Once More Into The Breach

Opinion

Dec 31, 2021

Holy Mask Mandate, Robin! A mere two weeks after the last Covid missive and we're back in La La Land already. As a measure of the accelerating lunacy, consider just two examples from the past fortnight, before we get stuck into the latest developments. In the place what I'm in, one of those infamous undisclosed locations beloved of the notorious, I cannot gain access to any premises that are government owned without a Covid Pass. Not just indoor; outdoor, too. Now, I understand that 'federal' mandates have been in widespread use in a number of countries and have attracted some level of opprobrium. I just hadn't thought it through properly until it directly affected me.

One of the problems with this policy is that they are not government owned, they are owned by the people. The government's job is to administer those spaces for the benefit of the people, using money provided by those same people. A good argument could be made to the effect that government facilities should be the last places that us normies should be barred from accessing, not the first. An equally compelling case can be made for the right of private businesses to admit who they so choose.

Of course, the state gaslights us by saying that these restrictions are for our benefit, somehow. That they are being responsible with our health. If that were truly the case, they would mandate it everywhere, rather than seeking to avoid liability by merely ensuring that government spaces are allegedly pristine. Although, as we've seen in the States, a move to force private business to comply with similar government edicts cannot be ruled out.

The consequences of random, ill thought out, unjustifiable restrictions such as these are small slices of abject nonsense. One such circumstance: I visited a café that was adjacent to a small outdoor concert space. The café was on private land, the concert space on public land. In the former, I could enjoy a maskless indoor coffee without being asked for my papers and yet, just ten metres away, in the outdoor space, I would have needed a QR code. And we just shrug our shoulders Gallicly and go along with it.

The second example is that of a friend who developed cold symptoms, including losing her sense of taste. She went to the doctor, was prodded with the ubiquitous PCR test and pronounced Covid diseased and in need of ten day's quarantine; as an aside, her symptoms lasted perhaps two days, if that. However, she is now in receipt of a Covid pass for the next twelve months as a 'recovered' patient (although I'm willing to bet that a year turns into something considerably less). Now, given what we know of the infallible test and the absence of any initial diagnosis from a doctor – plus the fact that Covid symptoms are remarkably (conveniently) similar to the flu and other circulating coronaviruses – how can anybody have any confidence in any part of this procedure? It is far more likely that she is in the cohort of false positives, which number up to 97% of testees. She may have had a cold. A way to be sure would have been for the surgery to conduct an antibody test on her blood in the immediate aftermath of the alleged infection, and if health authorities were truly serious about Covid, that's what would have happened. They clearly aren't.

But, of course, it's a way of getting one more person on the compliance treadmill, which will leave her with only two bad options when the accreditation runs out; either succumb to the jab or accept the loss of privileges that she had managed to retain and will be reluctant to surrender. It's a neat psychological ploy, but it makes absolutely no medical sense. It's entirely arbitrary and the polar opposite of 'following the science'.

On the one hand, there's an implicit acceptance that prior infection (if that's what it was) confers immunity and, on the other hand, an assertion that the span of that immunity is twelve months; a timespan plucked out of thin air and entirely illegitimate. Naturally acquired immunity is likely lifelong. Indeed, sufferers from the original SARS nearly twenty years ago still have antibodies.(1) Plus the not inconsiderable fact that the CDC themselves have not been able to find a single patient who has recovered from Covid and subsequently been reinfected.(2) But, no matter. Nobody is paying any attention to the actual science any more.

Israel

This may well be our third visit to Israel, which is still vying for the prize of Most Myopic State. Either that, or they are on a mission to disprove Einstein's (alleged) maxim that it's the definition of insanity to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. Cases are rising exponentially in one of the most 'vaccinated' countries in the world:

“Israel recorded 1,775 new cases of COVID-19 on Friday, including 591 cases with the highly-infectious Omicron variant, according to Health Ministry figures published Saturday.

Confirmed cases of Omicron reached 1,118 as of Saturday, more than triple the 341 known infections from Tuesday, when the Health Ministry last released specific figures on the variant. The ministry said Saturday that another 861 infections were “highly suspected” to be Omicron cases, pending test results.”(3)

And it's not as if it's just 'cases'.

Figure 1

So, the obvious solution is to insist upon another booster jab, right? Couldn't be clearer, despite the fact that there is no evidence that this booster will be any good against Omicron and plenty of precedent to say that it won't.(4) Israel has truly crossed over to the dark side, whether for reasons of blind panic or by design. There is no exit strategy visible; the answer to every problem seems to be another jab. Even if one is blinkered enough to fall for the 'vaccine' zealotry and turn aside from any evidence that the jabs are harmful, there has to be an understanding that every jab will force the body to produce copious amounts of spike protein every three months or so. Has any vaccination ever been that inefficient?

EU and passports

Having ceded the initiative to individual countries such as Austria and Germany, the EU has been making strenuous efforts to recapture its authority. So, on top of von der Leyen's theatrics about future mandatory vaccinations, comes the announcement that 'vaccine' passports will only be valid for nine months, not a year.(5) After that, the QR code (your electronic survival key) will be switched off. That didn't take long, did it? Any pretense that these documents are a temporary necessity, which was one of the initial selling points, is being swept aside. As an aside, would you agree to a flu jab mandate? No, didn't think so. But, despite Covid being comparable in effect to the flu (and this despite any attempt at early treatment allied to an inpatient treatment protocol that is almost certain to do more harm than good), it's entirely acceptable to have our rights and privileges circumscribed by a 'vaccine' mandate for Covid.

And nine months? Where did that come from? A particularly scientific solution, no doubt. But, regrettably, entirely wrong.

Figure 2

Not only does 'vaccine' effectiveness wane much quicker than that, it goes into negative figures, which indicates that a 'vaccinated' person is more likely, not less likely, to contract Covid. I don't recall that information being widely shared by health authorities, 'vaccine' manufacturers on the sainted Fourth Estate, do you?

Pandemic of the Vaccinated

Figure 3 Flattening the curve in Australia

Where to start? Well, we could head over to the UK where the National Health Service (NHS) is grinding to a halt as even the triple jabbed staff catch Covid,(6) although the NHS is on the verge of falling apart every winter since time immemorial – except last year, oddly enough, when they cancelled the vast majority of scheduled operations and procedures in anticipation of a Covid 'surge' and instead spent their time making TikTok videos (7) and taking the mandated applause of their grateful citizens for just doing what they were paid to do, when they were busy enough to have a patient on the ward.(8) I'm not entirely sure that sedating, intubating and ventilating Covid patients who shouldn't have even been in hospital if they had been given early treatment is deserving of applause, but the so-called Clap for our Carers movement has my support if it involves them getting it rather than being given one.

We can hop over to Mexico, where cruise ship passengers were not allowed to disembark due to twenty one fully vaccinated crew members testing 'positive'.(9) Or perhaps to Cuba, where the USS Milwaukee was detained while a Covid outbreak swept through the (you guessed it) fully vaccinated crew.(10) We could then venture up the eastern seaboard of the United States to New York, the long time shining beacon of Covid ineptitude, where nearly 30% of all active cases in America are currently recorded.(11) What's the connection to the two ships? Well, 83% of the population has at least one dose, with 71% being fully 'vaccinated'.(12)

Hard to credit, isn't it? I guess it must be all those who are still 'unvaccinated', none of whom must have immunity. It's the only viable answer. But, hold on:

“U.S. professional sports leagues — particularly the NBA and the NFL — have been decimated by COVID outbreaks. Games have been re-scheduled or cancelled altogether at the college level, which has severely impacted the playoff outlooks of some NFL teams.The outbreaks have been taking place largely among vaccinated players as both the NBA and NFL boast high vaccination rates. COVID outbreaks led to multiple NFL postponements this past Sunday after COVID outbreaks decimated the Cleveland Browns, Los Angeles Rams and Washington Football Team. The Browns were forced to play on Monday evening while missing more than 25 players and coaches....”(13)

And then there's that other fully 'vaccinated' cruise ship with 50 cases; the one that had to return to Miami.(14) The CDC is now warning people not to cruise at all, as the number of 'cases' on fully 'vaccinated’ cruise ships in US waters rose above 5,000 in the fortnight over Christmas.(15) Or the Christmas dinner in Norway where one of the attendees brought along the Omicron variant as a gift and 98% of those infected were fully 'vaccinated'.(16) Many more such examples could be found, but I think I've made my point. Even The Lancet agrees. A recently published study found that 'vaccination' conferred little if any protection and some of the figures were astonishing; in Germany, by 27th October 2021, the fully 'vaccinated’ in the over 60s made up 58.9% of all cases. The latest data, accurate at December 30th is equally compelling. Of 4,206 Coronavirus patients in Germany, 4080 (95.6%) were fully 'vaccinated'. This in a country with a 71.1% 'vaccination' rate.(17)

Figure 4 Vaccination rates and proportions of fully vaccinated people among symptomatic COVID-19 cases (≥ 60 years) in Germany between 21. July and 27. October 2021 based on the weekly reports from the Robert Koch-Institute.

In the UK, between weeks 39 and 42 (in the same age group), 89.7% of cases were fully jabbed and only 3.4% 'unvaccinated'. In the US, four of the top five counties in terms of 'vaccination' are classed as high transmission. The study comes to the somewhat inevitable conclusion that:

“Many decision makers assume that the vaccinated can be excluded as a source of transmission. It appears to be grossly negligent to ignore the vaccinated population as a possible and relevant source of transmission when deciding about public health control measures.”(18)

It does, doesn't it? Because it is obvious that 'vaccination' does not work; at least, not for long. But why? A few reasons, in combination. It may be remembered that Moderna, the main company that was all-in on mRNA technology company, did not start investigating its use in vaccines until it had failed to get any other drugs to human trials; in other words it was not the first port of call. There's a reason for this.

A Swedish study matched 842,974 pairs of fully 'vaccinated' and 'unvaccinated' people and compared the effectiveness of the 'vaccines'. The drop off in 'vaccine' effectiveness was stark, with the Pfizer product having retained only 47% effectiveness by day 147 and 0% by day 201. AstraZeneca had managed to hit 0% by day 121. Now, day 121 is about four months and day 201 is about six and a half months. So, naturally, the study's authors conclusion was that:

“Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 infection wanes progressively over time across all subgroups, but at different rate according to type of vaccine, and faster for men and older frail individuals. The effectiveness against severe illness seems to remain high through 9 months, although not for men, older frail individuals, and individuals with comorbidities.”(19)

Admittedly, I'm not a scientist; nor am I a mathematician. But I wouldn't have said that 0% effectiveness constitutes high effectiveness, nor that the 'vaccines' were proving to be useful to precisely the group of people most in need of them, but never let a failed experiment get in the way of a good conclusion. However, I think conclusion number one is that, whatever else the 'vaccines' do, they don't provide much protection for any significant length of time.

“An effective vaccine would focus on cellular immunity in the respiratory and intestinal tract, in which secretory IgA is produced by your lymphocyte. The antibodies produced by these lymphocytes are ejected through and to the surface of the linings. These antibodies are thus on site to meet air-borne viruses and they may be able to prevent viral binding and infection of the cells. Unfortunately, the main inoculants used presently for COVID-19 focus on antibodies that occur in the bloodstream. These antibodies protect the internal organs of the body from infectious agents that try to spread via the bloodstream.”(20)

That sounds considerably more logical in explaining what would be required from a proper vaccine and also why these ones aren't. As the primary infection site is not being targeted by the 'vaccine', one can understand how an infection can still take hold and still be transmitted. It explains why the 'vaccinated' are coming down with Covid all over the place. And if that was all there was to see, it would be just another colossal failure and that's where we could leave it; in booster heaven, with all the people who were most at risk still being most at risk and with no beneficial outcome, despite an enormous financial outlay. Regrettably, we are not going to just end up back where we were.

Back to 'vaccine' injuries

It is also unsurprising; these are the first use of mRNA technology against an infectious agent, the first-ever ‘vaccine’ to make no clear claims about reducing infection, transmissibility or death, the first-ever coronavirus ‘vaccine’ ever tested on humans (and previous coronavirus vaccines all failed due to antibody-dependent enhancement, a condition in which the antibodies actually facilitate infection rather than defend against it) and the first-ever use of genetically modified polynucleotides in the general population. And, almost certainly the first to conduct animal testing alongside human testing, rather than before.(21)

“A natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus) will in most individuals remain localized to the respiratory tract. The vaccines used presently cause cells deep inside our body to express the viral spike protein, which they were never meant to do by nature. Any cell which expresses this foreign antigen on its surface will come under attack by the immune system, which will involve both IgG antibodies and cytotoxic T-lymphocytes. This may occur in any organ, but the damage will be most severe in vital organs. We are seeing now that the heart is affected in many young people, leading to myocarditis or even sudden cardiac arrest and death. In other words, we are dropping the wrong bomb on the wrong target at the wrong time.”(22)

Again, an explanation that actually tries to explain the mechanism and seems to make logical sense, which is in marked contrast to the information previously provided by our elders and betters. This, at best, can be described as vague and running counter to the evidence of our eyes. They have eventually admitted that there may be some 'breakthrough infections', but not many as it's allegedly 95% effective. We weren't told that this level of efficacy only lasted about five minutes, that it could not be any different as the 'vaccines' can't prevent respiratory tract infection due to their mechanism and that the combination of fading immunity and infection would result in widespread infection among the 'vaccinated'.

Nor were we told the rest of the story. That the spike protein itself is toxic, that by programming our bodies to produce it in places where it can have no effect on any disease, we are causing lasting damage to parts of our system that we have need of in order to survive.

One more factoid while we're on the subject. The spike protein produced by the 'vaccine' isn't the same as the wild virus spike protein. It's been genetically modified to be longer lasting and it has longer attachments on its surface, so that when it attaches to what are called ACE2 receptors on our cells, it keeps the connection open for far longer than would otherwise occur. This causes the body to decrease production of these receptors. There is a pivotal link between a deficiency in ACE2 receptors and severe Covid infections,(23)(24) and it's unknown how long the spike protein will continue to be produced by the body, in order that it might continue to wreak this kind of havoc. What is known is that the spike protein persists in people who have recovered from the wild virus for at least fifteen months.(25) It's very difficult to imagine that the enhanced spike protein present in the 'vaccine' will be active for any less duration.(26) And every time a patient receives a new shot, another fifteen months of spike protein production (at least) can be added on.

So, how does that sound to the ranks of the 'vaccinated'? Lots more spike protein than with a wild infection, lots of damage over a long period, because it's been genetically modified to be a more potent pathogen, a permanent presence in the body because boosters will be (at most) nine months apart – and for what? Protection that wanes by the day and which targets the wrong part of the body entirely. Congrats.

And that's why you get this, since 'vaccinations' started:

Figure 5

Hospitalizations and deaths in age groups almost wholly unaffected in the pre-vaccine age. Does it look like the last line of defense, as articulated by the state and Big Pharma, is actually true; that the jabs will prevent hospitalisations and deaths? Really? And that is without any mention of 'vaccine' injuries.

And what is the update in the unacknowledged, unregulated world of mysterious deaths that are becoming more and more difficult to ignore to anyone with an open mind? Well, a massive study by Nature magazine in conjunction with Oxford University looked at the possibility that the 'vaccines' may be causing some heart problems. Not that this was likely as the clinical trials hadn't found any problems.(27) Nonetheless, as soon as the drug hit the market, there did seem to be a bit of an uptick in conditions like arrhythmia, pericarditis and myocarditis. Which is unfortunate, seeing as how the precise function of clinical trials is to gauge the safety and efficacy of the relevant drug.

No matter. What did the study find? Well, from the 38,615,941 in the study

“there were 1,615 and 1,574 admissions or deaths related to myocarditis and pericarditis, respectively (14 patients had both), and 385,508 related to cardiac arrhythmias.”(28)

Come again? One in a hundred 'vaccinated' individuals were hospitalised and/or died from heart conditions within a period of a maximum of 28 days after the second jab? One in a hundred? Does that not seem a little high? You don't think it could have anything to do with another four soccer players dying of heart attacks last week, do you?(29) Or the over 200 athletes who are known to have died of heart related issues in the past year?(30)

Or nurses finally breaking ranks (and it's usually nurses, not doctors). This lady from Ventura County:

“It has never been this busy, and none of it is Covid-19. “We don’t normally see this amount of strokes, aneurysms and heart attacks all happening at once. … Normally we’ll see six to ten aortic dissections a year. We’ve seen six in the last month. It’s crazy. Those have very high rates of mortality.”(31)

Her colleague:

“We’ve been having a lot of younger people come in,” Sam says. “We’re seeing a lot of strokes, a lot of heart attacks.” One 38 year old woman came in with occlusions (blockages of blood flow) in her brain.“They [doctors] were searching for everything under the sun and documenting this in the chart, but nowhere do you see if she was vaccinated or not. One thing the vaccine causes is thrombosis, clotting. Here you have a 38-year-old woman who was double-vaccinated and she’s having strokes they can’t explain. None of the doctors relates it to the vaccine. It’s garbage. It’s absolute garbage.”(32)

There are any number of similar stories from around the world. But, if there were anything to any of this, the authorities would be right on it, wouldn't they? Because they have our best interests at heart. We must just be having a bad run. What follows is not unrelated.

Why it's important that the kids are jabbed

There could really do with being some joined-up thinking. I appreciate that this has not been a notable feature of the response to this 'pandemic', but just once would be nice. Because the people who have authorised the jab for children are the same people who have been responsible for all the other pronouncements, mandates and restrictions. Any outrage directed at them now, while not misplaced, is certainly well overdue. If you feel that it is disgusting that they are trying to coerce your kids into being 'vaccinated' against a disease that has less chance of killing them than the seasonal flu (considerably less, in all likelihood, if they were treated as outpatients), where were you when seniors in nursing homes were having their sleeves rolled up without so much as a by your leave?

That said, are there any other reasons why the 'vaccine' mafia are ganging up on the young? Well, yes. There are. You see, it's about money. And it goes like this. As a business model, being able to sell a product without any liability for its safety or effectiveness would be regarded as very desirable. Especially if you could price gouge the consumer by establishing a near monopoly by virtue of your control over the organisations that regulate your industry, because you help fund them; which munificence then provides the conditions in which you are able to conduct your own vaccine trials without proper oversight.

The business model would look even more attractive if it was the customer who part funded the development of said product, but who receives none of the profits from the sale of it. And lastly, throw in the fact that you are able to mandate the use of your product. Does that not sound like a sweet deal? One with all the bases covered? No downside whatsoever and a licence to print money in perpetuity? I think so and that's what is about to happen. Let me elucidate.

As previously observed in other musings, an Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) can only be granted if four conditions are met.

There needs to be an emergency.
The 'vaccine' needs to be 30-50% effective (I'll come back to that).
The known and potential benefits outweigh the known and potential risks.
There is/are no adequate, approved and available alternative(s).

Now, it may be that such a definition was created in more innocent times, when the state and its agencies were not expected to be anything other than straight shooters, but the amount of latitude afforded is substantial. For a start, there needs to be a declared emergency, as distinct from an actual emergency, as the definition (in its fuller form) is malleable. And while an actual approved vaccine had to show 70% efficacy, an EUA vaccine has to meet a much lower threshold. The risk/reward calculation is a subjective free for all and, in this case at least, there are a large number of available treatments that are more effective and safer than the 'vaccines' but which remain unacknowledged, lest they spoil the dollar fest.

I've always struggled with the whole concept of quantifying the risk reduction of these 'vaccines'. For starters, there are two measures of risk, one considerably more persuasive sounding than the other in terms of the percentage assigned. The terms are 'relative risk reduction' and 'absolute risk reduction'. Naturally, the likes of Pfizer have focused on the measure that gives the biggest number, with no regard for actually informing the public of what the measure means; otherwise, I wouldn't be explaining it to myself as well as to you. The following may help:

“For example, if a study divided people into two groups of 1,000 and two people in the group who didn’t get a fictional vaccine got infected, while only one in the vaccinated group got infected, the relative risk reduction would be reported as 100%. In terms of absolute risk reduction, the fictional vaccine only prevented 1 in 1,000 from getting the infection — a very poor absolute risk reduction.”(33)

This is how we plummet from the much touted 95% to 0.84%; not even one person per thousand being prevented from getting Covid. In addition, it was the first clinical trial to have its efficacy tested by PCR test, rather than by measuring the antibodies produced in the blood. A study published in The Lancet couldn't find an instance of a single healthy child being killed by Covid; not a single one.(34) On the reward side of the axis alone, there is no benefit to giving the 'vaccine' to children. As for the risk side – one child from the Pfizer trial of only 1,300 kids went public; or rather, her parents did, as she had immediately suffered a seizure after being injected with the 'vaccine' and is now in a wheelchair, being fed by tube – for life. We don't know if there were others. Neither can we rely on Pfizer's clinical trial report, as they recorded the above mentioned victim as merely suffering from a stomach ache.(35)

But, as we are no longer living in a world where the checks and balances that are supposed to protect us exist, none of this matters. The 'vaccines' are safe and effective, the reward outweighs the risk, as the emergency is still in full swing, and there are no alternative treatments. Of course; that's why Big Pharma is desperate to avoid liability for their products. Here's how they intend to do it.

A product under an EUA, like Pfizer's Covid jab, is protected from liability for injuries because, well, it's an emergency and some must suffer for the collective. But the product will be approved eventually (no matter what), at which point liability kicks in. Puzzlingly, despite all the bullish expressions of faith in their 'vaccines', the manufacturers are doing their utmost to avoid this scenario. How? A permanent EUA would be one way, but it makes it tricky to mandate the use of it. For 'tricky' read 'illegal, but we'll get away with it for a while until we get sued and by then, most people will have taken it anyway'. One cannot mandate a 'vaccine' that has not been properly tested and also evade liability. It's against the law, as well as being morally bankrupt.

But, as is so often the way, there is a loophole. If the 'vaccine' can be somehow added to the Childhood Vaccination Schedule, then freedom from liability for adverse effects is retained, because the government takes responsibility, rather than Big Pharma. By government, I of course mean citizens, because any funds that are disbursed from the injury compensation scheme come from the public purse; your tax dollars at work. Fear not; it only pays out in about a third of cases and only then when the applicant has jumped through hoops for months or years.(35) Not surprisingly:

“this is the holy grail if you're a vaccine manufacturer of a COVID vaccine right now. You want it to be fully licensed, but not put it on the market until you get it on the children's schedule.”(36)

You may think me overly cynical on this point (and on many others, perhaps). But how else to explain the convoluted approval process that the Comirnaty 'vaccine' is going through. This is the BioNTech one, which is supposed to be almost indistinguishable from the Pfizer 'vaccine', except it hasn't yet existed in physical form and won't for some time yet. This hasn't stopped the FDA from mangling the English language and tying themselves into untenable logical positions. They claim that Comirnaty is interchangeable with the Pfizer jab, but legally distinct. Well, it's either the same product or it isn't. It can't be both, unless you're trying to have your cake and eat it.

The Pfizer 'vaccine' is still licensed under an EUA, so has no liability. Check. The Comirnaty 'vaccine', which is the same product except it's not legally, will be fully approved for children by virtue of the neutered Pfizer ‘vaccine’ results (at least, that's the plan), placed on the Childhood Vaccination Schedule so that it is simultaneously approved for all ages, and there will be a seamless transition from one state of financial bliss to another, with no unpleasant liability in-between, all while never having been given to a single child. Check. And never mind the cost in lives now, in the trial period, or in the future. Yes, it's that bad.

Every new variant keeps the pot boiling, the clear and present danger looming. It's why there is so much overreaction to Omicron. The emergency must be maintained. So must the vilification for any other treatment. These are the elements under state control and they need to leverage them mightily to keep the show on the road until full approval for Comirnaty is achieved. If even one of the necessary conditions for EUAs is acknowledged as being invalid, the whole structure comes tumbling down. No more jabs, because there would be no more authorization. And we can't have that, can we?

VAERS

The shining achievement in the field of vaccine safety in America – an early warning system that is cumbersome, antiquated, unknown and massively under utilized at the best of times. Once more, let's remind ourselves of the Harvard study:

“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.”(37)

However, these are not the best of times. If that's how many aren't being reported in normal circumstances, imagine what happens when there is an epidemic of medical cognitive dissonance and the threat of losing a licence to practice if VAERS reports are made; plus, actively removing reports that actually made it on there:

“what the analysis of all the case numbers is telling us right now is that there’s approximately 150,000 cases that are missing, that were there, that are no longer there. The question is, are they all deaths?… According to the data, many of the deaths have been erased.”(38)

Still don't believe me? There's more. Moderna alone received 300,000 reports of adverse events in the first three months of the campaign. Naturally, we only know this because of a whistle-blower, because why would that information be of any value to the wider public?(39) Even when it looks terrible, it's still a lot worse. Even when someone has battled hard enough to report an injury, some government employee with a keyboard is deleting their record; but they're probably just following orders, right?

And, finally

A quick round-up of the other news from Covid World. It seems that, in New York at least, Covid patients are getting younger. During the fortnight from 5th December, paediatric Covid hospital admissions rose fourfold.(40) It's always a possibility that this is true, although it does seem unlikely. After all, Covid hasn't affected healthy children so far and it's latest incarnation, Omicron, is less virulent if more transmissable (maybe). Unless, of course, it's actually the flu. Because the flu is back:

“Last year’s flu season was the lowest on record, likely because COVID-19 measures — school closures, distancing, masks and canceled travel — prevented the spread of influenza, or because the coronavirus somehow pushed aside other viruses.”(41)

Now, I'm almost certainly displaying my own ignorance again, but it occurred to me firstly, that the explanation for the disappearance of the flu was comically lacking in evidence and also that these two stories might not be completely unrelated. What do you reckon? Apparently, the variant that is circulating is particularly harmful to the very young and the old, which most are, I suspect. I wonder if it will kill some young children? Never fear, though. As the CDC flu supremo reminded us, there are some anti-virals around that might help. Like ivermectin, you mean?

And is it in any way conceivable that this next story is also connected? Because the PCR test, in the USA at least, is no longer among us. It's been phased out by the CDC. Why, you may well ask? No direct answer, but there is this:

“In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test. CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season.”(42)

Right. So, by a simple process of deduction, that statement is inferring that the existing PCR test doesn't facilitate 'detection and differentiation' of Covid and flu. Not only that, but the head of the CDC is now admitting that the sainted PCR test can stay positive for twelve weeks after infection, anyway.(43) As if she's just realized it, rather than it being known from before the very beginning. But she's not done just yet. She also admits that their updated Covid guidance (which also included halved quarantine requirements) was made on the basis of what she thought people could bear – which is sweet. Not very scientific, mind.(44)

Also being not very scientific, which is more problematic for the man who declares himself to be the very personification of science, was Lord Anthony of Fauci, who has belatedly come to the conclusion that shutting the country down is bad for people's health.(45) Although, maybe I'm being too harsh. Maybe it is science telling him that; at this precise juncture, nearly two years down the line when anybody with a brain bigger than a pea could have predicted that outcome before the first lock-down. Perhaps science is a slow mistress? Perhaps Tony is deaf? Perhaps common sense is underrated? Perhaps Fauci isn't science any more? Who can say? Tony, of course. We'll just have to wait for him to let us know.

New Zealand doesn't seem to have bought into this temporary loosening of authoritarian control. On the contrary, the Prime Minister and her band of merry tyrants are busy tripping through the remaining stages in the facilitation of legal murder. As the Catholic Herald reported, without doing anything so crude as taking sides, you understand:

“Patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 can die by euthanasia if doctors decide they might not survive, the New Zealand government has declared. The Ministry of Health confirmed that a right to a lethal injection under a new euthanasia law could extend to patients who were either dying from the coronavirus or suffering unbearably from its consequences.”(46)

So, which is it then? A doctor decides or the patient decides? The 2019 End of Life Act allows for both euthanasia and assisted suicide for adults suffering from an illness which would be terminal within six months, or who were in an advanced state of irreversible physical decline or who were suffering unbearably. Good job they tightened the wording up there. Wouldn't want there to be any gaps for ill intent or expediency to exploit. Apparently, those suffering from Covid may also be eligible, although they might not be aware of it, as they are likely to be sedated and intubated. But it's the thought that counts. Apparently, across the ocean in Canada, a similar law has resulted in the following:

“a 90-year-old... woman, chose to die by assisted suicide rather than endure another COVID lockdown in her care home that would isolate her from her friends and family.”(47)

I don't need to explore the possibilities, do I? The law of pretend unintended consequences? Further, doctors get a NZ$1,000 bonus for each euthanasia. Or, to put it another way, they get paid for killing people. What could possibly go wrong? Other than patients in overcrowded Covid wards being euthanized because a doctor doesn't think they'll survive? By 'overcrowded', I'm not necessarily referring to full capacity, but possibly to the small ward which they have designated a Covid ward, because a lot of their staff are off work because of the 'vaccine' mandates. Or the Act proving to be the thin end of the wedge, as similar legislation has in other countries and for wider, less terminal circumstances to also be acceptable reasons for death, à la Canada? Or that forecasting life expectancy is very far from being an exact science? Life (and death) Down Under is taking yet another sinister turn.

At least New York is just putting forward legislation for indefinite detention of the 'unvaccinated' at the Governor's behest. Yes, proposed Bill A416:

“gives the Governor of New York, his or her delegates – including but not limited to the commissioner and heads of local health departments – the right to remove and detain any individuals or groups of people through issuing a single order. The orders only have to include the individual’s name(s) or “reasonably specific descriptions of the individuals or groups.”

The department can decide to hold a person or group of people in a medical facility or any other they deem appropriate. The language is purposefully vague.” It would also “require an individual who has been exposed to or infected by a contagious disease to complete an appropriate, prescribed course of treatment, preventive medication or vaccination.”(48)

So, just to be clear. The severity of the disease is unspecified, an individual who is deemed to be a disease risk whether as a primary carrier or a close contact could be force vaccinated and any such person could be held at a facility for up to 60 days initially, extended in 90 day increments by a court. And it's no use saying 'they wouldn't, would they?' of a city that killed thousands of nursing home residents by sending those hospitalised with Covid back to the homes without allowing staff knowledge of diagnoses.

Figure 6

On the plus side, on December 17th 2021, the WHO gave an EUA to Novavax, a traditional Covid 'vaccine' developed in India.(49) It will apparently serve to overcome the skepticism of the 'vaccine hesitant' by re-introducing a vaccine type that has never made it past the animal testing stage; largely because it killed all the animals in the clinical trials. But, I'm sure it will be different this time. Just to be on the safe side though, I think I'll still hesitate and if the FDA subsequently approve it, they'll be talking to my hand instead. The FDA, in addition to its homicidal dedication to authorizing 'vaccines', has a shocking reputation in the treatment field as well.

“The first three Covid drugs approved under EUA were Remdesivir, Baricitinib, and Tofacitinib. All were EUA approved for inpatient use (in hospital) only, demonstrate dismal effectiveness and are replete with black box warnings and side effects such as organ failure, blood clots, serious infections and malignancy.”(50)

So, thanks, no thanks. Still, they were at it again, with yet another EUA, this time for the favored son Pfizer and its new miracle treatment:

“Today’s authorization introduces the first treatment for COVID-19 that is in the form of a pill that is taken orally — a major step forward in the fight against this global pandemic.“This authorization provides a new tool to combat COVID-19 at a crucial time in the pandemic as new variants emerge and promises to make antiviral treatment more accessible to patients who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19.”(51)

So, just like ivermectin, then. Except it can't be used for pre exposure prevention, post exposure prevention or for treatment of hospitalized patients with severe Covid; all of which ivemectin can be. And it's no substitute for a 'vaccine', apparently. Of course not. And hardly any of it is available. Apart from that, hallelujah.

Naturally, Omicrom has dominated the airwaves, but not in ways that accurately report the truth of it. Usually, we're informed that 'experts are worried', or that there's a 'surge' or 'hospital beds are full to overflowing' or some such nonsense. Not prominent among the headlines are the following tidbits. 70% of Londoners that have been diagnosed with the Omicron variant were admitted to hospital for other ailments.(52) Omicron had peaked before Christmas in South Africa, with the seven day average dropping by nearly 3,000 'cases' by 21st December.(53) Indeed, on 19th December, the Ministerial Advisory Committee recommended an end to the effort to trace infections, as it was no longer necessary.(54)

And a new study demonstrated that those infected by the Omicron variant (rather than other strains) were 80% less likely to be hospitalised.(55) So, rather than broadcasting fear porn, Big Media should be hanging out the proverbial bunting, but that wouldn't fit the Narrative, would it?

The United Kingdom provides us with a welcome return to normality, if attempting to turn people against each other is part of the New Normal. The government is sending 'vaccination' teams door to door in 'low-uptake areas' and letting it be known that it is only by this method that further lock-downs will be avoided. This must be true as government 'experts' are briefing that hospitals will be overwhelmed by the (you've guessed it) Omicron variant, paying scant heed to the fact that the hospitals always say there are overwhelmed at this time of year, every single year, and not helped this year by the number of staff who are not showing up to work.(56)

It is, however, difficult to imagine that those who want to get jabbed have not managed to set aside an hour or so in the past year and that what the door to door effort is really about is just one more attempt at coercion.

There is some evidence that people may just be waking up:

“...the pace of first-time vaccinations appears to be plateauing this month even as omicron takes hold, and the numbers of children getting vaccinated and eligible adults getting booster shots are lower than some health experts hoped. Around 20% of children 5-11 years old have gotten a dose of vaccine. And only around 1 in 3 fully vaccinated Americans has gotten a booster.”(57)

And a California school district is not enforcing any 'vaccine' mandates on the grounds that public health orders are not laws.(58) Some publications are either discarding blinkers or summoning up courage and questioning the lack of treatment options, going so far as to suggest that they cost lives; probably around 85% of those that died, in fact. If we can trust the Covid deaths figures at all.(59)

Additionally, targeting the Booster Brigade seems like a misstep. All that effort expended demonizing the 'vaccine' hesitant, all that moral outrage about the selfish individualists who cared not for the collective and where do we end up? Well, if you're Austrian, you're going to be in the dog-house with those already othered unless you take your booster shot as ordered.(60) Why create a divide, get the majority or your side and then annoy at least a good proportion of your supporters by reneging on promises made and treating them as the enemy, as well? Austria will be an interesting case. They are the country furthest down the path towards tyranny. They are even advertising for extra workers who will go out and collect Covid fines from their recalcitrant neighbours.(61)

One last mention of boosters, simply because this one is so egregious. The Netherlands, run by a coalition of centre right Communists, have matched Austria and raised. The Health Secretary has recommended that the Dutch, in addition to their third shot, are scheduled in for two more in 2022 and another in 2023, for a grand total of six (so far). It's probably unconnected, but the government seem to have excess 'vaccine' stock. But, the same story does contain some other notable news as well. Pfizer has confirmed that it will need at least 100 days to produce an Omicron booster, which takes us to April 2022; by which time we'll be welcoming either the next variant or the next pandemic. So, that's encouraging.(62)

Last but not least, a little light relief. A comparison of what they used to say against what they are saying now.

Fauci: “These vaccines are highly effective...They're really, really good against variants.”

Fauci: “If you look at Israel, they are seeing waning immunity, not only against infection, but against hospitalisation and, to some extent, death.”

Walensky (CDC): “Vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick.”

Walensky: “Reports from our international colleagues, including Israel, suggest increased risk of severe disease amongst those vaccinated early.”

Gates: “Anyone who takes the vaccine is not just protecting themselves, but reducing their transmission...and allowing society to get back to normal.”

Gates: “...they help with your health, but they only slightly reduce transmission.”

Biden: “You're not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations.”

Biden: Who cares? Just another word salad that he won't remember.(56)

Until the next time...

Citations

(1) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8529429/Could-immunity-17-YEARS-Singaporean-researchers-SARS-patients-crucial-T-cells.html

(2) https://rumble.com/vqt3p6-jre-1747-dr.-peter-mccullough.html

(3) https://www.timesofisrael.com/daily-covid-cases-near-1800-as-new-restrictions-for-malls-set-to-start-monday/

(4) https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/booster-hysteria-israel-begins-rollout-4th-covid-jab-despite-health-officials-admitting-no-data-effectiveness-mild-omicron/

(5) https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_6837

(6) https://metro.co.uk/2021/12/24/nhs-is-grinding-to-a-halt-as-even-triple-jabbed-staff-catch-covid-15819993/

(7) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/femailnews/video-2142866/Video-NHS-nurses-stay-positive-dance-amid-coronavirus-pandemic.html