They told us: "15 Days to Slow the Spread".
▪They advised us to lock our church and shop doors.
▪They banned early treatment with safe drugs.
▪They lied that masks protect us from tiny respiratory viruses.
▪They tried to make us afraid of each other, to weaken us.
▪The Lancet and the NEJM published fraudulent studies.
▪They lied to weaken us: the frail died, the children suffered, and the middle class faltered.
▪Now they are coercing you to accept an experimental biological injection.
▪And blaming you if you do not take it for the variants that are happening because of their experiments
On July 19, Ohio-based attorney Thomas Renz filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in Alabama Federal District Court to halt Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) granted to all three – Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson – COVID injections for three groups of Americans.
The lawsuit seeks to stop the emergency use of the jabs for people under 18, anyone with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (people with natural immunity), or anyone who has not received informed consent.
At least 45,000 Americans have died from the COVID jabs, government insider alleges – and that’s only deaths occurring within three days post-jab
Based on a whistleblower’s sworn declaration made under the threat of purgery, the lawsuit alleges that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been grossly under-counting injection-related deaths. The whistleblower, who has access to government computers, can prove that “at least 45,000” Americans have died within three days of receiving one of the three jabs. The whistleblower also stated that around 11 VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) systems report adverse reactions and deaths across the US, and the 45,000 reports of death are coming from only one of them.
The suit points out that since SARS-CoV-2 has an overall global survivability rate of 99.8 percent, which increases to 99.97 percent for people under 70, it is essentially on a par with the seasonal flu. Therefore, with such a low risk of harm, declaring COVID-19 a public health emergency back on December 18, 2020, was illegal because there is no underlying emergency.
So why was the Health and Human Services (DHHS) Secretary’s declaration so critical? Because it served as the necessary legal predicate for the issuance of the EUAs, allowing pharmaceutical companies to skip essential clinical trials and inoculate millions of Americans.
Let’s also recall that the DHHS changed the rules applicable to coroners and other healthcare professionals responsible for producing death certificates by creating a cause of determinations exclusively for COVID-19. The rule change stated: “COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.”
Inappropriately used PCR tests used to diagnose COVID-19 yield 97 percent false positives, study shows
The infamous polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests are also highlighted in the lawsuit as a point of controversy. Despite PCR test manufacturers’ disclaimers stating that “[t]he FDA has not determined that the test is safe or effective for the detection of SARS-Co-V-2,” the DHHS authorized its emergency use as a diagnostic tool.
So not only are the tests inappropriate for diagnostic purposes, but the way they have been used guarantees an unacceptably high number of false positives. Most scientists agree that PCR tests run at a CT (Cycle Threshold) value of 35-cycles or greater are useless. In fact, findings of a study funded by the French government showed that even at 35-cycles, the false positivity rate is as high as 97%.
Yet, despite such a well-known fact, most PCR tests for COVID-19 used in the United States are run at 35-45 cycles.
"Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing"
The CDC is changing their position on their own SARS-CoV-2 PCR test (“CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase (RT)-PCR Diagnostic Panel”)
In their own words,
After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives.
Visit the FDA website for a list of authorized COVID-19 diagnostic methods. For a summary of the performance of FDA-authorized molecular methods with an FDA reference panel, visit this page.
What diagnostic tests will be recommended after this one loses authorization?
Diagnostic Tests: Tests that detect parts of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and can be used to diagnose infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. These include molecular tests and antigen tests.
Here is also a page on molecular tests on the FDA website. It contains a list of various molecular tests that currently have the Emergency Use Authorization (including the CDC’s PCR test in question). Please note that the CDC announcement seems to pertain only to their own PCR test, not the entire class of PCR tests
Despite reports of record number of post-jab adverse events, CDC maintains COVID-19 injections are “safe and effective”
One must wonder if the above-stated facts are correct; what else are government health agencies hiding from the public? Can we trust the narrative?
On the CDC’s official page titled Selected Adverse Events Reported after COVID-19 vaccination, the agency does a thorough job reassuring the masses that the jab is indeed safe and effective. They claim that reports of jab-related deaths are rare and urge everyone 12 years and older to get jabbed as soon as possible.
But here are some of the severe adverse effects reported following the jab:
anaphylaxis
thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome
pericarditis
Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS)
deaths
All of the above are deemed rare by the CDC.
The sheer number of reports surrounding the experimental COVID jabs is virtually unprecedented for the surveillance program, which was created in 1990.
To start: between December 14, 2020, and July 9, 2021, 10,991 deaths after COVID shots were reported to VAERS – that’s roughly 70 post-jab deaths per day in the U.S. alone. Nearly a quarter of these deaths were related to cardiac disorders, and at least half occurred in males.
Journalist Alex Berenson Tells The Defender: ‘They Are Censoring Dissenting Views and That Is Wrong’
In an interview with The Defender, Alex Berenson, former New York Times reporter and author of 12 books, and currently author of the Substack publication “Unreported Truths” explains why he was kicked off Twitter for 12 hours, and why social media shouldn’t suppress dissenting views on COVID vaccines.
Berenson said if social media companies want to go against what’s wrong, then maybe they should lose liability protection. He pointed out how the Biden administration is pushing social media companies to make it harder for people like him to get their message out.
On July 15, White House Press Secretary Jenn Psaki said during a press briefing the Biden administration, through it’s senior staff members and COVID-19 team, is actively working with social media companies to censor certain views deemed “misinformation.”
Psaki said:
“In terms of actions…we have taken — or we’re working to take, I should say — from the federal government: We’ve increased disinformation research and tracking within the Surgeon General’s office. We’re flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation. We’re working with doctors and medical professionals … who are popular with their audiences with accurate information and boost trusted content.”
Berenson said this in response to Psaki’s comments:
“They are censoring dissenting views and that is wrong. Suppose the next administration, instead of stopping The New York Times from selling papers, tells Exxon not to sell any diesel to The Times so they can’t print it and deliver it. ‘We’re not censoring. We’re just asking one private company to step in against another private company.’ That’s essentially what they’re doing.”
Berenson pointed out that Psaki was guilty of spreading misinformation in her July 16 White House press briefing when she said COVID vaccines had been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and had gone through the gold standard of the FDA approval process. Yet, she wasn’t censored.
Twitter is not supposed to make political choices. It’s supposed to be politically neutral, Berenson explained.
He said:
“If the vaccines were nearly 100% effective, people would be lined up for them in the street. They wouldn’t be having a problem convincing 30 to 40% of the country to get the vaccine. The reason they’re having a problem is because side effects are real and a lot of people are having them after the shot, COVID isn’t that dangerous and there are questions about their effectiveness.
“It’s not because of me. I am one person with a Twitter account. We are up against an entire establishment here. If the message was more honest and what they were saying were actually true, there would not be a problem getting people vaccinated.”
Berenson, whose children have received their childhood vaccines, backed into the vaccination issue because of COVID and believes the solution to the speech issue is more speech.
“Obviously there are people who say terrible things on Twitter and everywhere else,” Berenson said. “But outside of constitutionally recognized hate speech, it shouldn’t be suppressed.”
Berenson said it’s upsetting to him that his former colleagues at The Times don’t seem to feel strongly about this — that it’s okay to deplatform people.
“They make a living writing stories powerful people don’t like and one day they’re going to wish they had [cared about this issue],” Berenson said.
When it comes to media reporting, Berenson said when he worked at The Times, reporting was to be objective and fair. Today, “the media is much more willing to attack,” he said.
CDC ‘Corrects’ Number of Reported Deaths After COVID Vaccines by Dumping Foreign Reports
A sudden increase in the number of deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following COVID vaccination is not correct and was the result of an “error,” according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
VAERS, run jointly by the CDC and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is the U.S. early warning system that monitors the safety of vaccines after they are authorized or licensed for use by the FDA.
The CDC said July 16 that since the mid-December rollout of COVID vaccines in the U.S., VAERS had received 12,313 reports of death among people who received a COVID vaccine — a sharp increase from the 6,079 U.S. deaths reported by the CDC the previous week.
However, as of 3:30 p.m. ET on July 21, the CDC website had revised downward the number of U.S. VAERS reports related to COVID vaccination deaths — from 12,313 to 6,079 deaths occurring between Dec. 14, 2020 and July 19, 2021, Precision Vaccinations reported.
Later that day, as of 7:30 p.m. ET, the CDC’s website showed 6,207 U.S. reports of death occurring between Dec. 14, 2020 through July 19, 2021, among people who received a COVID vaccine.
On July 21, the CDC’s number of 6,079 coincided with what ABC News reported Wednesday as the number of U.S. deaths reported to VAERS between Dec. 14, 2020 and July 12, 2021.
A CDC spokeswoman the number the agency displayed on its website July 16 — and continued to display until the afternoon of July 21 — was not correct.
The July 16 number was “double” that of the previous day, so it was “definitely” incorrect,” the spokeswoman said. “We checked our stats internally and it’s only 6,000. So someone doing an update misrepresented that or made a mistake, in other words.”
The spokeswoman was unable to say when the error would be fixed. “It’s being worked out,” she said.
Questions to Ask
So the questions we should all ask are: Is the jab really “safe and effective”? If so, by what definition? And how did we become so sensitized to accepting such massive numbers of “side effects,” including deaths, as a necessary part of taking an injection to protect against a condition with a 99.9X percent survivability rate?
With so much controversy surrounding the COVID-injections, it’s certainly wise to do your research and make an informed decision about whether taking the jab is worth the risk.
As Children’s Health Defense reports, VAERS also saw nearly half a million adverse events reported during this same time period, including 48,385 serious injuries. Post-jab injuries have included:
445 cases of GBS (51 percent occurring after the Pfizer shot)
127,421 cases of anaphylaxis
5,049 cases of Bell’s palsy
9,471 blood clotting disorders
In addition, nearly 3,000 pregnant women have experienced adverse events, including 1,072 miscarriages or premature births.
CDC admits it “may take several years” to collect enough data to fully understand the nature of adverse events following injections – are people really willing to gamble on their health for that long?
Nearly 11,000 or 45,000 deaths and 50,000 serious injuries in just 7 months of mass experimental injections. And it’s possible – even plausible – that thousands of more cases are going undocumented. Here’s why:
The CDC notes that only a minority of healthcare providers ever actually report to VAERS. Anecdotally, many healthcare workers say patients aren’t being asked about whether they recently got jabbed when they come to the hospital for emergency care.
How can adverse events be properly investigated if these events aren’t even being reported to VAERS?
Are healthcare providers routinely asking their patients with new or suddenly worsening health problems whether they recently got jabbed – and if they aren’t, why aren’t they?
What happens when people aren’t given informed consent and are not fully educated about possible adverse events, and therefore unaware that their unusual symptoms could be related to their recent jab?
How can a surveillance system work effectively if it is not fully capturing the extent of the safety concerns?
On their website, the CDC notes that it “may take several years to accumulate enough data to assess a rare occurrence” following injections, including the unapproved COVID shots. It is yet to be seen how long the American people will be willing to put their lives at risk.
Keep in mind, the most important thing is to make an informed decision about your healthcare choices.