Why Crunchy Moms And Independent Doctors Are Now Aligning With The Political Right
Voters from both sides of the aisle have found common ground in resisting everything from mandated childhood vaccines to food additives.
A new peer-reviewed study in a Springer Nature Group journal has painted a damning picture of the global COVID-19 vaccination campaign along with the novel mRNA products at its core — vaccines millions of Americans were compelled to take if they wanted to keep their jobs, eat in public, stay in school, remain in uniform, or visit their loved ones.
According to the study, published on Jan. 24 in the PubMed-listed open access journal Cureus, standards were dropped, corners were cut, and red flags were missed in the testing, authorization, and ultimate deployment of the COVID-19 vaccines. The result: a product with an "unacceptable harm-to-reward ratio."
Extra to hinting at possible ulterior motives driving the decision to rush out the vaccines in a fraction of the time conventionally figured appropriate, epidemiologist M. Nathaniel Mead and his co-authors — including Texas cardiologist Peter McCullough — wrote that the vaccines "evaluated in the trials were not the same products eventually distributed worldwide."
Whereas the mRNA products from "clinical batches" in the registration trials were ostensibly free of process-related impurities, the doses made with "a method much more suitable for mass production known as Process 2 ... showed significantly reduced mRNA integrity," claimed the researchers.
"All of the COVID-19 mRNA products released to the public were produced via Process 2 and have been shown to have varying degrees of DNA contamination," said the study. "The failure of regulatory authorities to heretofore disclose process-related impurities (e.g., SV40) has further increased concerns regarding safety and quality control oversight of mRNA vaccine manufacturing processes."
Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo noted the detection of "Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter/enhancer DNA" in the vaccines in a Dec. 6 letter to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Peter Marks, director of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said in reply, "No SV40 proteins are encoded for or are present in the vaccines," and emphasized that the shots were safe and effective.
The European Medicines Agency, which regulates vaccines in the EU, indicated that "non-functional" fragments of SV40's DNA sequence are used in the manufacture of the COVID-19 vaccine, reported the Associated Press.
Pfizer indicated the SV40 sequence is commonly used in developing vaccines.
Regardless of whether elements of SV40 were specifically of any consequence, Mead and his coauthors underscored that the mRNA vaccines were not as advertised.
"Re-analysis of the Pfizer trial data identified statistically significant increases in serious adverse events (SAEs) in the vaccine group," wrote Mead and the other researchers. "Numerous SAEs were identified following the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), including death, cancer, cardiac events, and various autoimmune, hematological, reproductive, and neurological disorders."
According to the study's authors, many of these serious SAEs "have often been wrongly ascribed to COVID-19 rather than to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations."
"Misattributions of SAEs to COVID-19 often may be due to the amplification of adverse effects when mRNA injections are followed by SARS-CoV-2 subvariant infection," said the study. "Injuries from the mRNA products overlap with both [post-acute COVID-19 syndrome] and severe acute COVID-19 illness, often obscuring the vaccines' etiologic contributions."
The study suggested not only that the vaccines are likely responsible for a host of devastating side effects that have been conveniently blamed on the virus but also that boosters have actually had a paradoxical impact.
"Multiple booster injections appear to cause immune dysfunction, thereby paradoxically contributing to heightened susceptibility to COVID-19 infections with successive doses," wrote the researchers.
The researchers suggested further that the vaccines are perpetuating the emergence of new variants.
"Mass mRNA inoculations result in the natural selection of highly infectious immune-evading SARS coronavirus variants that successfully bypass vaccine-induced immunity, leading to a dramatic rise in the prevalence of these variants," said the study.
On the basis of their review, the researchers concluded that for most adults under the age of 50, "the perceived benefits of the mRNA boosters are profoundly outweighed by their potential disabling and life-threatening harms. Potential harms to older adults appear to be excessive as well."
In addition to calling for COVID-19 vaccines to be removed from the childhood immunization schedule along with the suspension of boosters, the researchers urged "governments to endorse and enforce a global moratorium on these modified mRNA products until all relevant questions pertaining to causality, residual DNA, and aberrant protein production are answered."
Regarding possible conflicts of interests, the authors indicated that no financial support was afforded them by any organization for the study.
Stephanie Seneff, one of the authors, nevertheless declared a grant from Quanta Computer Inc., a Taiwan-based computer manufacturer. Entrepreneur Steve Kirsch, another author, noted that he is the founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation but "receives no income from this entity." McCullough, who supervised the study, highlighted his employment and stock options from the Wellness Company.
McCullough was involved in another troubling study that was recently published.
His peer-reviewed study published last month in the pharmacotherapy journal Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety stressed that "COVID-19 vaccination is strongly associated with a serious adverse safety signal of myocarditis, particularly in children and young adults resulting in hospitalization and death."
"COVID-19 vaccines induce an uncontrolled expression of potentially lethal SARS-CoV-2 spike protein within human cells, have a close temporal relationship of events, and are internally and externally consistent with emerging sources of clinical and peer-reviewed data supporting the conclusion that COVID-19 vaccines are deterministic for myocarditis, including fatal cases," claimed the study.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
The U.S. government, the mainstream media, and so-called experts long downplayed the possibility of a link between heart inflammation and COVID-19 vaccines. Elements of the medical establishment and social media companies worked to shut up those who dared to press the issue.
Health officials and their stenographers in the media later admitted an elevated risk of myocarditis among mRNA COVID-19 vaccinees, especially among boys and young men. Despite belated advisories to this effect from the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, little changed in the way of the prevailing narrative: the supposed benefits of the vaccines outweighed the risks, which allegedly remained mild and rare.
A new peer-reviewed study published Saturday in the pharmacotherapy journal Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety has thrown some more cold water on that persistent narrative, indicating that "COVID-19 vaccination is strongly associated with a serious adverse safety signal of myocarditis, particularly in children and young adults resulting in hospitalization and death."
"COVID-19 vaccines induce an uncontrolled expression of potentially lethal SARS-CoV-2 spike protein within human cells, have a close temporal relationship of events, and are internally and externally consistent with emerging sources of clinical and peer-reviewed data supporting the conclusion that COVID-19 vaccines are deterministic for myocarditis, including fatal cases," the study claims.
The study is the result of an effort on the part of Texas cardiologist Peter McCullough, biologist Jessica Rose, and researcher Nicolas Hulscher to further explore links between COVID-19 vaccination and heart inflammation using the vaccine adverse events report system.
On the basis of data in VAERS — a system created and implemented by the FDA and CDC in 1990 — the researchers examined the frequency of myocarditis reports in the aftermath of COVID-19 vaccination and compared their findings with past reports from other vaccines that have been rolled out over the years.
The researchers found that upon the massive rollout of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, there was a significant spike in the number of myocarditis reports, "far higher than the reports from all other vaccines combined over the previous 30 years. This side effect was mostly reported in young individuals, especially males."
The spike represented a 2,500% increase in the "absolute number of reports in the first year of the campaign when comparing historical values prior to 2021."
Contrary to governmental claims of mildness, the study found that most of those who reported myocarditis required emergency medical care or hospitalization, and 92 individuals reportedly succumbed to the apparently vaccine-induced affliction.
The study highlighted that the COVID-19 vaccines, which were rushed through safety and efficacy trials inside a 10-month period as opposed the years-long process that novel genetic products customarily undergo, continue to be recommended to everyone 6 months of age and older. The researchers suggested this recommendation should be axed, at the very least for children.
"Children have a negligible risk for COVID-19, and yet they are a high-risk group for myocarditis from COVID-19 vaccination," wrote the researchers. "The World Health Organization's current vaccination advice states that healthy young people ages 6 months to 17 years are a 'low priority group' and that vaccinating this group has limited impact on public health."
The researchers stressed further in their paper that "myocarditis resulting in hospitalization and death attributable to the COVID-19 vaccines may be viewed as an excess risk of the injection program" because, despite claims to the contrary, the vaccines never stopped transmission and there "are no prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of COVID-19 injectable products demonstrating reductions in COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths as primary or secondary endpoints."
"We believe COVID-19 vaccination may pose more harm to children than theoretical benefit. This corroborates actions taken by Sweden, Norway, and Finland in 2021 when health officials suspended the use of Moderna injections in young people due to the detection of safety signals for an increased risk of myocarditis," added the researchers.
Europeans are not the only ones who have spared their children from the novel vaccines. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration has recommended against COVID-19 vaccination for children and young men since March 2022.
McCullough said of his study, "If vaccines cannot demonstrate acceptable safety profiles or be modified to improve safety, they must be removed from the market. Don't accept 'unavoidable harms' and freedom from liability for the manufacturers. These data demonstrate COVID-19 vaccines are not safe."
Dr. Jordan Peterson responded to the study on X, writing, "I think it's about time to lay some criminal charges." He added in a subsequent message, "This is utterly terrible."
Katy Faust, the head of the children's rights group Them Before Us, tweeted, "The pressure to vaccinate my teenagers was overwhelming. From schools, from doctors, from friends, from public establishments that shut them out. A pox on all the medical professionals who pushed this at the risk of children's lives and long-term health."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Drs. Peter McCullough and Robert Malone were reinstated to Twitter Monday night. Both had been kicked off the platform for allegedly spreading misinformation and for challenging the establishment narrative concerning pharmaceutical responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The restoration of their accounts, which some critics reportedly have suggested will cause harm, comes amid a campaign under the social media platform's new leadership to ostensibly foster and protect free speech — an initiative once called into question by one of the former Twitter exiles.
Robert Malone, a biochemist involved in the invention of the mRNA vaccine platform, had his account banned late last December for "violating [Twitter] policy on spreading misleading and potentially harmful information related to COVID-19."
Upon learning of his ban, Malone, branded a "Covid Misinformation Star" by the New York Times, wrote on his Substack, "We all knew it would happen eventually. Today it did."
"Over a half million followers gone in a blink of an eye. That means I must have been on the mark, so to speak. ... It also means we lost a critical component in our fight to stop these vaccines being mandated for children and to stop the corruption in our governments, as well as the medical-industrial complex and pharmaceutical industries," Malone added.
The ban took place ahead of Malone's appearance on the "Joe Rogan Experience," which was entered into the congressional record by Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) after both YouTube and Twitter removed the interview from their platforms.
Malone suggested to Rogan that he might have prompted the final censorial response when he referenced on Twitter a "fantastic video" put out by the Canadian COVID Care Alliance group detailing alleged "malfeasance and data manipulations, misinterpretations associated with the Pfizer vaccines and their clinical trials," which he conceded may have been "interpreted as something that would cause people to become vaccine hesitant."
Cardiologist Peter McCullough is the former vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center, an author of roughly 677 medical publications in peer-reviewed journals, one of the world's most cited medical experts, and a medical practitioner who treated COVID-19 patients. He had his account permanently suspended on Oct. 6.
At the time, McCullough told the Falun Gong-run broadcaster NTD, "This is just another example of medical censorship by Big Tech on doctors who have the freedom, according to the First Amendment, to express their scientific views through freedom of speech."
Their reinstatements come after Twitter dissolved its Trust and Safety Council, first formed in 2016.
In his first tweet after reinstatement, McCullough wrote, "Alright everyone, I am back on Twitter! Let's see my verification and completely uncensored, no unfollow programs, no bots assigned to me, and absolutely no shadow-banning. Let the world hear the medical truth (98% want it) on the pandemic and more!"
McCullough proceeded to promote his socials and note that if Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who visited Twitter's headquarters on Saturday, had something to do with his "release" then he is "indebted."
After calling for other silenced medical professionals to be permitted back on Twitter, the cardiologist went on to tweet, "Since Twitter struck me down, I have come back even more powerful, more than @elonmusk can ever know! Let's join forces to break the psychological-pathological spell of the bio-pharmaceutical complex and get the world back on its axis!"
\u201cSince Twitter struck me down, I have come back even more powerful, more than @elonmusk can ever know! Let's join forces to break the psychological-pathological spell of the bio-pharmaceutical complex and get the world back on its axis!\u201d— Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH\u2122 (@Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH\u2122) 1670942451
Upon his return, Malone similarly called for the restoration of other suspended doctors' accounts.
After retweeting a post accusing Dr. Anthony Fauci of causing "more harm to humanity than any other scientist in history," the biochemist also responded to critiques of his reinstatement, writing, "Well, there are still the usual Twitter trolls tossing old corporate media hit pieces and snark at me. What they do not know is that our lawsuit against the WaPo is progressing, and we are biding our time for many others including the Atlantic and the NYT. Truth is like a lion."
\u201cWell, there are still the usual Twitter trolls tossing old corporate media hit pieces and snark at me. What they do not know is that our lawsuit against the WaPo is progressing, and we are biding our time for many others including the Atlantic and the NYT. Truth is like a lion.\u201d— Robert W Malone, MD (@Robert W Malone, MD) 1670942115
It is unclear whether Malone's reinstatement will affect his previous distrust for Twitter CEO Elon Musk.
Malone penned an opinion piece for LifeSite in October, suggesting that Elon Musk does not really care "about scientists' and conservatives' ability to interact on the social media app."
The biochemist accused Musk of seeking to "bring social media, banking, auto loans, Amazon type buying, insurance, paying loans and utility bills, medical insurance, service estimates, you name it, under the umbrella of Twitter. Everything you do, buy, or need could be bought on the Twitterverse. This is about power and money."