Post 14: Idaho WILL Lead the WAY To Stopping the mRNA Injections
HB 154 is making the rounds in the Health and Welfare committee. Senator Tammy Nichols and Representative Judy Boyle have written a clean and simple bit of law: You jab someone, you will be fined.
When my cold, blackened heart begins to beat, it does so for very rare and significant events. The good elected folks working in Boise have decided that they have an overwhelming interest in protecting the people that elected them into office.
(Thanks for the MRI of my heart, Dr. James Lyons-Weiler!)
I’m sure that the oath that they took to protect and defend the Idaho and U.S. Constitution has some role to play in the decision process. Senator Tammy Nichols and Representative Judy Boyle have drawn a significant line in the sand for responsible use of experimental medical/technocratic technologies: “I was just following orders” now comes with a fine. Bless their hearts and I will work night and day to make sure the legislators get told about the reality of the mRNA injections (as well as the adenovirus injections).
Here is the language of HB 154:
The bill is a good start and uses a very light touch. Honestly, I was looking for jail-time and a ban, but the ball needs to get rolling.
Now, the national media has gotten a whiff of this legislation and they (not surprisingly) are just starting to make all sorts of derogatory and emotionally ladened appeals to irrationality. Oh, and they are ignoring the facts on the ground and hewing to the lies and distortions that their betters (intellectually, emotionally, spiritually and physically…’natch, we are the better-looking bunch) have dismantled REPEATEDLY.
And it just so happens that Bailiwick News and Due Diligence and Art have just cross-posted an amazingly-timed report coming out of Florida (Mind Matters and Everything Else with Dr. Joseph Sansone):
Last week I presented our Ban the Jab resolution to the Lee County Florida Republican Party and it passed with 80-90% of the vote. Although, the Lee County GOP has thus far been unable to issue a press release because the wire services are claiming it goes against CDC standards and it incites fear. That’s right, after three years of media hysterics and fear mongering, a press release exposing the C19 injections as bioweapons is inciting fear.
I’m sure that it did incite fear…in the folks that are trying to sweep this issue under the rug. Good on the Lee County Florida GOP PATRIOTS/RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS/BRAVE SOULS for passing that resolution. Time to add a little more gasoline to that fire.
Needless to say, legislators are a mixed bunch of Americans that come from a rather varied and interesting background. Some like to dig deeply into issues, others focus solely on a few issues that matter to them and some like the excitement and attention that working at that level will bring to them. Many are blissfully unaware of the ongoing disaster (at many levels) that the Public Health Emergency (PHE) brought about by the W.H.O.’s Public Health Emergency of International Concern declaration. The slow leak that sinks the boat is the hardest to see, especially when you have trained sheep-dog talking heads telling everyone not to look.
Getting Into Full Contact Citizenship
With the help of my good friends Bernadette Pajer (at Informed Choice WA) and the indefatigable Dr. Ted Fogarty (at Fogarty UND Hyperbaric) we are in the process of making sure that the Idaho legislators get a full view of the reality that many of us in the Medical & Political Accountability world have been dealing with and managing.
A brief was sent to select legislators that contained the following:
Executive Summary
This brief is provided in support of Idaho House Bill 154 (HB 154, 2023). This summary is provided to demonstrate the necessity of the Idaho State Legislature to take immediate action against the continued delivery of an unproven technology that is causing death and disability in our State, our Nation and around the World.
There is no political divide when all our friends, families, neighbors, children and grand-children are placed in harms-way. This gene-delivery technology has proven evidence of harm and no evidence of efficacy for any disease.
Moderna is the patent holder of the mRNA technology.
Moderna has NEVER produced an FDA cleared product to treat ANY condition.
Pfizer/BioNTech used nearly the same mRNA technology as Moderna.
The declaration of a Public Health Emergency by the H.H.S. EXEMPTS normal rules for medical products (E.U.A., emergency use authorization).
The components of the mRNA injections have NOT undergone STANDARD safety testing.
Pfizer and Moderna’s animal studies DEMONSTRATE that the products have severe adverse event and do not conform to manufacturer declared standards. They are NOT “safe or effective".
The lipid nanoparticle delivery system DOES NOT stay at the injection site and the payload (the mRNA sequence) can enter into multiple organs with severe consequences for health and reproduction.
Neither Pfizer or Moderna DEMONSTRATED or EXPECTED their product to stop infection of transmission in injected individuals.
FDA and CDC actively assisted Pfizer in hiding pre-clinical and clinical data from the public that demonstrates harm.
The VAERS (vaccine adverse event reporting system) pharmaco-surveillance system has SIGNIFICANT increases in death and disabilities in the U.S. population after the mass-vaccination campaigns with the mRNA injections.
There are over 1,000 published, peer-reviewed medical reports of severe adverse events AFTER mRNA injections.
EVIDENCE of DIRECT harm and death from the mRNA injection was recently published by German pathologists. A mechanism of action has been established.
We cannot continue to assume that “causation does not equal correlation”.
Bradford Hill epidemiological criteria for establishing a link between the mRNA injections and the increased death and disability reports are established.
German health ministries have published direct evidence demonstrating increased rates of INFERTILITY IN WOMEN and loss of pregnancies following mRNA injections.
Real world data, as reported by Life Insurance companies from death and disability payouts, shows a staggering increase in death and disability in working age adults (24-65 years of age).
Federal regulators have failed in their duty. State legislators are the next line of defense in preventing further tragedy.
Summary of Publicly Available Data
This summary is provided to Legislators as an introduction to information that has been widely circulated in the peer-reviewed literature, government publications, as well as expert opinion with regards to the mRNA technology that is being marketed as a vaccine.
The need to fine practitioners for delivering these injections (HB 154; Idaho Legislative session 2023) will be demonstrated as a necessity, as the federal regulators are failing in their duty and there is an in-built incentive structure to get “shots in arms” via bonus payment or increased reimbursements if milestones are met.
First Thing First
“Do No Harm” is the guiding principle when attempting a medical intervention.
All medical interventions are dangerous UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE, and even after proven “safe for most people”, you cannot assume safety for all people.
The entirety of the current mRNA technology development, manufacture and release is dependent on Public Health Emergency (PHE) rules, which are a lower-criteria to meet than standard rules and regulations. (attached document: Development and Licensure of Vaccines to Prevent COVID-19, Guidance for Industry, JUNE 2020)
Pfizer & Moderna
The two major manufacturers licensed to produce lipid nanoparticle (LNP) encapsulated mRNA are Pfizer and Moderna. Pfizer bought the mRNA delivery technology from BioNTech.
All mRNA platform studies claiming that a product prevents disease use “immune-bridging” proxies – the production of antibodies – as a marker for immunity and a correlate for protection. Prevention of illness, infection and reduced transmission are the ONLY valid measures of immunity – antibody production is not sufficient for establishing conferred protection from a disease. This has not been established by Pfizer or Moderna, as there are several caveats imposed before any meaningful correlate can be established (see attached: doran-fink_4_immunobridging_vrconsultation_6.12.2021)
Cutting Corners and Limiting Data Access
Both Pfizer and Moderna initiated accelerated clinical trials, prior to completing industry standard testing. Without FOIA requests by Judicial Watch and Siri & Young Law Group, public disclosure would not have occurred. FDA has a duty of care to work in the public interest, yet FDA placed all its efforts to stop the release of data that could have resulted in public agencies from seeing warning signs.
Standard Pre-Clinical Studies and Efforts:
Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics (drug distribution and the processing of it by the body).
Pharmacology (mechanism of action), including primary and secondary (off-target) effects.
Safety Pharmacology and Toxicology, including characterization of risks for major organ classes.
Genotoxicity (proclivity to cause damage to genetic material).
Carcinogenicity (proclivity to cause cancer).
Reproductive Toxicology (toxicities to reproductive organs or to developing fetus).
In March 2022 a package of 466 pages of Pfizer non-clinical submission (animal studies) to the FDA was obtained by Judicial Watch via FOIA (see attached: JW-v-HHS-prod-3-02418 Pfizer Pre-Clinical Data).
Finding 1: Pfizer’s program did not include a comprehensive end-to-end test of all components as well as the final chemical entity of the mRNA product.
a. Each incipient in a medical product has to be tested for safety, individually. This was not done.
Finding 2: The toxicity/safety pharmacology of the Covid 19 vaccine’s active ingredient (mRNA BNT162b2) was never evaluated.
a. Proxy sequences (not the commercially used BNT162b2 and different lipid nano-particles (LNPs) delivery formulations) were used. This is a major violation of basic research protocols.
Finding 3: Pfizer claimed absence of potential for “vaccine-elicited disease enhancement” based on studies of an animals that did not get sick from Sars-Cov-2.
a. Six Rhesus monkeys (inoculated with VR-VTR-10671) and 3 control monkeys were infected with SARs-Cov-2. None of the animals showed clinical signs of illness, yet were used as evidence.
b. If an animal model cannot produce an illness profile similar to humans, it is NOT VALID to use in a study for “vaccine-elicited disease enhancement”.
Finding 4: CDC, FDA and Pfizer lied about “vaccine staying in the injection site” - the injected substance is carried by the LNPs all over the body and into all organs.
a. The rat study is based on the surrogate mRNA (encoding Luciferase) and not the spike protein encoding version.
b. Full bio-distribution was not allowed to occur, as the experiments were stopped before full organ saturation was achieved.
c. The overall nonclinical testing program appears woefully incomplete. This fact was clearly noted in the European Medicines Agency (EMA) summary document of the “Comirnaty” BNT162b2 vaccine.
d. This applies to Moderna’s studies, too.
Finding 5: Pfizer waived major categories of safety testing for their product altogether using self-serving interpretation of WHO recommendations from 2005.
a. WHO does not have jurisdictional authority in the United States and FDA should never have allowed the use of the RECOMMENDATIONS for waiving safety testing.
Finding 6: Both FDA and Pfizer knew about major toxicities associated with gene therapy class of medicines, and therefore cannot claim lack of anticipatory knowledge of these risks.
Moderna (which developed SpikeVax) has a similar report to Pfizer’s. This was a 699-page non-clinical overview of their animal testing (see attached: JW-v-HHS-Biodistribution-Prod-4-02418-pgs-671-701Moderna). In this case, the researchers found evidence of developmental abnormalities, specifically skeletal malformation of the ribs in the first generation of pups from dam’s that were vaccinated. This should have resulted in a clear indication to NOT vaccinate women that were pregnant or were trying to become pregnant with either Pfizer or Moderna injections.
Additionally, Moderna’s animal studies demonstrated that the risk for ADE and ERD (antibody dependent enhancement [ADE] and enhance respiratory disease [ERD]) was not excluded. The mRNA injection and subsequent bodily production of the S-protein has the potential to make the disease and symptoms worse.
Effects on pregnancy and reproduction from Sweden and Germany demonstrate clear and sharp drops in human fertility rates that are unexplained by other factors other than vaccination (see attachment: Fertility-declines-near-the-end-of-the-COVID-19-pandemic-Evidence-of-the-2022-birth-declines-in-Germany-and-Sweden; Federal Institute for Population Research).
A longitudinal study in Europe (The Effect of Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 on the Menstrual Cycle (EVA Project); see attached: Premenstrual and Menstrual COVID19 Vaccination) demonstrates that the mRNA and adeno-virus delivered gene therapies produce changes in menstrual cycles and mechanistically support the data reported from Sweden and Germany. Women are failing to get pregnant, carry a pregnancy to term and report changes in menstrual cycles after vaccination.
Evidence of harm was also present in Pfizer’s early POST-MARKET approval data and known to FDA. Aaron Siri representing the physicians’ group Public Health and Physicians Group for Medical Transparency, sued FDA to release Pfizer documents. The FDA made a request to the reviewing Judge that the Pfizer documents presented to him in court should be withheld from the public for 75 years. The Judge declined and ordered the mass release of the documents in FDA’s possession.
The table above is the total number of reports sent directly to Pfizer (independent of VAERS) and encompass a 3-month window after the mass-vaccination campaign began (see attached: pfizer-doc-5.3.6-postmarketing-experience). The highlighted yellow portion is the total number of adverse and severe adverse events that had not recovered at the time the data was tabulated (December 2020 to March 2021). The red highlight is the number of deaths reported to Pfizer after vaccination = 1223 deaths. Pfizer does not contest the data…they ignore it. For reference, most medical products are pulled or suspended when suspected or reported deaths after vaccination exceed 5-25 deaths for a single product.
The primary medical literature is replete with reports of deaths and adverse events following the administration of mRNA injections (see attached: Article of Vaxx AES with citations - Copy). These number well over 1,000 reports – and they continue to climb.
Causation and Correlation – Pharmaco-vigilance Warns; It does not Require Proving
The VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) demonstrates a death and injury profile that is temporally correlated with the roll-out of the mRNA injections.
The often used “Correlation does not equal causation” argument is not valid when it comes to pharmacovigilance systems. VAERS is an early warning system, designed to warn regulators about potential problems. Regulator are REQUIRED to pause market activities for the product in question and begin an extensive analysis – only now (2023) are we seeing movement by some regulatory agencies to acknowledge the reality that has been reported by independent groups for over 2 years. VAERS data shows ≥ 10x increase in average monthly reports in deaths, stroke and myocarditis from the previous 2010-2020 time period. One has to wonder how FDA has not seen the signals, as they have the same data we have access to analyze.
From VAERS – https://wonder.cdc.gov/ (Up to November 30, 2022)
The above graphs are data taken directly from the VAERS database. The bars are the average monthly counts for that year (or years), reported to VAERS and curated by CDC. Deaths are only posted on VAERS when a death certificate can be established. From 2010-2018, deaths averaged 1-3 per month for all age groups. From 2019 to 2020, deaths averaged 2-4 per month for all age groups. Pfizer and Moderna released their mRNA injections into the market (via emergency use authorization; EUA) on December 2020. As can be seen, the oldest age groups (which received the majority of the injections; right graph) had the highest death reports in 2021 and 2022. Please note that the graph on the right is adjusted by almost 10X to accommodate the larger number reported relative to the graph on the left. Increases in deaths are not seen until after December 2020, when the mass-injection campaign began.
What is critical to realize, is that for over ten years of vaccine associated death reports to VEARS (2010 to 2020), death reports NEVER exceeded 4 cases per month in any age group. 2019 and 2020 VAERS reports, during the most severe spread of SARs-Cov-2, did not see a significant upswing in numbers. By 2021 and 2022, at the height of the mass-injection campaign, we see death reports exceeding all past reports, while the lethality of the SARs-Cov-2 variants decreased.
VAERS also has a known Under Reporting Factor (URF) problem. As posted on OPEN VAERS (OPENVAERS.com), since 2010 Ross Lazarus (MBBS, MPH, MMed, GDCompSci) and Michael Klompas, (MD, MPH) published and analysis on behalf of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to identify ways to use Health Information Technology to improve reporting to VAERS. They discovered that 2.6% of all vaccinations led to adverse events. From their review of the literature and their own independent findings, they concluded that VAERS undercounts actual harms from vaccines by a factor of 10x to 100x (see attached: r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011).
This finding of a URF problem for VAERS has been observed by Dr. Jessica Rose (see attached: Critical Appraisal VAERS Rose Oct 2021) and the estimated URF is between 31x to 51x, right in between what Lazarus and Klompas estimates. A third analysis, comparing the active pharmaco-surveillance program V-SAFE, to VAERS, also demonstrated a URF of 26x (https://openvaers.com/faq/how-to-calculate-the-urf-using-v-safe-and-vaers). The actual number of deaths and injuries are an order of magnitude higher than what we see in VAERS.
When a cumulative assessment for deaths (left), myocarditis (middle) and stroke (right) are plotted on a cumulative month-by-month basis, the numbers highlight the significant increase in cases reported to VAERS. It is highly anomalous and well-outside the norm. All values since 2010 DO NOT break past 60 cumulative cases per month. It is only after December 2020 that we see massive increases that are ≥ 10x higher than previous.
No reasonable explanation exists for the increase in these VAERS reports, other than actual injuries increasing due to the mRNA injections. The often-used counter-argument that these are self-reported injuries from individuals that lack medical knowledge and training is countered by analyses from AAP News (see attached: VAERS Plays Pivotal Role in Safety Meissner AAP News 2016) and independent health data researchers (see attached: VAERSInterimResults2.0ReleaseDraft) that demonstrate that a consistent 67-70% of the reports come from health care worker and pharmaceutical manufacturers.
The increase in deaths and permanent injuries reported to VAERS, has a parallel in life insurance policy payouts. Deaths among working people ages 18-64 were up 40% in the third quarter of 2021 for One America. A much larger life insurance company, Lincoln National, reported a 163% increase in death benefits paid out under its group life insurance policies in 2021.
From 2019 to 2020, group death benefits pay-outs increased by 9 percent from 2018. But group death benefits in 2021, the year the vaccine was introduced, increased almost 164 percent over 2019-2020. These changes in expected payout levels were driven by non-pandemic-related morbidity. U.S. regulatory data shows net death benefits in the fourth quarter of 2021 were up 5.6% (30.4%) from the year-ago period. That is a striking figure given that the fourth quarter of 2020 saw net death benefits increase 28.8% from the same quarter a year earlier. Overall, death trends are increasing in a population that should not be dying (US death-benefit payouts hit record high in 2021).
Thank you, Ed Dowd and the work at the TotalityofEvidence.
Overall, data outside of health-related systems (like VAERS) are seeing a striking parallel in actuarial numbers that reflect a phenomenon that is not driven by potential biased reporting into those health systems. This implicates that the mRNA injections are contributing directly to the increase injury/death rates.
Finally, the development for histopathological confirmation for the characterization of myocarditis (and other injuries) induced by anti-SARS-Cov-2 vaccination, has been published in Clinical Research in Cardiology (see attached: 392_2022_Schwab Schirmacher_2129). The publication comes from the prestigious Institute of Pathology at Heidelberg University in Germany, headed by Peter Schirmacher. This is a significant publication that directly links heart damage produced by an LNP/mRNA or adenovirus delivered gene therapies and has the support of the Federal Association of German Pathologists. Early work by Schirmacher in performing autopsies, suggested to him that death due to adverse event brought about by vaccination were highly under-reported (https://freewestmedia.com/2021/08/03/german-chief-pathologist-sounds-alarm-on-fatal-vaccine-injuries/). As the director of the Pathological Institute at the University of Heidelberg, his credential and reputation are unassailable and should be taken very seriously.
Conclusion
The data, from multiple sources, across multiple systems and countries, demonstrates a temporal association with deaths and injuries. The known mechanism of action of the Spike protein, as well as the LNP ingredients, are known to produce clots, inflammation, affect capillary beds, produce neurological injuries and organ damage.
The Bradford Hill criteria for epidemiological causation are met for the mRNA injections. FDA and CDC do not want to acknowledge the extent of their regulatory failure, but state legislators can intervene on behalf of their constituents.
The mRNA technology remains unproven as a platform to deliver ANY therapy, but the evidence of harm in the public literature and local/national health databases cannot be ignored. Waiting and wanting to hear from federal agencies that have proven incapable of doing their duty will place the citizens of the State of Idaho in continued harms-way.