Supporting Evidence

This book provides a thought-provoking analysis of the complex interactions between the virus and the host immune system that underlie the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic. The author delves into the impact of mass vaccination on individual and global health, and explains how powerful organizat...

The excess all-cause mortality remains high even when by June 19, 2023 there are zero COVID-19 deaths per million for these 5 countries.

Looks Like it Does Puts the TURBO in Turbo Cancers!

Looks Like it Does Puts the TURBO in Turbo Cancers!

10-10-2023 (Pink background in honor of Breast Cancer Awareness Month).

Dr. Ryan Cole describes an "alarming" uptick in cancers and immune system responses in the past year. Based on both scientific data and anecdotal observations, Cole says scientists are "seeing an alte

A scientific scandal with huge implications for women's health is brewing and you weren't going to hear about it - until now.

Antibodies are studied more than other immune proteins for association with disease. This does not mean that they are more decisive in disease outcomes. Type I interferon likely has far more impact.

Dr. Angus Dalgleish, a Professor of Oncology, wrote to Dr. Kamran Abbasi, the Editor in Chief of the BMJ, to alert him to worrying signals he is seeing in his patients and contacts following Covid vaccination.

Waning of protection against infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) conferred by 2 doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine begins shortly after inoculation and becomes substantial within 4 months. With that, the impact of prior ...

This cohort study estimates rates of myocarditis and pericarditis after receipt of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine among individuals in Ontario, Canada, stratified by recipients’ age and sex and by the vaccine product, schedule, and interdose interval.

Original Article from The New England Journal of Medicine — Protection and Waning of Natural and Hybrid Immunity to SARS-CoV-2

Operation Warp Speed brought to market in the United States two mRNA vaccines, produced by Pfizer and Moderna. Interim data suggested high efficacy for both of these vaccines, which helped legitimize Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the FDA. However, the exceptionally rapid movement of these vaccines through controlled trials and into mass deployment raises multiple safety concerns. In this review we first describe the technology underlying these vaccines in detail. We then review both components of and the intended biological response to these vaccines, including production of the spike protein itself, and their potential relationship to a wide range of both acute and long-term induced pathologies, such as blood disorders, neurodegenerative diseases and autoimmune diseases. Among these potential induced pathologies, we discuss the relevance of prion-protein-related amino acid sequences within the spike protein. We also present a brief review of studies supporting the potential for spike protein “shedding”, transmission of the protein from a vaccinated to an unvaccinated person, resulting in symptoms induced in the latter. We finish by addressing a common point of debate, namely, whether or not these vaccines could modify the DNA of those receiving the vaccination. While there are no studies demonstrating definitively that this is happening, we provide a plausible scenario, supported by previously established pathways for transformation and transport of genetic material, whereby injected mRNA could ultimately be incorporated into germ cell DNA for transgenerational transmission. We conclude with our recommendations regarding surveillance that will help to clarify the long-term effects of these experimental drugs and allow us to better assess the true risk/benefit ratio of these novel technologies.

In 2009, a new H1N1 influenza virus emerged, causing the first global flu pandemic in 40 years, called Swine Flu. On June 11, 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it a pandemic and raised the worldwide pandemic alert level to phase 6, which means the virus was spreading to other parts of the world.

Pre-Pandemic Timeline2000 - 2015 Chronological order of significant global, Australian and SA data points leading up to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Navigate the timeline pages: 1800s | 1900-1945 | 1946-1979 | 1980-1999 | You Are Here | 2016-2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 Best viewed on a large screen Data points

Strasbourg, 24.06.2010 – At the end of a debate on the handling of the H1N1 pandemic, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) today endorsed the conclusions of its Health Committee, which were published on 4 June last. According to the Assembly, the handling of the pandemic by the...

The 2009 Swine Flu Profiteers In 2009, the world greatly feared a new virus showing up in Mexico. After a few months, it quickly turned out it was as good as harmless, with only a few hundred people confirmed dead from it, worldwide.(Later numbers in Wikipedia are significantly higher, but are still estimates) Even so, the World Health Organization decided to declare a pandemic.The directions from the WHO are not binding for the states, but they create a strong political pressure. WHO's decision to raise it from alert phase 4-5 to phase 6 was based on technical criteria that was decided in advance,based on geographic distribution. How many people actually die or get seriously ill in the world, is no longer a criterion for declaring a pandemic, geographic distribution is more important. The raising to phase 6 meant billions of dollars in investments, in vaccines and medicines. The pharma industry and the WHO were in agreement. The worldwide flu danger makes use of medicines necessary. The measures that most states implemented after the declaration were based on WHO warnings. In France, five months after the outbreak of swine flu, the Health Minister still regards it as highly dangerous, even though that was already obviously not the case. There are a number of people who have worked in the pharmaceutical industry and have carried that way of thinking over into the WHO, and in such a way that they make sure WHO's decisions are friendly to the pharma industry. Also politicians and scientists have close economic and career ties to the pharma industry At the beginning of the millennium, the pharma industry faced slim pickings. There were no new, innovative products, and one asked oneself how to keep up profits.So the specialists in the pharma industry pushed the development of the vaccine sector, where they invented epidemic warnings and pandemics, to boost the sale of vaccines. The first thing that was attempted, was the much quoted bird flu. It is worth noticing that all the experts crying out against swine flu, were the same as the ones that cried out against bird flu. With the pandemic declaration, a principle of pharma marketing was adopted. The pharma industry can sell their products better when people are frightened, So one has to create a fear psychosis, so that people get weak and demand the vaccine and flu medicine like Tamiflu. The pharmaceutical company Roche had made giant profits from Tamiflu once before. The bird flu gave the company record revenues, There were no evidence that this drug reduced the risk of severe complications or made hospital stays unnecessary, but governments bought the medicine for billions of dollars for the anticipated swine flu.

Key scientists advising the World Health Organization on planning for an influenza pandemic had done paid work for pharmaceutical firms that stood to gain from the guidance they were preparing. These conflicts of interest have never been publicly disclosed by WHO, and WHO has dismissed inquiries into its handling of the A/H1N1 pandemic as “conspiracy theories.” Deborah Cohen and Philip Carter investigate Watch the BMJ/The Bureau of Investigative Journalism's video on WHO and disclosure. This video has also appeared on Al Jazeera and guardian.co.uk. Next week marks the first anniversary of the official declaration of the influenza A/H1N1 pandemic. On 11 June 2009 Dr Margaret Chan, the director general of the World Health Organization, announced to the world’s media: “I have conferred with leading influenza experts, virologists, and public health officials. In line with procedures set out in the International Health Regulations, I have sought guidance and advice from an Emergency Committee established for this purpose. On the basis of available evidence, and these expert assessments of the evidence, the scientific criteria for an influenza pandemic have been met…The world is now at the start of the 2009 influenza pandemic.” It was the culmination of 10 years of pandemic preparedness planning for WHO—years of committee meetings with experts flown in from around the world and reams of draft documents offering guidance to governments. But one year on, governments that took advice from WHO are unwinding their vaccine contracts, and billions of dollars’ worth of stockpiled oseltamivir (Tamiflu) and zanamivir (Relenza)—bought from health budgets already under tight constraints—lie unused in warehouses around the world. A joint investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has uncovered evidence that raises troubling questions about how WHO managed conflicts of interest among the scientists who advised its pandemic planning, and about the …

Exactly the same thing is happening now, but on a far larger and more draconian scale.Channel 4's John Snow reports on the Council of Europe's investigation ...

BMGF relationship to drug companies, practices in poor countries

In 2009 the self-designated “Good Club” – a gathering of the world’s wealthiest people whose collective net worth then totaled some $125 billion – met behind closed doors in New York City to discuss a coordinated response to threats posed by the global financial crisis.

"Prophetic" quotes from Bill Gate's speech at the Munich Security Conference on February 17, 2017, setting the stage: "I decided 20 years ago to make global health the focus of my philanthropic work"...I spend a lot of my time on the effort to eradicate polio... It's also true that the next epidemic could originate on

His renowned charitable activities seem to serve mainly private interests, namely his own.

Thanks to the Microsoft founder’s support, the IHME can make its own rules about how to track global health. That’s a problem.

Fully reckoning with Bill Gates means not just focusing on how he treats women—vital as that is—but also confronting our own deep-seated worship of wealth and hardwired belief in hero narratives.

Allegations of financial misconduct against Michael Larson, who manages the foundation’s money as well as a portion of Bill and Melinda’s personal wealth, should prompt a closer look.

The Oracle of Omaha just resigned from the Gates Foundation. But he’s still on the hook for billions in future donations to the troubled charity.

Though described as “strong independent voices,” the new board members all have financial ties to the Gates Foundation.