS function is to signal potential side effects that weren’t known before.

Naturally, collecting data on side effects is particularly crucial when dealing with a brand-new, never previously used medical product such as these mRNA and DNA-based COVID injections.

Every health care worker in the nation really ought to be on the lookout for potential side effects, and diligently fulfill their public health duty to report any and all health effects that occur within a month or two, at minimum, after the injections. We are, after all, in a mass experiment, and without rigorous data collection, how can we possibly understand what these injections are doing?

VAERS Is a Crucial Tool to Ensure Vaccine Safety

As soon as Conrad became aware of her responsibility to report side effects, she started filing reports. But there were so many that “quickly, that became a full-time job,” she says. Within a month, she’d already reported 50 suspected vaccine injuries.

Fact checkers typically dismiss VAERS data as “unreliable” because anyone can file a report. The fact that a patient experienced a problem after vaccination also does not mean that the vaccine was the cause. Such debunking attempts do not hold water, however.

The purpose of VAERS is to detect possible signals of adverse events associated with vaccines.

First of all, filing a VAERS report is not a quick and easy task. It’s very time consuming and requires detailed data on blood work, symptoms, previous medical history, vaccine lot numbers and much more. What’s more, there’s no save feature, so you cannot walk away from it midstream, or the system will log you out and you have to start all over again.

So, to say VAERS is not optimized for ease of use and compliance is a profoundly serious understatement. Conrad, and many other doctors, have stated that the system will often also fail to authenticate once you hit “submit,” and erase the whole report. It’s almost like it’s was intentionally designed to discourage reporting.

There’s also no incentive to spend your days filing false reports, as there are penalties for doing so. This is in stark contrast to not filing a report, which carries no penalty. What’s more, while a patient or parent can file a report, most reports are done by medical professionals, and they’re not going to waste their time filing false reports.

Then there’s the actual purpose of VAERS, which as mentioned is to signal potential problems. It’s true any single report cannot be taken as proof that the vaccine caused a problem, but when you have thousands or tens of thousands of reports of a given effect, that’s a SIGNAL that there might be a link. This is clearly expressed on the FDA’s website:2

“The purpose of VAERS is to detect possible signals of adverse events associated with vaccines. VAERS collects and analyzes information from reports of adverse events (possible side effects) that occur after the administration of U.S. licensed vaccines.”

Avoiding Vaccine Hesitancy Deemed More Important Than Safety

Once Conrad started getting overwhelmed by the task of filing reports, she asked the hospital administration for help. She wanted the administration to educate the staff so that everyone could all pitch in and “do the right thing” by identifying injuries and filing reports.

Instead of getting the assistance she expected, she ran into a brick wall of resistance. The vaccination push was in full swing, and no one was willing to raise questions about vaccine safety, as it might promote vaccine hesitancy. Remarkably, promoting the idea that the shots are perfectly safe — even if untrue — was deemed more important than making sure patients were not being harmed by the millions.

Conrad then called her hospital’s president to ask why side effects were not routinely reported to VAERS as required by law. The president replied he believes “the position the system has taken is that each provider has the responsibility to report on their own patient.”

But how can they do that if they’re not educated about what they’re supposed to be reporting? Conrad asked. He told her “providers should educate themselves when they’re dealing with patients related to COVID vaccinations.”

After that, the risk management team told her she was no longer allowed to file reports on behalf of other doctors. She could only file reports for her own patients. She also received a written warning, saying she must support the hospital’s approach to the vaccine, per CDC and Department of Health guidance.

Historically, Vaccine Injuries Are Routinely Underreported

As explained by Conrad, as adult-care providers, they rarely deal with vaccinations, as adults receive very few vaccines. Pediatricians are typically the ones who administer vaccines, and they give them to babies and young children. Hence pediatricians may be more familiar with VAERS.

However, even among pediatricians, knowledge and use of VAERS is limited, and this has been known for over a decade. As noted in the so-called “Lazarus Report,” formally titled “Electronic Support for Public Health — Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System,” published in late 2010:3

“Preliminary data were collected from June 2006 through October 2009 on 715,000 patients, and 1.4 million doses (of 45 different vaccines) were given to 376,452 individuals.

Of these doses, 35,570 possible reactions (2.6 percent of vaccinations) were identified. This is an average of 890 possible events, an average of 1.3 events per clinician, per month.

These data were presented at the 2009 AMIA conference. In addition, ESP: VAERS investigators participated on a panel to explore the perspective of clinicians, electronic health record (EHR) vendors, the pharmaceutical industry, and the FDA towards systems that use proactive, automated adverse event reporting.

Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. Low reporting rates preclude or slow the identification of ‘problem’ drugs and vaccines that endanger public health. New surveillance methods for drug and vaccine adverse effects are needed.

Barriers to reporting include a lack of clinician awareness, uncertainty about when and what to report, as well as the burdens of reporting: reporting is not part of clinicians’ usual workflow, takes time, and is duplicative.”

CDC’s New System Showed 1 in 10 Had Reactions

This report has an interesting backstory. In 2010, the CDC actually hired a company to automate VAERS. Any patient who received a vaccine within the Harvard Pilgrim HMO automatically had their medical records scanned for the next 30 days, such as diagnostic codes, lab tests and drug prescriptions.

Any health problem suggestive of an adverse event was then automatically uploaded into the VAERS database. Remarkably, preliminary data showed nearly 1 in 10 people suffered a reaction after vaccination, yet the official CDC mantra is that the risk for serious vaccine injury or death is 1 in 1 million.

Unfortunately, while the creation of VAERS in 1986 was an opportunity to get a firmer grasp of the number of potential vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths occurring after vaccinations given in the U.S., the CDC didn’t follow through, and the project fell by the wayside.

As noted by the authors, the plan to automate VAERS reporting didn’t happen because “the necessary CDC contacts were no longer available and the CDC consultants responsible for receiving data were no longer responsive to our multiple requests to proceed with testing and evaluation.”

Why did the CDC drop this project? Don’t they want to protect public health from potentially dangerous products? Did they think the truth might destroy the vaccine industry?

Surprising Rise in Cancer and Other Odd Conditions

As mentioned, Conrad saw a dramatic rise in several different health problems as the COVID jabs were rolled out. One of the most surprising problems has been a sudden rise in cancers among vaccinated patients whose cancer had gone into remission before the jab.

Bigtree points out he’s spoken with a number of oncologists who have made the same observation in their practices. These cancers tend to be very sudden in onset and highly aggressive, often leading to death.

She’s also seeing new cancers that appear “out of nowhere,” and rarer types of cancer, such as solid organ tumors that kill the patient before a biopsy can even be taken.

Blood clots and strokes have also skyrocketed, and these occur even in patients who are on maximum doses of anticoagulants. Odd and unusual neurological problems with seizures and tremors are also becoming more commonplace, as is pneumonia and sepsis.

Are We in a Pandemic of the Unvaccinated?

When asked if a majority of the patients in her hospital are unvaccinated — which is what we’re being told — she says no, quite the opposite. She’s been tracking the numbers for a couple of months, and as just one example, on one particular day in July, of the 35 patients admitted, 30 were fully vaccinated, and all of the seven patients in the intensive care unit were fully vaccinated.

This despite the fact that, at that time, the county vaccination rate was only between 40% and 45%. She points out that these vaccinated patients were not all COVID-19 patients, but were admitted for all sorts of health issues. Many vaccinated patients have also been readmitted several times since they got their shot.

While Conrad has done everything she can to protect public health up until now — having filed more than 120 VAERS reports so far — she won’t be fighting on the frontlines any longer. She’s being let go from her job at the end of September 2021 for refusing to get the COVID shot. After everything she’s seen, “I’m more afraid of the vaccine than I am of COVID,” she says.

The Likely Result of This Tyrannical Intervention

This is the ultimate irony. Conrad is clearly one of the most compassionate, high integrity and absolutely committed health professionals in that hospital and they are firing her for adhering to her constitutional rights. I believe this is precisely the behavior that will ultimately lead to the self-destruction of our society.

You simply can’t fire tens of millions of some of the brightest and most honest people in the country who adhere to personal freedom and liberty and not expect it to have devastating consequences. Who will be left to do the work? The majority of these people being terminated are highly trained professionals that can’t be easily replaced.

It is clear they don’t understand the results of these tyrannical interventions. It is beyond evident that we are in for some very rocky times with massive shortages as people are fired from their jobs. So, be prepared folks, and stock up as if you were expecting a hurricane and knew you’d have no access to outside help for three to six months. I hope this doesn’t happen, but everything is pointing to this outcome.

Vaccine-Injured Patients Want To Be Heard

The sad truth is, we’re in an epidemic of vaccine injuries, and injured patients are now routinely ignored by the very people who encouraged them to get the shot. To get an idea of what the risks actually are, check out some of the cases reported to nomoresilence.world4 and c19vaxreactions.com,5 two websites dedicated to giving a voice to those injured by COVID shots.

You can also browse through more than 246,000 comments left on a Facebook post by WXYZ-TV Channel 7.6,7 They asked people who had lost an unvaccinated loved one to COVID-19 to contact them for a story, but what they got was an avalanche of stories of vaccine injuries and deaths instead. Below is a sampling of comments posted on the site:

“How about doing a story about my uncle who was in fine shape until he got vaccinated. Or my boss’s uncle who was healthy and in his 50s, then died suddenly a week after getting vaccinated.”

“My sister-in-law’s father died of a stroke 48H after Moderna vax. He was active and healthy.”

“The shot murdered my friend three weeks after he got it.”

“I know 2 women who had strokes aright after their shot.”

“We lost an uncle to heart inflammation 2 days after he received the vaccine.”

“Lost a very dear man after his second dose of the vaccine and he said he regretted getting it and he advised me not to get it. How about reporting on those? He died of a brain aneurysm, and was a very healthy man.”

“My beautiful mother passed away recently, 23 days after having the first AstraZeneca shot (that I didn’t know she was getting). ‘Immunization’ was the ‘cause of death’ on her death certificate.”

“I now know more people injured by the vaccine than people who even had covid.”

“No, but I know of two people who died from Covid after being fully vaccinated.”

“My uncle passed away 3 months after his second shot. He was diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer, had surgery, was released to rehab and then died of a blood clot. Thanks Pfizer.”

“I know of two women who had miscarriages within 2 days of taking it.”

As noted by one commenter, “Doesn’t sound like you’re getting the story you need judging by the vast majority of these comments about vaccine losses and side effects. Since there is such an overwhelming outpouring of vaccine reactions, maybe do a story on that?”

Asymptomatic Spread?

Asymptomatic spread is virtually non-existent, and if this does occur, it is less than 1%. It is very rare and we have very limited evidence (and questionable) of this happening at all. We have no documented proof, no documented evidence of this occurring in any appreciable manner. Spread of pathogen will occur more surely when the persons are ill/sick with symptoms, especially if the symptoms function to expel the pathogen into the surrounding air. Having no symptoms or very mild symptoms reduces risk of spread and with no symptoms, spread is basically removed. This is the same for SARS-CoV-2 virus and a recent BMJ publication pretty much sums it up that asymptomatic are rarely the drivers as it was thought to be. This is basic immunology and should not be changed for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). We are being emphatic in saying there is no evidence of asymptomatic spread. We also recognize that one must be careful not to claim ‘zero’ as the evidence changes daily and rapidly and absence of documented evidence is also not a reason. It may just have not been studied yet or documented optimally. But we are confident enough based on the existing literature to also agree that ‘it is a dangerous assumption to believe that there is persuasive, scientific evidence of asymptomatic transmission’.

The basis for the societal lockdowns was that 40% to 50% of persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 could potentially spread it due to being asymptomatic. “But fears that the virus may be spread to a significant degree by asymptomatic carriers soon led government leaders to issue broad and lengthy stay-at-home orders and mask mandates out of concerns that anyone could be a silent spreader”. However, the evidence in support of common asymptomatic spread remains largely non-existent and we argue, was overstated and potentially was made with no basis.

A high-quality review study by Madewell published in JAMA sought to estimate the secondary attack rate of SARS-CoV-2 in households and determine factors that modify this parameter. In addition, researchers sought to estimate the proportion of households with index cases that had any secondary transmission, and also compared the SARS-CoV-2 household secondary attack rate with that of other severe viruses and with that to close contacts for studies that reported the secondary attack rate for both close and household contacts. The study was a meta-analysis of 54 studies with 77 758 participants. Secondary attack rates represented the spread to additional persons and researchers found a 25-fold increased risk within households between symptomatic positive infected index persons versus asymptomatic infected index persons. “Household secondary attack rates were increased from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) than from asymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%)”. This study showed just how rare asymptomatic spread was within a confined household environment.

From the nearly 2 million children that were followed in school in Sweden, it was reported that with no mask mandates, there were zero deaths from Covid and a few instances of transmission and minimal hospitalization.

In the UK, the ‘Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies’ recommended that “Prioritizing rapid testing of symptomatic people is likely to have a greater impact on identifying positive cases and reducing transmission than frequent testing of asymptomatic people in an outbreak area”.

A study published in Nature found no instances of asymptomatic spread from positive asymptomatic cases among all 1,174 close contacts of the cases, based on a base sample of 10 million persons. “There were no positive tests amongst 1,174 close contacts of asymptomatic cases”. AIER’s Zucker responded this way “The conclusion is not that asymptomatic spread is rare or that the science is uncertain. The study revealed something that hardly ever happens in these kinds of studies. There was not one documented case. Forget rare. Forget even Fauci’s previous suggestion that asymptomatic transmission exists but not does drive the spread. Replace all that with: never. At least not in this study for 10,000,000”. Haynes of Life site news reported similarly.

A study on infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers was carried out by Goa at al. Researchers looked at the 455 contacts who were exposed to the asymptomatic COVID-19 virus carrier. They were divided into three groups: 35 patients, 196 family members and 224 hospital staffs. “No severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections was detected in 455 contacts by nucleic acid test”.In this regard, the World Health Organization (WHO) also made this claim that asymptomatic spread/transmission is rare. This issue of asymptomatic spread is the key issue being used to force vaccination in children. The science, however, remains contrary to this proposed policy mandate. Even Dr. Fauci said asymptomatic transmission is rare, and an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers.
As an update that we say clearly is 16 months too late, the WHO on June 29th 2021 has now recommended no testing of asymptomatic persons. This is after trillions of $ have been sucked out of economies and many lives lost due to lost jobs and closures of societies and schools. Many people killed themselves due to the unscientific and illogical testing policy of asymptomatic persons.
Additionally, a high-quality robust study in the French Alps examined the spread of Covid-19 virus via a cluster of Covid-19. They followed one infected child who visited three different schools and interacted with other children, teachers, and various adults. They reported no instance of secondary transmission despite close interactions. These data have been available to the CDC and other health experts for over a year. As mentioned earlier, Ludvigsson published a seminal paper in the New England Journal of Medicine on Covid-19 among children 1 to 16 years of age and their teachers in Sweden. 

A recent June 10th 2021 op-ed sheds more confirmatory light that asymptomatic spread was more a myth that a reality. Ballan and Tindall wrote “People presenting with symptoms of Covid-19 are almost exclusively responsible for transmitting SARS-CoV-2. Serious infection usually results from frequent exposure to high doses of SARS-CoV-2, such as health care workers caring for sick Covid-19 patients in hospitals or nursing homes and people living in the same household.

– Paul E. Alexander, PhD

DISCLAIMER: This content (anything, any information I share or discuss) is for educational purposes only. I function as a prognosticator and I am sharing information and driving debate. It doesn’t serve as a substitute for diagnosis, treatment, or advice from a licensed medical professional (your doctor). Any treatment you undertake in terms of COVID (or any illness) should be discussed with a licensed medical professional. Never disregard or delay seeking medical advice because of content posted by me or in any discussions or groups I and others are part of. If you are having a medical emergency, call 911 or go to the nearest emergency room immediately. No physician-patient relationship is created here. I am not your doctor and every decision is between a person and their doctor. Not me. I function here purely as an academic scientist and my words represent only my views and not that of any institution or other party. No other person in my/our discussions can also make medical recommendations to you. Take no representations, expressed or implied, with respect to this content or its use, as medical advice. Nothing from me is medical advise to you, I am only sharing my thoughts and thinking on the science as it exists regarding this existing emergency. 

Online Conversation

Sep 18, 2021

QUESTION:

Can anyone point me to the strongest studies and papers on the following:


1) Evidence that vaxxed are more/less contagious than unvaxxed?


2) Evidence that vaxxed are experiencing more/less severe illness than the unvaxxed?


Apologies if some of this is covered in your paper, or feel free to tell me to go and do my research- its just im hoping someone can point me in the right direction as you are closer to this than I am.


With thanks,
Cal

Sep 18, 2021

Hi Cal,

I’ll go through my files and see what I can find but for starters, here’s information that shows all the vaccines reduce the risk by < 2%. 

Dr. Ronald Brown’s analysis reports the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines reduce the risk of infection by .7% and 1.1%, respectively, (the absolute risk reduction measure, ARR). The FDA, Pfizer and Moderna did not disclose the ARR to the public, ignoring the FDA’s reporting guidelines. I reviewed Pfizer’s clinical trial data and confirmed his numbers.


https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/57/3/199/htm#B11-medicina-57-00199

Two more articles confirm the ARR for all the vaccines is < 2%.

A study published in The Lancet also confirms all the Covid19 vaccines’ ARR is <2%.

Pfizer .9%

Moderna 1.4%

J&J 1.8%

AstraZeneca-Oxford 1.9%

Gamaleya (Sputnik V) 1%

“Covid-19 vaccine efficacy and effectiveness – the elephant (not) in the room”


https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext

Peter Doshi, BMJ Assoc. Editor also writes Pfizer’s clinical trial data’s absolute risk measure is less than 1%.


https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/11/26/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-modernas-95-effective-vaccines-lets-be-cautious-and-first-see-the-full-data/

The Lancet and Doshi’s articles’ ARR is slightly different from Brown’s because they used interim clinical trial data and Brown used the data Pfizer and Moderna submitted to the FDA for authorization of their shots under an EUA. This article explains absolute risk reduction (ARR) vs. relative risk reduction (RRR).

https://www.healthnewsreview.org/toolkit/tips-for-understanding-studies/absolute-vs-relative-risk/

Dr. Brown explains the ARR vs RRR in this vidoe interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jkwn5I8tLmE

Vaccine risks:

Luc Montagnier, winner of the Nobel Prize for discovering the HIV virus, says the death curve follows the vaccination curve. 

https://freewestmedia.com/2021/05/27/nobel-prize-winner-in-every-country-the-death-curve-follows-the-vaccination-curve/

Salk Institute study shows the spike protein causes the most damage separate from the virus.

https://www.salk.edu/news-release/the-novel-coronavirus-spike-protein-plays-additional-key-role-in-illness/

Spike Protein circulating in the blood of fully vaccinated healthcare workers at Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab465/6279075

Dr. Charles Hoffe video illustrates the damage the mRNA vaccines do to the body.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/uD98ksu0PzQg/

I think one reason why people like your cousin believe the vaccine is the only solution, is because they are unaware that there are so many safe generic drug protocols. 

This video about Ivermectin not only provides studies supporting it, but it also highlights the corruption that censored it.

https://rumble.com/vlpecw-the-story-of-ivermectin.html?fbclid=IwAR3oo062DYFputGBXBamis1Bxhe4HlC-Zr9C4lur09FUZiuDcrvNIhuXCPI

This website provides extensive information about the safe generic treatments and the studies backing them.

https://c19hcq.com/

Dr. Peter McCullogh has given countless interviews. 

https://vimeo.com/553518199

Drs. Harvey Risch, George Fareed, and Peter McCullough testify before the U.S. Senate about early outpatient treatments as an essential part of Covid19 Solution.

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/hearings/early-outpatient-treatment-an-essential-part-of-a-covid-19-solution

Dr. Harvey Risch article on Hydroxychloroquine

https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535

Sep 23, 2021

Cal,

The reason why the vaxxed still get Covid is because:

 
1) all the shots have an ARR <2%, so they do not provide any protection. This is directly from the vax manufacturer’s clinical trial data and the articles I provided confirm this.

2) there is antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) risk in all the shots. 

People think those who die from Covid, are killed by the virus. But actually, it’s the immune system’s over reaction to the virus (cytokine storm), which creates hyper inflammation in the body. ADE, through a process called pathogenic priming, occurs when the antibodies generated during an immune response recognize and bind to a pathogen, BUT they are unable to prevent infection. Instead, these antibodies are like a Trojan horse where they allow the pathogen to get into cells and worsen the immune response. 

This was evident in past vaccine animal studies for SARS CoV-1. Vaccinated mice and ferrets developed antibodies. But when they were exposed to the wild virus, they had a hyper inflammatory response. The mice developed lung inflammation and the ferrets developed hepatitis/liver failure and had to be euthanized. This is why a SARS CoV vaccine never successfully made it past animal trials, because the vaccines made the disease worse

Dr. James Lyons-Weiler (Jack) warned that any SARS CoV-2 vaccine could put the vaccinated at risk for more severe disease if they were later exposed to the virus, a variant, or another coronavirus (e.g. common cold), or a future SARS CoV-3, etc. I read his excellent article about pathogenic priming which summarized the past failed animal trials and warned about ADE, which he referred to as disease enhancement or immune enhancement. I reached out to Jack on LinkedIn and thanked him for writing this paper. He said he hoped it would wake people up to the risks. LinkedIn later shut down his account but I saved an archived copy of his article. 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/notice-clinicians-regulatory-agencies-vaccine-via-may-lyons-weiler/

Here’s an interview with Jack about the disease enhancement risk (ADE).
https://dryburgh.com/james-lyons-weiler-coronavirus-vaccine-safety-warning/

Fauci even warned in a press conference that a vaccine could make the disease even worse. But he said this can be observed in animal trials. However, they skipped animal trials. https://youtu.be/ZrWAqpPGAxQ?t=183

There is a study about Informed Consent that focused on ADE risk. This NIAID funded study (Fauci is the Director of the NIAID) published Oct. 28, 2020, said vaccine clinical trial participants were not properly informed of the ADE risk, which is “non-theoretical and compelling” where the vaccinated could experience “severe disease, lasting morbidity or even death” but would otherwise have a mild case if unvaccinated.
The authors said the ADE risk was so important, that it warranted a separate Informed Consent form. Despite this recommendation, none of the Informed Consent forms I have read mentions ADE risk.


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijcp.13795?fbclid=IwAR3UmkB4jtA0lPACSOucFNfLrS2JNv7-A3pxRIDw8eDOH2aG7V6XBUPutnk

Dr. Robert Malone, who helped invent the core technology platform for the Covid19 shots said, “Antibody enhancement is the vaccinologist’s worst nightmare. That the product that you worked so hard to create actually causes worse disease.”… “We have the flawed clinical studies, I acknowledge that they’re far from perfect and some might say designed to not be able to detect certain types of adverse events. Specifically, one thing they were not designed to detect is antibody dependent enhancement. And that’s recognized by the FDA because in the FDA authorization letter for Emergency Use Authorization, they specifically say that the data are not sufficient to rule out antibody dependent enhancement; it remains a significant risk and suggested to the vaccine companies that they should do follow on clinical studies to detect the presence or absence of antibody dependent enhancement. But they didn’t insist that the vaccine companies do that.” Malone says the vaccine companies decided to take a pass and not investigate whether or not antibody dependent enhancement would occur. He said, “What we do know is the distribution of virus levels, load, whether it’s measured by PCR cycles or some measure that correlates more directly to titer, in the vaccinated is at least as high, those vaccinated that have ‘breakthrough’ infections, that become infected, is at least as high as in the unvaccinated and to my eye, it looks like there’s suggestions that there may be a subset of patients that have been vaccinated and infected, that have even higher levels of viral replication than are present in the unvaccinated population. That, if that was to hold true, that would be the smoking gun demonstrating antibody dependent enhancement.”  

https://www.bitchute.com/video/jHcDEhJgn3y6/ 


As for the Delta variant, it’s not more severe, if you mean deadly. Viruses mutate and become more transmissible but less virulent/deadly because they want to survive and not kill the host (Virology 101). The media is hyping the Delta variant and lying when they say it’s more severe or deadly. I haven’t even heard lying Fauci say it’s more deadly. That’s probably because he knows he doesn’t have to. He knows the public will equate “more transmissible” with more deadly so that’s all he needs to repeat, is how much more transmissible the Delta variant is and the complicit media fuels this fear mongering propaganda by saying ICUs are at capacity, more children are being hospitalized, etc. 

On the 18th, I shared the most recent U.K. Public Health Report that showed the Delta variant’s case fatality rate (CFR) is .4% and the original virus’ case fatality rate was 1.1%. So this confirms the Delta variant is far less virulent/deadly. And the infectious fatality rate is always lower than the CFR because it includes asymptomatic and mild cases, which largely go undocumented.


Delta variant CFR per U.K. reports

August 6   .2%

August 20 .3%

Sept 3      .4%

Sept 17    .4% 


You can see that the CFR has risen over time. As I previously mentioned, Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche and others have warned that the mass vaccination programs will create more virulent variants due to ‘vaccine leaking’ or ‘vaccine escape.’ On the other hand, Dr. Michael Yeadon (former Pfizer Chief Science Officer) considers this immune escape claim as fear mongering and said it’s an “evil trick” to push “top ups” (boosters). It’s hard to tell if the rising CFR supports Vanden Bossche’s theory but in my opinion, the rising CFR points to the ADE risk and the high vaccination rate in the U.K. 


Luc Montagnier, winner of the Nobel Prize for discovering the HIV virus, says the death curve follows the vaccination curve. He also says that the vaccinated are creating variants that are resistant to the vaccine. However, that’s not the same as what Vanden Bossche is asserting, that the new variants are more virulent.  

https://freewestmedia.com/2021/05/27/nobel-prize-winner-in-every-country-the-death-curve-follows-the-vaccination-curve/

U.K. Public Health Dept Reports:  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigation-of-novel-sars-cov-2-variant-variant-of-concern-20201201

U.K. Sept. 17th report:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1018547/Technical_Briefing_23_21_09_16.pdf

A study finds the current Covid19 vaccines will cause ‘Vaccine Induced Enhanced Disease’ when infected with Delta:

https://theexpose.uk/2021/09/16/study-finds-covid-19-vaccines-will-cause-vaccine-induced-enhanced-disease/

I disagree that it is best to vaccinate the vulnerable. Given the ADE risk and the cytotoxic spike protein, under no circumstances should anyone receive these shots. There is zero benefit and 100% risk, both short term and long term. While some may argue that the viral vector DNA shots (J&J and AstraZeneca) are better because they do not use mRNA or the harmful lipo nano particles, they aren’t aware that these shots also instruct the body to create the spike protein. The viral vector DNA shots simply go about it in a different way. 

Instead of directly injecting the mRNA into the body, the J&J/AstraZeneca shots inject the DNA, which enters the vaccinated person’s cells and makes its way into the nucleus where the person’s DNA is stored and it transcribes their DNA into the mRNA. From this point, the J&J and AstraZeneca vaccines work exactly the same as the mRNA vaccines. The newly created mRNA leaves the nucleus into the cell’s cytoplasm and there a ribosome will translate this genetic material, the mRNA, into the spike protein. The cell will produce numerous spike proteins, which will protrude from the surface of the cell wall. A Salk Institute study published in May (which I shared in my previous email), showed these spike proteins alone (spikes on the surface of the virus cells) cause damage separate from the virus cell. So all the Covid19 shots instruct the body to produce the cytotoxic spike protein. 


Dr. Charles Hoffe explains to journalist Laura Lynn the damage the vaccines do once injected; someone created this compelling 9 min. video that illustrates what occurs. 

https://www.bitchute.com/video/uD98ksu0PzQg/


Dr. Ryan Cole (pathologist) explains the vaccine damage to the brain, heart and other organs using photos from an autopsy of a vaccinated person.

https://rumble.com/vkopys-a-pathologist-summary-of-what-these-jabs-do-to-the-brain-and-other-organs.html

Project Veritas  released a video of whistleblower Jodi O’Malley, an RN for the U.S. Dept of Health & Human Services, who reveals secret video footage of how  vaccine injuries are not being reported to VAERS. The staff will lose their jobs if they are allowed to administer Ivermectin. Dr. Maria Gonzales, ER Doctor for the U.S. Health & Human Services said “The government doesn’t want to show the darn vaccine is full of shit.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obdI7tgKLtA

Whistleblower Deborah Conrad, a hospitalist physician’s assistant, reports vaccine injuries are not being reported to VAERS and the more severe Covid cases are among the vaccinated. https://rumble.com/vmncez-these-patients-deserve-to-be-heard-vaers-whistleblower.html

If these videos don’t convince someone how incredibly dangerous these vaccines are, then it’s best to walk away. 

There is no talking sense into those who refuse to have an open mind. The evil that is behind this is too much for many to comprehend. Their Denialism prevents them from suspecting any malfeasance by those they blindly trust to protect their health. So if you present the irrefutable facts and they still cling to their beliefs, it’s time to move on. I am focusing all my efforts in trying to help people avoid the vaccine mandates and inform others about the risks if they are willing to listen. 

Even though it’s stressful and as you said, a very uncomfortable experience, for all of us who see what’s going on, ignorance is not bliss, it can be deadly. The future suffering the vaccinated may face from the shots will be many times worse than the anguish we all feel from knowing what we know. 

Despite this angst, I consider it a huge blessing to be awake to all this madness and to be part of this amazing group, thanks to Dr. McCullough. The tireless work he and other members are putting forth to save lives and create a better future is why I am convinced that we will ultimately win this global battle. I foresee a huge paradigm shift in how healthcare will be delivered and it will not be served by big pharma. The globalists have overplayed their hand and awakened a sleeping giant. You know what they say about Karma. It will be biblical and I predict the tide will turn soon. Tick-Tock. 

Communications here are for informational purposes only and are NOT meant to be on the record or for press purposes or medical advice.

Pfizer Covid vaccine boosters: FDA staff declines to take stance, citing unverified data

KEY POINTS

  • The FDA staff declined to take a stance on whether to back booster shots of Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine, saying U.S. regulators haven’t verified all the available data.
  • “Overall, data indicate that currently US-licensed or authorized COVID-19 vaccines still afford protection against severe COVID-19 disease and death in the United States,” they wrote in a 23-page document.
  • The staff report is meant to brief the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, which meets Friday to review Pfizer’s request to approve Covid booster doses for the general public.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/15/covid-booster-shots-fda-staff-declines-to-take-stance-on-pfizers-third-doses-citing-lack-of-verified-data.html

Doctor in Sarasota Hospital Witnesses a 50-Year-Old Man Being ‘COVID neglected’ by Hospital Personnel – Doctor Restrained When He Advocates for Patient (VIDEO)

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/08/breaking-exclusive-doctor-sarasota-hospital-witnesses-50-year-old-man-covid-killed-hospital-personnel-doctor-restrained-advocates-patient-video/