Vaccines are the solution or are they going to cause much greater problems?
Many people who want to take the vaccine do it to protect themselves from the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Others are less concerned about the virus but do it so that things can go ‘back to normal.’ I am sure there are more reasons but most likely these are the two main reasons as to why people take the vaccine.
But what do we actually know about these vaccines? I have asked many different people and each time I am getting the same kind of answers;
I don’t know,
the vaccines create antibodies,
should be fine, it has been tested,
they don’t give it if it is not safe,
the risk of not taking it is bigger,
the Government says it is safe,
vaccines are proven to be safe so this one will be too
I don’t want to know
or they say, why are you asking me this question? what do you know? are you an anti-vaxxer? what do you think?
Thomas Sowell said once, “It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance”.
There is truth to what Thomas Sowell said however, anybody who is seeking different perspectives before they make up their minds do not care for moral superiority, they just want to hear the facts.
I am very aware that many people are trustworthy and want to believe that their Government, Medical and Pharmaceutical corporations have their best interests at heart. It, therefore, should not matter if people with a healthy dose of scepticism are verifying their presented information. These sceptical people (I am one of them) should arrive at the same conclusions, meaning that the Government, Medical and Pharmaceutical corporations have our best interest at heart. And that the new vaccines are created and built for purpose, that they are safe and that the potential side effects are minimal.
Would I take the vaccine? NO, if you wonder why not, I invite you to read below the 14 reasons as to why not?
Vaccines are not the solution, instead they will add further to the problem. Most people (for good reasons) do not comprehend what mRNA & RNA vaccines are, nor how they are made, what is in them and what the risks are.
But I do, it is part of my job as a health coach to know. I have the time, expertise and connections to verify the presented information from the Governments, Health Advisory Committees, WHO and the Medical and Pharmaceutical corporations. I research to verify and analyse what they are saying is true and is based on science. Let’s start with the biggest discovery first.
1. Why take a vaccine for a virus that has never scientifically being proven to exist?
In my previous blog post, Dr Stefan Lanka (Virologist & Biologist) explains in-depth that the alleged Virus SARS-CoV-2 has never scientifically been isolated nor purified and no scientific controlled studies have ever been conducted. It means plain and simple that there is no evidence that the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus exists. Dr Andrew Kaufman and Dr Thomas Cowan are of the same opinion.
This is further confirmed through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). It reveals that health/science institutions around the world have no record of SARS-COV-2 isolation/purification, anywhere, ever! These are the results represented by 60 responses from 47 institutions in 10 countries re the isolation/purification existence of the “ SARS-CoV-2 virus”(Last updated February 12, 2021).
Does this not raise the question as to why Big Pharma started to manufacture mRNA & RNA vaccines for a virus that does not exist? I can imagine that you are thinking right now this sounds too crazy to be true. You probably say, but the SARS-CoV-2 virus does exist and it is causing the disease COVID-19, which is causing the pandemic, and that is the reason why we are in lockdown, do an RT-PCR test, do social distancing, do masks, do quarantine have a curfew etc.
Then why is the Government hellbent on jabbing their populations? How can we trust that these vaccines are safe? what purpose can they serve? It will become clear very soon. Health coach Christian Elliot has put together 13 disturbing insights as to why taking the vaccine is very problematic and dangerous.
2. Vaccine makers are immune from liability
The only industry in the world that bears no liability for injuries or deaths resulting from their products are vaccine makers.
As first established in 1986 with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, and reinforced by the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, vaccine makers cannot be sued — even if they are shown to be negligent.
The COVID vaccine makers are allowed to create a one-size-fits-all product, with no testing on sub-populations (i.e. people with specific health conditions), and yet they are unwilling to accept any responsibility for any adverse events or deaths their products cause.
If a company is not willing to stand behind its product as safe, especially one rushed to market, I am not willing to take a chance on that product.
No liability. No trust. Here’s why …
3. The checkered past of vaccine companies
The four major companies who are making COVID vaccines are/have either:
Never brought a vaccine to market before COVID (Moderna and Johnson & Johnson).
Are serial felons (Pfizer, and AstraZeneca).
Are both (Johnson & Johnson).
Moderna had been trying to “Modernize our RNA” (thus the company name) for years but had never successfully brought any product to market. How nice for the company to get a major cash infusion from the government to keep trying.
In fact, all major vaccine makers (save Moderna) have paid out tens of billions of dollars in damages for other products they brought to market when they knew those products would cause injuries and death — see Vioxx, Bextra, Celebrex, Thalidomide and opioids as a few examples.
If drug companies willfully choose to put harmful products in the market — when they can be sued — why would we trust any product where they have no liability?
Three of the four COVID vaccine makers have been sued for products they brought to market even though they knew injuries and deaths would result.
Johnson & Johnson has lost major lawsuits in 1995, 1996, 2001, 2010, 2011, 2016, 2019 (For what it’s worth, the company’s vaccine also contains tissues from aborted fetal cells, perhaps a topic for another discussion).
Pfizer has the distinction of the biggest criminal payout in history. The company lost so many lawsuits it’s hard to count. You can check out its rap sheet here. Maybe that’s why Pfizer is demanding that countries where they don’t have liability protection put up collateral to cover vaccine-injury lawsuits.
AstraZeneca has similarly lost so many lawsuits it’s hard to count. Here’s one. Here’s another…you get the point. And in case you missed it, the company had its COVID vaccine suspended in at least 18 countries over concerns of blood clots, and it completely botched its meeting with the FDA with numbers from their study that didn’t match.
Oh, and apparently Johnson & Johnson (whose vaccine was granted Emergency Use Authorization in the U.S.) and AstraZeneca (whose vaccine is not approved in the U.S.), had a little mix up in their ingredients … in 15 million doses. Oops.
Given the free pass from liability, and the checkered past of these companies, why would we assume that all their vaccines are safe and made completely above board?
Where else in life would we trust someone with that kind of reputation?
To me, that makes as much sense as expecting a remorseless, abusive unfaithful lover to become a different person because a judge said deep down they are a good person.
No. I don’t trust them. No liability. No trust.
4. Ugly history of attempts to make coronavirus vaccines
There have been many attempts to make viral vaccines in the past that ended in utter failure — which is why we did not have a coronavirus vaccine in 2020.
In the 1960s, scientists attempted to make an RSV (respiratory syncytial virus) vaccine for infants. In that study, they skipped animal trials because the trials weren’t required then.
In the end, the vaccinated infants got much sicker than the unvaccinated infants when exposed to the virus in nature, with 80% of the vaccinated infants requiring hospitalization. Two of them died.
After 2000, scientists made many attempts to create coronavirus vaccines. For the past 20 years, all ended in failure because the animals in the clinical trials got very sick and many died, just like the children in the 1960s.
You can read a summary of this history/science here. Or if you want to read the individual studies you can check out these links:
In 2004, an attempted vaccine produced hepatitis in ferrets.
In 2005, mice and civets became sick and more susceptible to coronaviruses after being vaccinated.
In 2012, the ferrets became sick and died. And in this study, mice and ferrets developed lung disease.
In 2016, this study also produced lung disease in mice.
The typical pattern in the studies referenced above is that the children and the animals produced beautiful antibody responses after being vaccinated. The manufacturers thought they hit the jackpot.
The problem came when the children and animals were exposed to the wild version of the virus.
When that happened, an unexplained phenomenon called antibody-dependent enhancement, also known as vaccine enhanced disease, occurred where the immune system produced a “cytokine storm” (i.e. overwhelmingly attacked the body) and the children/animals died.
Here’s the lingering issue: The vaccine makers have no data to suggest their rushed vaccines have overcome that problem.
In other words, never before has any attempt to make a coronavirus vaccine been successful, nor has the gene-therapy technology in mRNA “vaccines” been safely brought to market.
We might assume that because the companies received billions of dollars in government funding, they must have figured out that problem.
Except they don’t know if they have …
5. The ‘data gaps’ submitted to FDA by vaccine makers
When vaccine makers submitted their papers to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the Emergency Use Authorization (which is not the same as a full FDA approval), among the many “data gaps” they reported was that they have nothing in their trials to suggest they overcame that pesky problem of vaccine enhanced disease.
They simply don’t know if the vaccines they’ve made will also produce the same cytokine storm (and deaths) as previous attempts at such products.
As Dr Joseph Mercola points out …
“Previous attempts to develop mRNA-based drug-using lipid nanoparticles failed and had to be abandoned because when the dose was too low, the drug had no effect, and when dosed too high, the drug became too toxic. An obvious question is: What has changed that now makes this technology safe enough for mass use?”
If that’s not alarming enough, here are other gaps in the data — in other words, there is no data to suggest safety or efficacy regarding:
Anyone younger than age 18 or older than age 55.
Pregnant or lactating mothers.
No data on the transmission of COVID.
No data on preventing mortality from COVID.
No data on duration of protection from COVID.
In case you think I’m making this up, or want to see the actual documents sent to the FDA by Pfizer and Moderna for their Emergency Use Authorization, you can check out this, or this respectively. The data gaps can be found starting with page 46 and 48 respectively.
For now, let’s turn our eyes to the raw data the vaccine makers used to submit for emergency use authorization …
6. No access to raw data from trials
Would you like to see the raw data that produced the “90% and 95% effective” claims touted in the news?
Me too. But the companies won’t let us see that data.
As pointed out in the BMJ, something about the Pfizer and Moderna efficacy claims smells really funny. There were “3,410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed COVID-19 in the overall study population, 1,594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1,816 in the placebo group.”
Wait … what? Did they fail to do science in their scientific study by not verifying a major variable?
Could they not test those “suspected but unconfirmed” cases to find out if they had COVID? Why not test all 3,410 participants for the sake of accuracy?
Can we only guess they didn’t test because it would mess up their “90-95% effective” claims?
Would it not be prudent for the FDA to expect (demand) the vaccine makers test people who have “COVID-like symptoms,” and release their raw data so independent third parties could examine how the manufacturers justified the numbers?
It’s only every citizen of the world we’re trying to get to take these experimental products — why did the FDA not require that? Isn’t that the entire purpose of the FDA anyway?
7. No long-term safety testing
With products that have been on the market for only a few months, we have no long-term safety data.
In other words, we have no idea what this product will do in the body months or years from now — for any population.
Given all the risks above (risks that all pharmaceutical products have), would it not be prudent to wait to see if the worst-case scenarios have indeed been avoided?
Would it not make sense to want to fill those pesky “data gaps” before we try to give this to every man, woman and child on the planet?
That would make sense. But to have that data, they need to test it on people, which leads me to my next point …
8. No informed consent
What most who are taking the vaccine don’t know is that because these products are still in clinical trials, anyone who gets the shot is now part of the clinical trial — part of the experiment.
Those (like me) who do not take it, are part of the control group. Time will tell how this experiment works out.
But, you may be asking, if the vaccines are causing harm, wouldn’t we be seeing that all over the news? Surely the FDA would step in and pause the distribution? (Editor’s note: federal health officials on Tuesday paused the Johnsons & Johnson vaccine over concerns related to blood clots).
If the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) — the government-run system for reporting deaths and injuries after vaccines — worked, maybe things would be different, but …
9. Under-reporting of adverse reactions and deaths
According to a Harvard study (commissioned by our own government), less than 1% of all adverse reactions to vaccines are actually submitted to VAERS.
While the problems with VAERS have not been fixed (as you can read about in this letter to the CDC), at the time of this writing, VAERS reports over 2,200 deaths from the current COVID vaccines, as well as close to 60,000 adverse reactions.
If those numbers represent only 1% of the total adverse reactions (or .8% to 2% of what this study published recently in the JAMA found), you can do the math — but that equates to somewhere around 110,000 to 220,000 deaths from the vaccines to date and a ridiculous number of adverse reactions.
Bet you didn’t see that on the news.
That death number would currently still be lower than the 424,000 deaths from medical errors that happen every year (which you probably also don’t hear about), but we are not even six months into the rollout of these vaccines yet.
If you want a deeper dive into the problems with the VAERS reporting system, you can check out this or this.
But then there’s my next point, which could be argued makes these COVID vaccines seem pointless …
10. The vaccines don’t stop transmission or infection
Aren’t these vaccines supposed to be what we’ve been waiting for to “go back to normal”? Nope.
Why do you think we’re getting all these conflicting messages about needing to practice social distancing and wear masks after we get a vaccine? The reason is that these vaccines were never designed to stop transmission of infection.
If you don’t believe me, I refer you again to the papers submitted to the FDA I linked to above which show that the primary endpoint (what the vaccines are meant to accomplish) is to lower your symptoms.
Sounds like just about every other drug on the market right? That’s it … lowering your symptoms is the big payoff we’ve been waiting for. Does that seem completely pointless to anyone but me?
It can’t stop us from spreading the virus.
It can’t stop the virus from infecting us once we have it.
To get the vaccine is to accept all the risk of these experimental products and the best it might do is lower symptoms?
There are plenty of other things I can do to lower my symptoms that don’t involve taking what appears to be a really risky product.
Now for the next logical question: If we’re worried about asymptomatic spreaders, would the vaccine not make it more likely that we are creating asymptomatic spread?
If it indeed reduces symptoms, anyone who gets it might not even know they are sick and thus they are more likely to spread the virus, right?
For what it’s worth, I’ve heard many people say the side effects of the vaccine (especially the second dose) are worse than catching COVID.
I can’t make sense of that either.
Take the risk. Get no protection. Suffer through the vaccine side effects. Keep wearing your mask and social distancing … and continue to be able to spread the virus.
It gets worse …
11. People are catching COVID after being fully vaccinated
Talk about a bummer. You get vaccinated and you still catch COVID.
It’s happening in Washington State.
It’s happening in New York.
It’s happening in Michigan.
It’s happening in Hawaii.
It’s happening in several other states too.
It happened to 80% of 35 nuns who got the vaccine in Kentucky. Two of them died by the way.
In reality, this phenomenon is probably happening everywhere, but those are the ones making the news now.
Given the reasons above (and what’s below), maybe this doesn’t surprise you, but bummer if you thought the vaccine was a shield to keep you safe.
It’s not. That was never the point.
If 66% of healthcare workers in L.A. are going to delay or skip the vaccine … maybe they aren’t wowed by the rushed science either.
Maybe they are watching the shady way deaths and cases are being reported …
12. Overall death rate from COVID
According to the CDC’s own numbers, COVID has a 99.74% survival rate.
Why would I take a risk on a product, that doesn’t stop infection or transmission, to help me overcome a cold that has a .26% chance of killing me — which actually in my age range has about a .1% chance of killing me (and .01% chance of killing my kids).
With a bar (death rate) that low, we will be in lockdown every year … i.e., forever.
But wait, what about the 500,000-plus deaths, that’s alarming right? I’m glad you asked …
13. Bloated COVID death numbers
Something smells really funny about this one. Never before in the history of death certificates has the USA government changed how deaths are reported.
Why now, are we reporting everyone who dies with COVID in their body, as having died of COVID, rather than the co-morbidities that actually took their life?
Until COVID, all coronaviruses (common colds) were never listed as the primary cause of death when someone died of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, auto-immune conditions or any other major comorbidity.
The disease was listed as the cause of death, and a confounding factor-like flu or pneumonia was listed on a separate line.
To bloat the number, even more, the World Health Organization and the CDC changed their guidelines such that those who are suspected or probable (but were never confirmed) of having died of COVID, are also included in the death numbers.
If we are going to do that then should we not go back and change the numbers of all past cold and flu seasons so we can compare apples to apples when it comes to death rates?
According to the CDCs own numbers, (scroll down to the section “comorbidities and other conditions”), only 6% of the deaths being attributed to COVID are instances where COVID seems to be the only issue at hand.
In other words, reduce the death numbers you see on the news by 94% and you have what is likely the real numbers of deaths from just COVID.
Even if the former CDC director is correct and COVID-19 was a lab-enhanced virus (see Reason #14 below), a .26% death rate is still in line with the viral death rate that circles the planet every year.
Then there’s this Fauci guy. I’d really love to trust him, but besides the fact that he hasn’t treated one COVID patient, you should probably know …
14. Fauci and others at NIAID own patents on the Moderna vaccine
Thanks to the Bayh-Dole Act, government workers are allowed to file patents on any research they do use taxpayer funding.
Tony Fauci owns more than 1,000 patents (see this video for more details), including patents being used on the Moderna vaccine … for which he approved government funding.
In fact, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) — which oversees the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), of which Fauci is the director — claims joint ownership of Moderna’s vaccine.
Does anyone else see this as a major conflict of interest, or criminal even?
Christian Elliot has raised very important insights as to why taking a vaccine is not a smart idea and he is not the only one. To comprehend why we are in a lockdown you might want to read the following blog posts.
The dark future of the health passport (Bio Metric – ID) the digital prison is coming.
Major insights in how the controllers fool the entire world population
The truth about SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and are there any consequences
The Scam has been confirmed PCR does not detect the SARS-CoV-2 virus
These few blog posts will be useful in connecting the dots as to what is going on right now and most likely is coming.
Our freedoms are at stake, our voices are systematically silenced, worldwide fear of an invisible enemy is a new reality, dangerous vaccines for a virus that does not exist and a full-fledged slavery system health passport (Bio Metric – ID) is in the making if we let them.
It is up to us what kind of world we want to live in. Ignorance is the root cause of all evil. Our thinking has been infiltrated with pseudoscience and all kinds of unverifiable stories.
I salute every person that is willing to inform themselves. Be curious, trust but verify, it is time for a new beginning… start living with your senses and stop believing in the non-sense!