A Shot in the Dark
It’s an enormous issue, this so-called “vaccine.” It’s also an obvious place to notice the diverging media worlds that exist today almost like parallel universes. In independent media, you’ll often hear dozens of reasons to be hesitant if not downright suspicious about this rushed billion-dollar pharmaceutical that isn’t FDA approved, uses brand-new technology, and skipped normal phases of safety trials. In the corporate media world, on the other hand, this injection is clearly the best thing since sliced bread and the tiny fringe of weirdos who even question jabbing this miracle cocktail deep into their muscles tomorrow need not be taken seriously.
Let’s dig in.
An Experimental Therapeutic Injection
First, I will be referring to the shots developed so far as “experimental injections.” We could also call them “experimental gene therapy injections” or “experimental chemotherapy.” The word “experimental” is necessary as this product has received only an emergency authorization, isn’t formally approved, and hasn’t undergone normal testing. It fits only the FDA’s description of “investigational” or “experimental.” I don’t find the word “vaccine” to be merited since none of these injections prevents infection or transmission. Thus none of them fits the legal, public health, or common-sense definition of a vaccine. A “vaccine” is something that provides a public health benefit, immunity, rather than just making an individual feel better, and this injection doesn’t even claim to prevent infection or stop transmission. That’s the first and biggest thing here: the corporate media barely mentions that this experimental injection does not stop you from getting the virus. If they actually mentioned this, it would make some of their suggestions around requiring the injection ridiculous.
Nor does the therapeutic injection contain the virus; rather it uses genetic information to instruct the body’s cells to themselves manufacture virus proteins, and it attempts to reduce symptoms caused by those proteins (not the virus itself). It’s a synthetic new cocktail that is injected into the body — thus bypassing the body’s normal exterior defenses to foreign pathogens — to deliver genetic information to your cells. It has no long term trials, and drugmakers have no liability for death or disease it causes. Imagine a new experimental chemotherapy regimen and you’re in the right ballpark. It’s synthetic, so there will be side effects, we just don’t know what all of them will be yet.
So what’s going to happen?
For the drugmakers it’s a giant roulette wheel with no losing spaces. Their stock is up; they’re all in on seeing how far this goes.
For the rest of us, it’s joining (or opting out of) the largest human medical experiment in history. It might work, it might not work. We’ll see.
The main problem, the elephant in the room, is that the public still doesn’t have the raw data from the supposedly thorough trials. It’s a ridiculous situation. Instead of medical science and data and the scientific method, we have press releases. The Phase II and Phase III trials for both Pfizer and Moderna’s shots were combined and then rushed, so the intent must be understood: to use the general public as the Phase III trial subjects. There were no animal trials; we’re the animals. That we don’t have the data is to my mind unforgivable. A damning piece in the British Medical Journal (not known as a fringe publication) called this out back in November, and a bit more data was eventually published by Pfizer in the New England Journal of Medicine, whereupon a second BMJ piece by Peter Doshi earlier this month pointed out the massive remaining holes in the data and science behind this experimental injection.
The new partial data that was released in response to that pressure included a bombshell. We learned that Pfizer didn’t include suspected cases of covid that occurred in their trials. In other words, when determining the experimental injection’s effectiveness, they only counted PCR-confirmed cases, which is a big deal given the tiny number of actually PCR-confirmed cases, and the fact that the subjects were located all around the world in vastly varying socioeconomic circumstances. Many people clearly did get covid but weren’t tested and thus weren’t included. This paragraph in Pfizer’s briefing document (no full data included, alas) that was released after their analysis of their trial contains the bombshell:
As specified in the protocol, suspected cases of symptomatic COVID-19 that were not PCR-confirmed were not recorded… Among 3,410 total cases of suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group. Suspected COVID-19 cases that occurred within 7 days after any vaccination were 409 in the vaccine group vs. 287 in the placebo group. It is possible that the imbalance in suspected COVID-19 cases occurring in the 7 days postvaccination represents vaccine reactogenicity with symptoms that overlap with those of COVID-19.
These numbers flip the media narrative about this experimental injection. Its “effectiveness” is in fact way less than their press releases claimed. In essence, if you actually count people who had symptoms and appeared to get covid but weren’t tested (perhaps the Pfizer-paid trial didn’t encourage testing in select instances), it turns out the experimental “vaccine” is not 95% effective, but more like 19% “effective.” (I’m putting “effective” in quotes because, again, the use of this word about this injection does not mean stopping infection or stopping transmission of the virus, but rather reducing symptoms.) So it’s 19% effective at reducing symptoms of suspected/confirmed covid. That’s it.
And it will probably get worse when we see more data. Based on what we’ve seen from their press releases, it’s not likely that the data they are withholding is going to make the injection look better.
But let’s be optimistic and assume that we already know the worst drawbacks of this experiment. Even if we somehow know all the bad news already, there are many other huge problems. I’m challenging myself to be brief here, but I have to be a bit detailed since I’m writing against a dominant narrative:
– Side Effects. We still don’t know the extent of the harmful side effects, but according to the data released thus far, some 15-25% of recipients of the injection experienced moderate or serious side effects, including headaches, chills, fever, diarrhea, and other covid-like symptoms, often lasting for multiple days. Now, as explained below, 99% of people who get covid have mild or asymptomatic cases. Many call the vaccine’s second dose to be “the worst flu you’ve ever had, lasting for days.” Think about that.
– Pathogenic Priming / Disease Enhancement. This could be the worst of all, and it’s something surprisingly few doctors know about despite the fact it’s well-documented in the literature. We have no idea about the possibilities of “pathogenic priming,” as well as ADE of the virus by this “vaccine,” things that have dogged previous attempts to develop coronavirus vaccines. Past attempts at a vaccine for a coronavirus have made test animals sicker (or dead) when eventually exposed to the virus in the wild after receiving the vaccine. Maybe this is why they skipped the animal trials and the “challenge trials.” In short, we don’t know whether this experimental injection will make people sicker or less sick when eventually exposed to the actual wild virus after receiving the injections. A man in Israel who had an asymptomatic COVID case developed life-threatening inflammation after receiving the injection earlier this month.
– New Technology: Nanoparticles. We have no idea about the effects of the artificial lipid nanoparticles used in these injections. This is new technology. Polyethylene Glycol (PEG), a lipid nanoparticle used to envelop the mRNA in the experimental injection, is known to cause CARPA and other allergic reactions, and lipid nanoparticles are known to find quick uptake into cells all over the body, including the brain. No vaccine has used PEG before, and no studies have been done on this experimental chemotherapy. Some of the cases of anaphylactic shock are likely due to intense reactions to PEG in the body, these reactions are known to get worse upon a second exposure, and both the Pfizer and Moderna injections require a second injection.
– New Technology: mRNA. Humans have never injected mRNA genetic material into one another before, let alone into millions or billions of us at once. In short, we have zero knowledge of the long term effects of this experimental gene-editing injection. While RNA doesn’t tend to last long inside the body, there are numerous ways and instances where it can be converted into DNA and thus permanently change a person’s genetic code. It’s unclear how common this is with injected mRNA, but it is a non-zero amount, and this is serious cause for concern when this will be injected into millions or billions of people, at numbers where even .001% could translate into millions of people with permanently changed genetic code.
– Possibly Increased Spread of Virus. Because this injection doesn’t prevent infection or stop transmission, only reduce symptoms, it might create a tidal wave of new asymptomatic carriers. Millions more people will be generating the virus (or at least its spike protein) inside their body, and people with serious cases who would have stayed home might feel a bit better and venture out into the world not knowing the seriousness of their infection. This could spread the virus more quickly.
– Ending Science Prematurely. The rushed trials did include an inert placebo, something most vaccine trials don’t do, and that was a hopeful sign that there would be legitimate, even-handed science about these injections despite the fact the drugmakers were running their own trials. The point of a placebo is obvious: If you can compare how people getting the injection fare against how those who simply got a placebo but think they got the injection, you can determine over the ensuing months and years the true benefits and dangers of the injections. This science is essential. But now, with a handy rationalization provided by the New York Times, the drugmakers have begun giving the injection to those in the placebo arm of the trial, thereby destroying the core science of the trials. First, the drugmakers began notifying those who got the placebo that they had in fact not received the live injection, thereby ending the “placebo effect.” Now they’re actually giving those who want it the injection itself, and they’re indicating the unblinding of the placebo for all will end after only 6 months. We will thus have no long term data on the extent to which the new cocktail causes anaphylaxis, paralysis, cancer, miscarriages, infertility, death, or other negative outcomes.
– Censorship. One of the most troubling aspects is that censorship is clearly in effect. When viewing the almost totally positive coverage of this experimental injection in the corporate media, it’s easy to forget the advertising and political power of the pharmaceutical industry. Big Pharma gives more campaign cash to politicians than any other industry — even Wall Street, Big Oil, and the military industrial complex. Just as you heard very little skeptical news about attacking Iraq in the buildup to that war, which made billions for oil and weapons companies, you today hear precious little skeptical coverage of an experimental pharmaceutical product about to rain unprecedented wealth upon the most powerful drugmakers. And these drugmakers shower hundreds of millions, in turn, on corporate media channels. Big Pharma also pours out largesse to our university science departments, hospitals, and individual doctors, scientists, and professors. Meanwhile, many doctors around the world are trying to sound the alarm about this injection, but social media companies openly declare they’re censoring that “disinformation.” And what exactly is “disinformation,” as opposed to critical inquiry? That is determined by someone usually with less expertise than the person raising the question. Censorship has no place in science. Period. And it’s highly concerning when it rears its ugly head.
– No Liability Whatsoever. Even if you find all of the above to be of minimal concern (I don’t), this final concern has to be the biggest of all. The makers of this virtually untested gene therapy injection have complete exemption from liability for all the death and disease it will cause. How is this possibly ethical in a world in which drugs are developed for profit? What is their incentive for safety? As I said above, for the drugmakers this is a giant billion-dollar roulette wheel with no losing spaces. They either win, or win big. For the rest of us, it’s the largest human medical experiment in history. And if you or a loved one dies or develops facial paralysis or encephalomyelitis, you have nowhere to go, it’s on you, good luck with that. This is the question I want you to sit with: If this injection is so safe, why do the drug makers insist on exemption from liability? No other drug is exempt from liability like this. Why this one, rushed through trials, data concealed, forced on all of humanity, right now? For a virus that 99.76% of infected people recover from?
Who knows. In any event, off we go with this gigantic human experiment.
Personally, no thanks.
What will likely become an avalanche of negative consequences has begun to roll down the mountain. The CDC has already admitted that side effects from this injection will likely be at least 10 times more frequent than with the flu vaccine. Let’s take a quick look at some of those right now, since you won’t generally find them compiled in corporate media.
News of adverse effects and deaths from vaccines have been censored in the United States for decades, but we have learned already here in 2021:
– At least 453 people have already died in the US after receiving the injection. This is according to the CDC’s own VAERS system, which is known historically to underreport vaccine-related deaths by as much as 99%, so there are probably already thousands of deaths in the US from the injection. “Fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported,” according to an HHS study.
– 32 nursing home residents have died after receiving the injection in Auburn, NY. The nursing home had recorded 0 deaths from covid prior to the “vaccination.”
– Anecdote: Healthy 59-year-old doctor died in Florida from the experimental injection when it took his blood platelet count to 0.
– Anecdote: Indiana woman suffers neurological damage and full-body spasms after getting the injection. The full-body nature of the spasms could indicate an issue with the nanoparticles.
– A California “Vax Superstation” Halted After Series of Allergic Reactions and there have been other problems throughout California as well.
– At least 29 older people have already died in Norway after getting the experimental injection. The number has actually passed 50 deaths now, and Norway has begun advising people over 75 not to get the vaccine without an individual risk assessment. People over 75 are of course the main ones that need the vaccine; the rest of humanity enjoys a 99.9% recovery rate, similar to influenza.
– Italy, Germany, and France also warn older people not to get the injection, particularly the AztraZeneca version, which again begs the question, why wasn’t the injection tested on people over 55, since they’re the ones most at risk from this virus?
Meanwhile, Natural Immunity Keeps Getting Better
As news of adverse reactions to the vaccine continues to roll in, and as we learn that the “immunity” conferred by the “vaccine” might only last four or six months before needing another pair of shots, it turns out natural immunity is permanent, or at least as long-lasting as we have data for.
- Natural immunity lasts at least 8 months, probably years
- As long as we have data for: Natural immunity lasts at least 8 months
- As long as we have data for: Natural immunity for healthcare workers lasts at least 6 months
Approximately 99% of people who contract sars-cov-2 today have mild or asymptomatic cases, that is, a cold, and 99.74% of cases recover and receive this long-lasting natural immunity. With solid results from studies on suppressed treatments finally coming out (see below), it seems to me many people will sensibly choose to take the risk of getting the virus, use a treatment if they do get it and the symptoms are bad, and then enjoy long term immunity. The possibility of death or disease from the injection is thereby avoided and the outside possibility of developing a fatal case of covid is simply folded into the many risks and dangers inherent in being alive on this beautiful and risky planet.
At the end of the day, it’s absolutely your right to participate in the experiment and get the gene therapy injection, but it must never be required in any instance public or private. I believe at this point impartial science shows this injection to be a flop and dangerous to health on its own right, but I could be wrong. Will it ultimately prove helpful or harmful to overall human health? There’s simply no way to know yet. At this point, it’s “a shot in the dark.”