- First up, a summary of the Doshi-Lataster papers or JECP4 (article one, article two, article three, article four), which regular readers will know all about, and which was recently presented on for the U.S. Senate (videos here). These primarily deal with the dodgy counting windows found in the clinical trials and also in observational studies which serve to drastically exaggerate the effectiveness and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines. They also touch on the hugely concerning issue of negative effectiveness (where the jab appears to increase the chance of Covid infection and death) and the little-known fact that the post-jab myocarditis rate is much more common than the rate at which young and healthy people get a significant benefit from the jabs - yes, just the one side-effect appears to make the risks outweigh the benefits, and by a lot. Couldn't imagine why this didn't make the mainstream news. Maybe it's because of the dense web of financial connections between those who own Big Pharma and the mainstream news outlets.
- The next article mentioned in this 'magnificent seven' (would have been eight if not for the shocking retraction of Mead et al. by Cureus) is Thacker (article), appearing in the prestigious BMJ, which alluded to Pfizer trial fraud.
- Next up is the excellent Fraiman et al. (article), which noted that the "excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest surpassed the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalisation relative to the placebo group in both Pfizer and Moderna trials".
- Finally, the amazing Benn et al. (article), which noted no statistically significant decrease in COVID-19 deaths in the mRNA vaccine clinical trials, while there was an increase in total deaths. I didn't stutter, there was an increase in deaths in the jabbed.
- I point out that these seven articles should have had us doubting the evidence for the jabs from the very beginning, and wonder if the situation would be far worse now with a little time elapsing and milder variants around. For example, we have had more time to learn about the risks and milder variants means less potential benefit.
- Moving on to post-trial research, I mention Raethke et al. (article), which shows a serious side-effect rate much higher than 'rare', and very likely not worth the minimal to zero benefits of the jabs for the young and healthy.
- Also mentioned is Faksova et al., a huge study on around 99 million people, which found a ton of serious jab side-effects, and could have found more if they looked beyond "42 days following vaccination" (article).
- I end by declaring that "we must always be intellectually humble, recognising that absolute certainty will almost certainly remain out of reach", a sentiment echoed by Senator Johnson at the recent hearing, and by hinting that an article on reverse misinformation regarding COVID-19 may be in the works.
Many thanks are due to the editorial team at Elsevier's Public Health in Practice which published these important articles, and to the original authors who I understand were supportive of my article. May many more articles be published in The Science™, that ask legitimate questions about the sacred cow that is the jab. Even as we have to fight ongoing Government censorship.
Reader Comments
Sad, that. And many other folks the same, I know some. Take care.
.
'Today Louisiana became the first US state to deny jurisdiction to the WHO, UN and WEF' Governor Landry signed SB133, which will go into effect immediately by MERYL NASS MAY 28, 2024 [Link]
.
"I shouldn’t even be surprised anymore, but somehow I am. I guess when when we exist in a world where diseases are so deadly that people have to take fake tests to be told they are asymptomatically sick…and antidepressants are being pushed for a “respiratory syndrome” that cannot possibly pandemic the world…it makes sense to inject some poison to counteract some poison. It makes exactly as much sense as it does to add some this DNA to that DNA to isolate the DNA.
Let’s take a look at today’s dose of Psyop Fuckery..."
Why? Peter will of course have a history of support from any drug manufacturer, as he is a noted cardiologist. In my view, the plandemic has woken him up. He now states that the vax is a bioweapon, which is not a coverup narrative. He has been demonized and marginalized.
The question I have had for the vaxxed and for any of us who may be affected by shedding, is what can be done to detoxify from the vax. For example, Bryan Ardis has promoted nicotine as something that blocks the effect of spike protein, and anecdotal evidence indicates it works.
What can block the mRNA generation of spike protein? You have to consider the possibility that siRNA may work and research it. Would Big Pharma back something that will make them money? We need to question and keep an open mind.
I don't think modifying existing DNA for any reason is ethical without informed consent as to unforeseen consequences. The siRNA is being used in turning off cancer by targeting mRNA. Some examples.
[Link] This link from 2016 uses antibody linked siRNA to interfere.
[Link] From 2010. Quote: "RNA interference (RNAi) has been one of the most rapidly expanding areas of biological research in the past decade, revolutionizing the ability to analyze gene function. Thorough validation of siRNA duplexes is required prior to use in experimental systems, ideally by western blotting to show a reduction in protein levels. However, in many cases good antibodies are not available, and researchers must rely on RT-qPCR to detect knockdown of the mRNA species."
[Link] From 2008. Quote: " Here, using a combination of experimental results and analysis of a large dataset, we demonstrate that the accessibility of certain local target structures on the mRNA is an important determinant in the gene silencing ability of siRNAs. siRNAs targeting the enhanced green fluorescent protein were chosen using a minimal siRNA selection algorithm followed by classification based on the predicted minimum free energy structures of the target transcripts. "
[Link] Quote: "COVID-19 is a newly emerged viral disease that is currently affecting the whole globe. A variety of therapeutic approaches are underway to block the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Among these methods, siRNAs could be a safe and specific option, as they have been tested against other viruses. siRNAs are a class of inhibitor RNAs that act promisingly as mRNA expression blockers and they can be designed to interfere with viral mRNA to block virus replication."
[Link] 2006 review article on siRNA
[Link] 2008 siRNA and bird flu "virus", Title: RNA interference of avian influenza virus H5N1 by inhibiting viral mRNA with siRNA expression plasmids
When I look at many of those who have stood up to the plandemic, they look worn down: McCullough, Karen Kingston, Pierre Kory, Judy Mikovits. Why? They are being attacked in my view.
.
"...I’ll leave you with these thoughts from John H: John H.
This was an outstanding post, Sarah.
Some food for thought:
Dr PM is a clinician, not a basic science researcher. His subspecialty is non-interventional cardiology with a master’s degree in public health. He appears to have no actual working knowledge of molecular biology, drug or biological product design/development or in the laboratory setting. The payments documented here would therefore appear to be for the purpose of marketing potential or new products in his capacity as a well-recognized public medical spokesperson.
As far as I can ascertain, Dr PM has never addressed the plethora of reports from independent researchers who proved that there is only trivial (or none) amounts of nitrogen or phosphorus present in any of the 4 major CV19 “vaccines." That means there is likely minimal to no mRNA present in any of them, (if the vials studied are representative of the total universe of manufactured product). It is highly improbable on the basis of chance alone, that all the vials analyzed independently, would fail to contain nitrogen or phosphorus unless that was the intent. On the other hand, there are multiple substances in them which are toxic to humans. If I am wrong about any of these assertions, I am willing to amend my comments.
Then there is this:
If pathological viruses don’t exist (which seems increasingly likely), there can’t be any bird flu. In the unlikely circumstance that bird flu actually exists but can’t be diagnosed with PCR tests (PCR was proven to be an unreliable diagnostic test for CV19), bird flu can’t be diagnosed reliably. If that’s true, there is no medical indication for SiRNA’s or an mRNA “vaccine” for this alleged disease. The fundamental underlying assumptions upon which this new treatment is based, are either extremely doubtful or false. Anyone making such claims is at the least, highly suspect.
Moreover, when you see words/phrases like “seem effective", realize you are being subjected to propaganda since they are not valid medical or scientific terms. Recall that the CV19 "vaccines" were said to be "safe and effective" not seemingly so, and yet, they have been proven to be dangerous. It is wise to dismiss such efficacy claims entirely, unless and until they can be properly/independently verified. I am willing to reconsider any of the above assertions if presented with contrary/rigorous evidence."
'
"The curious case of Onpattro, siRNA in lipid nanoparticle now being considered by some as a potential treatment for mRNA injuries" by SASHA LATYPOVA JUN 17, 2024 [Link]