Covid-19 — vaccinations and masks — a comprehensive summary of the substantial risks to health
A couple we know finally managed to return to the UK in September from a ‘Red List’ country, because they wanted to see their children. Despite my attempts to persuade them otherwise, they had decided to be vaccinated, in order (they believed) to protect themselves from contracting Covid-19.
I understand why they wanted to return to the UK and, therefore, decided to allow themselves to accept the outrageous requirement that they should be imprisoned in a hotel at their own cost.
But I feel that it is vital that we resist all such oppressions, otherwise we will just enable the steady increase of restrictions until our freedoms have disappeared entirely.
We have Nazi Germany, Mao’s China and many others as prime examples of why resisting creeping oppression is absolutely vital. But the lessons of history seem to escape the majority of people, as they live in fear of this virus.
My wife and I used to enjoy going off backpacking for a month, in India or elsewhere, nearly every year and also had taken regular short trips to Sofia, Bulgaria, to watch their high quality operas and ballets, with seat prices around 10 times lower than in the UK. Low budget travel, particularly in the Third World, has greatly informed our world view and educated us about what life is really like in these countries.
But it seems that those happy days might be gone forever: our position has now hardened, such we are not prepared to submit to any medical procedures or tests, just so that we can go about our lives and travel where we want. Again, if we don’t resist this oppression, it will only get worse. We must all stand up for what we believe and not submit to oppression, even if, in so doing, we end up with less full and exciting lives.
Why the hell should we submit? We do not want a ‘new normal’; we want, simply, normality.
I did tell my friends that they can’t trust what health authorities tell them but, for most people, this seems like a ridiculous claim. I moved towards this position about 40 years ago, based mainly on personal experience. But to expect someone who has trusted the medical so-called ‘profession’ all of his life to trust my opinions instead was always a false hope. I was whistling in the wind.
The fundamental problem — and the underlying mendacity-stupidity of (most) doctors and (it seems) all health officials — is that they appear to have deliberately blurred the distinction between old-fashioned viruses, like measles, and what appears to be a completely new virus.
A study from May 2015 throws light on the reasons why measles, in particular, is such a poor model:
“While the influenza virus mutates constantly and requires a yearly shot that offers a certain percentage of protection, old reliable measles needs only a two-dose vaccine during childhood for lifelong immunity [my note: I take issue with this assertion!]. A new study has an explanation: The surface proteins that the measles virus uses to enter cells are ineffective if they suffer any mutation, meaning that any changes to the virus come at a major cost [to the virus].”
The SARS-CoV-2 virus is not like the measles virus, so using the conventional (but epidemiologically invalid) ‘lets-eliminate-it-with-a-vaccine’ approach flies in the face of reason and also directly contradicts health authorities’ vain attempts to prevent influenza, the rapid mutations of which necessitate completely different — and hopelessly ineffective — vaccines every year. Nobody ever talks about vaccine-derived ‘herd immunity’ against flu, or suggests that we can use old stocks of the flu vaccines to protect us the next year.
There is no logic in doggedly continuing to use vaccinations against a now-extinct variant of SARS-CoV-2, but the fact is that logic has been one of the main casualties of this ‘pandemic’!
It appears that all viruses in their early stages mutate very rapidly and readily and, in the face of some level of immunity produced by the vaccines, the SARS-CoV-2 virus will have mutated specifically to evade that antibody-derived short-term immunity.
The part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus which enables it to attach itself to cells in our bodies is called the ‘spike protein’. The mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna) and DNA (AstraZeneca) vaccines work by stimulating the body to produce an extremely (and dangerously) large number of these spike proteins — incidentally, not actually those in the virus, but a laboratory-synthesised version of it, which we assume is somewhat similar (or possibly very similar) to that in the live virus. The body’s immune system then produces antibodies against the spike protein.
So far so good, people might think — indeed, that is what we are being encouraged to think! However, it had been known even before the introduction of these vaccines that the spike protein is the part of the virus which mutates most easily. This is why we are seeing that the vaccines now provide only very low protection against the current ‘Delta’ variant, a situation which will worsen with future variants.
In addition, the antibodies which are produced by the body are only against the spike protein, rather than the whole virus, which also results in a sub-standard immune system response. This is another failing of these vaccines which is a result of their underlying design and another way in which they fundamentally differ from ‘conventional’ vaccines which always introduce a killed or ‘live attenuated’ (weakened) virus into the body.
But the pseudo-immunity induced by all (including the mRNA and DNA) vaccines only ever induces the body to produce antibodies, rather than the full spectrum of immunity (ie not just short-term antibodies) which natural infection-derived immunity provides.
One of the reasons for this lack of a full immune response is that the body ‘expects’ respiratory viruses to enter the body via the respiratory system, where the mucosa in the nose and throat, together with the tonsils, cause activation of an immune response appropriate to a respiratory virus.
The main antibody involved here is ‘Secretory Immunoglobulin A (IgA)’, which sticks to the lining of the respiratory and intestinal tracts, helping to block viruses and bacteria from entering their bodies. Secretory IgA is produced in these mucosal areas, where it survives and functions as it should. However, entry of a virus via the bloodstream produces only Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies, which do not have that protective effect.
So, sadly, my friends were sold a lie, a lie which told them that they are now ‘protected’ against SARS-CoV-2. They told me that eight people they know had caught Covid-19, and this was one of the main reasons why they decided to be vaccinated. But those people now have immunity against all strains of the virus — and, to an extent, against all coronaviruses — which will last them for many years and, potentially, the rest of their lives.
If my friends had wanted to protect themselves, they would have been far better off staying in these people’s houses for a couple of days, whilst boosting their immune systems by taking, for example, Vitamins C, D3 and K2, together with Zinc and Beta 1–3,1–6 Glucan. [see Appendix 1, below]
Sadly, the worst part of the authorities’ blatant deception is an apparent failure to understand the reason why viruses mutate. What a virus ‘wants’ is to be able to spread and infect as many people as possible. Death of the infected person works against that inbuilt viral ‘drive’, if you like, as does people being so ill that they can’t move around and infect other people. So viruses typically mutate, over time, to more transmissible variants causing fewer deaths and less severe illness.
In other words, the more months/years during which someone didn’t contract Covid-19, the less likely he or she is to suffer severe illness or death from the virus. So, being vaccinated has provided people with very little protection against a virus which has, by now, become considerably less dangerous.
There have (obviously) been no trials of whether these vaccines reduce severity, so this idea (which is presented as a fact) is best treated as no more than NHS/government spin. The vaccine manufacturers make no such claims and I suppose that we have to assume that they know what they’re talking about.
We have a situation now in the UK with a lot of cases, very few deaths and certainly not a large number of hospitalisations, so what is the reason for that? It might possibly be a beneficial vaccine effect, but the much more likely reason is that the virus is now less dangerous. We simply don’t know, so assuming that we are seeing beneficial effects from the vaccines seems to me to be scrabbling around for some reason for people to have the damned so-called ‘jabs’, given that we now know that they are not stopping people contracting the disease!
There’s also a potential situation whereby the spike proteins produced in your body after the vaccination are triggering a positive PCR test — hence loads of ‘cases’ (ie positive PCR tests). This is just an idea at present and I have yet to find any discussion of this potential phenomenon.
So there are lots of correlation effects here, but no causation analysis. But wait, isn’t everything the NHS say supposed to be based on ‘evidence’ … except when it suits them!
And despite what some newspaper reports allege (for example here from early October: “The technology works by using part of Covid’s genetic code to trick the body into producing a harmless piece of the virus” and here, from August: “MRNA used in the Pfizer and Moderna jabs is essentially a DNA instruction to tell your cells how to produce the harmless spike proteins from the virus — allowing your body to create an immune response without being exposed to the virus itself”), the spike proteins which the body is induced to create in response to the vaccine are not “harmless”.
Far from it: if we catch Covid-19, the spike proteins are part of the virus ‘package’ and will be neutralised by a healthy immune system. However, the vaccine-induced versions move around in the bloodstream and can attach to any organ in the body and cause health-threatening inflammation. Initial research following the vaccine rollouts has indeed shown that this is exactly what happens.
This discussion, between Jonathan Landsman and MIT researcher, Stephanie Seneff PhD, provides much more information on this subject and particularly on the subject of spike protein-induced inflammation. Stephanie’s view is that the spike proteins migrate particularly to the spleen and the ovaries, where they cause inflammation. In the ovaries, this can lead to abnormal menstruation, failed pregnancies and miscarriage.
Dr Richard Urso concurs:
“A good percentage of the spike proteins [in the vaccine] goes to the ovaries [and] we know is going to cause significant inflammation in the ovaries. What do we know about that? Is that going to affect fertility? We don’t know.”
[source: https://rumble.com/voz1ya-8-prominent-doctors-and-scientist-engage-in-a-remarkable-exchange.html ]
A young woman who we know, in her mid-20s, has developed menstrual irregularities after the vaccine and she knows a very large number of other women her age who are suffering from the same type of symptoms, which are very likely to be a result of that inflammation in the ovaries.
According to Stephanie Seneff (see discussion link above) — and I have heard this from other researchers — there does appear to be a mechanism whereby the spike proteins and/or the mRNA can be transmitted via ‘exosomes’ (primarily via the breath) to people who come into contact with a vaccinated person. This is the ‘shedding’ which you might have heard about. Incidentally, if you read up about this, you will find that any discussion of this from a ‘conventional’ health authority will always say that there can be no viral shedding, because there are no killed or live attenuated viral particles in the Covid vaccines.
That’s absolutely true: there can be no viral shedding. However, we are talking here about spike protein shedding, via exosomes, never about viral shedding, so dismissing that does not dismiss shedding from these vaccines and appears, therefore, to be a subterfuge, designed simply to pour scorn on anyone who might be suggesting this.
The fundamental point to make here is that a person might have their health damaged simply by being in contact with a vaccinated person, since a mechanism does exist for transmission of the spike proteins and/or mRNA to others. I would infer that, since the mRNA does gradually degrade over time (how much time we don’t know), the risk of this is greatest when a person has been vaccinated recently.
There have been reports of unvaccinated women developing menstrual irregularities from contact with a recently vaccinated person. Is this really a problem? In the absence of any trials, we simply don’t know. My view is that we cannot be too careful with a new technology like these DNA and mRNA vaccines, but regulators worldwide have thrown caution to the winds and deployed them on a population scale with fingers crossed and heads buried in the sand.
As far as data on safety in pregnancy, reproductive risks and potential birth defects is concerned, Dr Robert Malone, one of the key ‘architects’ of the mRNA vaccine technology stated that pregnant women were not included in the clinical trials and the US National Institute for Health (NIH) had just funded a study “a week ago” [ie in early October] on reproductive toxicology and birth defects in children. Apparently, the major study on potential risks in pregnancy wasn’t started until about a month after the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) told the US public that it was safe to go ahead and start taking the vaccine [in pregnancy].
In other words, we are completely in the dark on safety of the vaccines in pregnancy. Dr Malone again:
“The honest truth is that, whatever they tell you, we don’t have the data. So, whomever is speaking, if they’re telling you that it’s safe, but they haven’t actually done the studies, I think you can figure out that that means that they are not being … truthful with you” [source: as above]
In addition, Dr Ryan Cole makes it very clear that children’s lives are also being endangered:
“The shot can damage the hearts of children. There are more children who’ve had myocarditis — and there’s never such a thing as mild myocarditis. That’s inflammation of the heart. Once you get inflammation, you get scarring. Those kids’ hearts are damaged for life. Kids have died of heart attacks after the shot, and there are more kids that have had myocarditis than have died from Covid. Kids aged zero to 18 survive this virus at a statistical 100 per cent — 99.997 per cent. So why are we punishing kids for a virus they survive?” [source: as above]
The vaccine manufacturers themselves, as we can see on the US FDA page ‘Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Frequently Asked Questions’ now agree with Dr Cole’s concern about myocarditis:
“Q. What information is available about myocarditis and pericarditis following vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine?
“A. Post-authorization safety surveillance data pertaining to myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and pericarditis (inflammation of the tissue surrounding the heart) demonstrate increased risks of myocarditis and pericarditis, particularly within 7 days following the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, with the risk being higher in males under 40 years of age than in females or older males. The observed risk is highest in males 12 through 17 years of age.
“The Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine (Vaccination Providers) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine includes a warning about the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, and the Vaccine Information Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers include information about myocarditis and pericarditis. The Vaccine Information Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers notes that vaccine recipients should seek medical attention right away if they experience any of the following symptoms after vaccination: Chest pain; Shortness of breath; Feelings of having a fast-beating, fluttering, or pounding heart.” [my emphasis in bold]
We might have expected to see an answer designed to alleviate people’s fears or attempt to play down the risks. It doesn’t, so we can infer that this is viewed as a very serious risk indeed. As I have found many times before, both vaccine manufacturers and the FDA are often much more honest about the risks of any type of vaccination than the NHS, Public Health England, etc, who are steeped in their fanatical and quasi-religious belief that all vaccines are safe and effective.
According to Dr Malone, the vaccine developers thought that the spike proteins were biologically inactive, but even in the middle of 2020, we knew that this was not the case — these proteins appear to cause all the worst symptoms and deaths from Covid-19. This was a horrendously bad assumption to make and the mad, headlong rush to develop these vaccines did not enable the manufacturers to have time to determine whether their original hypothesis was correct. [source: https://rumble.com/voz1ya-8-prominent-doctors-and-scientist-engage-in-a-remarkable-exchange.html }
That mistake has cost lives and ruined the health of very many people who have had the misfortune to be vaccinated — when Dr Cole has conducted his own microscopic examination of tissue from people who have died or had adverse effects, he has always seen blood clotting (which includes tiny blood clots only visible through a microscope) caused by the circulating spike proteins:
“Covid is a clotting disease. When we give a spike protein [through the vaccine], that is an active biologic molecule. We chose the wrong molecule, which causes disease.
“So what do I see under the microscope? We see clotting under the skin, in the lungs, in the blood vessels, in the brain — not from the virus, but from the spike …”
[source: as above]
Dr Cole runs the largest Independent testing lab in Idaho, USA and has carried out over 100,000 pathology lab examinations from Covid patients. It would be difficult to find someone who is more of an expert on Covid vaccine damage.
Indeed, many of the adverse effects that have been experienced are directly related to blood clots, often in the brain. We personally know two young people who have gone blind in one eye from a blood clot and another who has impaired vision — effects directly related to the vaccines.
The biggest problem here is that the vaccines are designed such that the production of spike proteins continues for a very long time — not a day or a few days, but possibly weeks or months. The alarming fact is that neither the drugs companies themselves nor the health regulators have any idea how long the production of these toxic substances goes on for. So an inflammatory substance is being produced by your own body and you have no control over when its production will slow down or stop.
This is in contrast to what happens if you actually contract Covid-19: you have complete control, via your immune system, over the volume of spike proteins that are produced and they are packaged with the virus, rather than floating free in your body. If you catch the disease and experience no — or only mild — symptoms, you now have long-term immunity, an immunity far better than that which the vaccines create and your body has not had to cope, day after day, with an onslaught of these damaging inflammatory spike proteins.
And now, as if the systemic inflammation and microscopic blood clots were not enough, an article which I have just read analysing the last 7 Public Health England {PHE) / UK Health Security Agency ‘Vaccine Surveillance’ report figures on Covid-19 cases show that:
“double vaccinated 40–79 year-olds have now lost lost 50% of their immune system capability and are consistently losing a further 5% every week (between 3.9% and 8.8%)”
The 14th October ‘Week 41’ PHE Vaccine Surveillance Report itself notes that:
“In individuals aged greater than 30, the rate of positive COVID-19 test is higher in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated”
In summary, as the article writer puts it:
“That means the vaccine have not merely lost their efficiency. They have not merely stopped working. They are still very much working. But they are working against your immune system rather than for it. They are suppressing your immune response. They are damaging your immune system. They are causing it to become worse than if you had not taken the vaccine. They are toxic to your immune system. They are not merely ineffective. They are negatively effective.”
In short, these vaccines are a hideously bad idea — they look very clever but turn out to be ill-conceived, severely under-researched and a burden on the health of everyone who has allowed themselves to be vaccinated.
The NHS and Public Health England both now accept — albeit grudgingly — that the vaccinations do not provide satisfactory protection against the virus, so they have to bluster about reduced transmission and lesser symptoms. This is despite the absence of any trial data to support this position and its direct contradiction by the vaccine manufacturers themselves, as we can see on the US FDA FAQ page, which I referred to above:
“Q: If a person has received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or Comirnaty, will the vaccine protect against transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from individuals who are infected despite vaccination?
A: Most vaccines that protect from viral illnesses also reduce transmission of the virus that causes the disease by those who are vaccinated. While it is hoped this will be the case, the scientific community does not yet know if the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or Comirnaty will reduce such transmission.”
An earlier version (which I had copied down for reference) included this Q&A item:
Q: Is the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine and Comirnaty [my note: the same vaccine, but renamed] effective at reducing the severity of COVID-19?
A: Based on a small number of severe cases in the data set submitted for the EUA, it was difficult to evaluate whether the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine reduces the severity of COVID-19.
Why has this been removed? It is difficult not to smell a rat! Unfortunately, the internet operates very much like the ‘Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s prescient 1949 novel ‘Nineteen Eight-Four’. An element of doubt might creep into one’s mind: “Did I really read that, or am I imagining it?”
The concept of the third so-called ‘booster’ dose is another idea mendaciously lifted from conventional vaccination methodology. Returning to the measles vaccination — sometimes the antibody response after a first dose is not very robust and, in addition, antibody protection is known to wane over time. Whilst I fundamentally disagree with the whole concept of childhood vaccinations, the fact remains that, within that paradigm, the logic of a ‘booster’ dose is completely sound: repeated doses increase antibody production and provide (albeit sub-standard) protection over a longer period of time.
But for Covid-19, the ‘booster’ dose is from the same stocks as the earlier vaccines, which were only designed to protect against the original, non-mutated, SARS-CoV-2. It provides only very limited — and diminishing — protection against current and future variants and loads your body down with even more dangerous spike proteins.
Every single one of the eight doctors and scientists on this panel discussion from October 2nd agrees: there is absolutely no logic in giving ‘booster’ doses of these vaccines.
I accidentally caught an item on BBC News on Monday November 1st, in which someone called Robert Reid, a smiley 60-something, was interviewed about these booster doses. I hastily scribbled down what he was saying, since this was one of the worst examples I’d ever come across of deception from the health ‘authorities’ in this country.
Amongst other things, we heard that Mr Reid had recently had the flu vaccination at the same time as his third dose of a Covid vaccine. Apparently this was fine, because “we now know it’s very safe to have both vaccines [together]”.
Who is this “we” that knows something which could only actually be ‘known’ after a long and extensive safety trial, to study interactions between all the flu vaccinations which are offered (normally more than 10, from different manufacturers) and all of the Covid vaccinations? And note that this mystical ‘we’ authority not only knows that this is ‘safe’, but that it’s “very safe”.
Further, that “now” is clearly intended to suggest that the ‘we’ entity has extensive data which was not available before, but is now.
In short, this is a barefaced lie.
But the lies continued to gush from Mr Reid’s mouth:
“the vaccines wane most rapidly in older people”
There are no studies that show this.
“[The booster dose] will make you virtually impregnable to [sic] hospitalisation”.
There is no data that even indicates this and it represents an absurd and emotionally manipulative technique to play on people’s fears.
He continued, telling us that the maximum effectiveness of the ‘booster’ dose was at six months after the second dose; having it before that date meant that it would be less effective. Presumably even a couple of days before would jeopardise its supposed ‘effectiveness’, then? And also presumably everyone’s body behaves identically, so that six months is a hard and fast rule? Again, there is no data which indicates that any of this is true.
Lastly, we were told:
“all vaccines do wane and this vaccine is just like all the others”
No it’s not, “this” (even that use of the singular is a deception) vaccine is completely different from a conventional viral vaccine in every way. He went on to compare it with the tetanus vaccine, telling us that, if we went to hospital with a wound which might have been infected, they would give us a ‘booster’ tetanus vaccination even though we were “immune to tetanus”.
No — this is simply not the case! I have personal experience of this — they asked me when I had last had a tetanus vaccine and I replied that it was probably in childhood, so they said that it was probably a good idea to have a booster vaccine then. That logic seemed sound to me, within their vaccination paradigm.
But notice the sly mendacity: we are being told that all vaccines confer long-term immunity, but that booster doses are still a good idea, even if you are immune. You can bet your life that, if I had told the hospital that I had had a tetanus vaccine six months ago, there is no way that they would have even considered bothering with another dose.
We can see multiple lies and deceptions here in the invalid comparison between the Covid vaccines and the tetanus vaccines: the idea that all vaccines confer life-long immunity, but this might ‘wane’ a bit over time; the implication that the Covid vaccines protect you from the SARS-CoV-2 virus, when we have seen that they don’t; the idea that we should be vaccinated against a virus even though we are immune to it.
And, on the FAQs page which I referred to above, the US FDA disagree with any ill-informed guesses by Mr Reid (or any other spokespeople who the BBC wheel out to reinforce their fanatical pro-vaccination propaganda drive) about length of protection:
“Q: How long will the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine provide protection?
“A: Data is not yet available to inform about the duration of protection that the vaccine will provide.”
Anyone who watches the BBC regularly, or consumes what passes for ‘news’ from any mainstream outlet, will have been consuming this diet of misinformation and lies multiple times a day for the past 18 months. It’s little wonder that there is such vitriol directed at those of us who are questioning the official narrative!
We can be absolutely certain that the ‘freedom’ which people have been sold as the benefit of being ‘double-jabbed’ (God, I hate that phrase) will slip through their fingers, like sand from a beach. Their semblance of freedom will become dependent on having had that ineffective and dangerous third dose, then a fourth, then a fifth, ad infinitum.
A Daily Mail article here from August 15th indicates that this is not a groundless fear:
“A Minister told the Mail on Sunday the ‘logical’ move will be to make the booster shots a requirement for travel, adding that the most up-to-date Covid certification for travel will become as normal as the need to have a yellow fever jab to enter certain countries.”
Note the slippery and absolutely outrageous comparison with the Yellow Fever vaccination, a conventional viral vaccine which is considered to provide lifelong protection.
And, in an article in the Telegraph on October 20th, the Health Secretary, Sajid Javid, states that:
“If we all play our part then we can give ourselves the best possible chance in this race, get through this winter, and enjoy Christmas with our loved ones …
“If not enough people get their booster jabs …if people don’t wear masks when they really should in a really crowded place with lots of people that they don’t normally hang out with, if they’re not washing their hands and stuff [sic], it’s going to hit us all.
“And it would of course make it more likely we’re going to have more restrictions.
“If we want to secure these freedoms for the long term, the best thing that we can do is come forward, once again [to have a third vaccination], when that moment comes.”
The government’s propaganda message was enhanced in the article by wheeling on Dame Kate Bingham, the former Chair of the UK Vaccines Taskforce and the main architect of the vaccine rollout in this country:
“… Dame Kate Bingham, the former vaccines tsar, urged older people to ‘bang on doors’ to get their top-up jab.
“Speaking at The Telegraph’s Women Mean Business event, she said: ‘I do think it’s important for those people who are vulnerable and at risk to get a booster, and the data is unequivocal.
“‘Older people and vulnerable people with diseases should be banging on the doors to get their boosters.’”
These statements positively ooze with arrogance: Ms Bingham is such a towering omniscient figure that she knows that there is “data” (exactly what data we are not told) which “unequivocally” backs up her oppressive authoritarian position. If such data exists, we can reasonably infer that it is, in reality, a computer model based on dubious assumptions and/or what amounts to little more than guesswork.
And we need to be very clear that every additional dose of one of these vaccines will cause the creation of even more of these dangerous spike proteins, causing blood clotting, systemic inflammation and immune system impairment.
It has become all too obvious that we now have an authoritarian command-and-control ‘health’ system, in which we are bullied and frightened into meekly accepting ineffective and extremely dangerous health interventions, all so that we can live our lives in this simulacrum of freedom, a ‘new normal’ which we must never accept as anything approaching normality.
The double vaccinated (only two doses — how selfish and irresponsible you are!) should certainly relish their ephemeral freedom whilst they can.
I — and all those who have seen through the deceptions inherent in this relentless propaganda campaign — would describe the widespread deployment of these substantially untested — and very dangerous — vaccines, to (supposedly) prevent a disease which is only a little more lethal than flu as shocking to the point of evil.
So what is their solution to the fact that their oh-so-wonderful vaccines now provide increasingly ineffective protection from contracting Covid-19?
Masks.
Yes, those dehumanising badges of fear, virtue signalling to everyone that the wearer cares so much about other people.
The cloth masks that everyone wears (including the omnipresent ones in that nasty washed-out pale blue colour) are surgical masks. Surgical masks are designed to do only two things:
1. Protect the patient under surgery from bacteria and viruses which might be transmitted by the surgical staff coughing or sneezing on the patient, dripping sweat, hair or skin flakes onto him/her or a runny nose dripping onto him/her, etc;
2. Protect the surgical staff from unexpected gushes of blood or other bodily fluids spurting in their faces.
Nothing more.
The predominant transmission of respiratory viruses is in the breath, which is termed ‘aerosol’ transmission, not via droplet transmission (coughs and sneezes), but viral particles are smaller than the holes in cloth masks, so these masks cannot and do not protect either the wearer or the mask or those people around him/her from viral transmission.
This is confirmed by trial data: worldwide, there have apparently only ever been 14 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the prevention of respiratory virus transmission by masks. Eleven of these found no benefit, or a worse outcome than no mask. The results of the remaining three trials showed statistically insignificant benefit.
RCTs are considered to be the ‘gold standard’ in medical research, mainly because specific variables can be isolated, thus reducing the potential for research bias. In contrast, mere observation studies are not robust or rigorous enough to provide satisfactory research data to back up the idea of mask wearing so, if anyone looking for themselves should be extremely wary of such studies and try to sniff out lack of rigour and/or inherent bias.
In addition, as we know, masks block proper respiration, thus reducing the oxygen which the wearer can breathe in and also cause, on the damp cloth, a build-up of viral and bacterial particles for the wearer and have other severe deleterious effects, as the author of a very recent scientific paper concluded:
“Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression. Long-term consequences of wearing facemask can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death.”
[source: “Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis” (Medical Hypotheses. 2021;146:110411. doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110411 — — https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/ ]
Oh dear, vaccinations don’t work and masks don’t work! And, with a supreme irony, both of these supposed ‘protections’ have adverse effects on your health. We are left with relying on our immune systems to protect us. Some of us know how to assist and boost our immune systems, but the vast majority of people don’t.
They rely on ‘our beloved NHS’ to protect them.
Disempowered and infantilised, they cower in fear, begging those arrogant, preening, self-regarding petty priests of our national religion to march in with white coats billowing behind them and save them from the spectre of disease. Shame on doctors for their stupidity and narrow-minded insistence that their way is the only way; that their ‘modern’ ‘evidence-based’ medicine is the only medicine with any validity.
And shame on all those politicians and health officials who have been relentlessly pushing vaccines and masks on their ill-informed and acquiescent populations. Their fear and vanity is destroying lives.
Not to forget the journalists, commentators and celebrities, those ignorant lapdogs gushing their support for this oppression onto our pages and screens.
Shame on the whole damned lot of them!
— — — — — — — — — — — — -
Appendix 1 — Beta Glucan
The regime for the Beta Glucan is to take 250mg three times a day for the preceding week before possible infection and for a week after exposure. This stimulates the immune system to prevent bacterial or viral infections taking hold. We take this on our month-long backpacking trips to India and other 3rd World countries and do not get ill (we also do not have vaccinations before travelling). I would tend to say that, if this simple supplement can protect us against the likes of Hepatitis A, Malaria and E-Coli, it can certainly protect anyone from contracting a simple respiratory virus! Here is a link to that product from a reputable supplier which we use — https://www.cytoplan.co.uk/immunovite
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —-