PROPAGANDA 21 [Nº2] a realidade conveniente e a gestão da perceção

Dois exemplos de manipulação da perceção: 

1/ Os pais de crianças com mais de dois anos são, agora, obrigados a aceitar que no jardim de infância, suas filhas e filhos usem máscara. Sabe-se que as crianças - sobretudo as pequenas - precisam muito de uma interação entre si e com os adultos, que passa pelas expressões do rosto. É também conhecido o efeito, na oxigenação do cérebro, de estar-se longas horas com a máscara colocada. A associação médica pediátrica americana, teve inicialmente uma posição de rejeição do uso de máscara pelas crianças pequenas, tanto mais que elas não são suscetíveis de apanhar covid, têm uma forte proteção natural, nem de serem transmissoras assintomáticas (como foi demonstrado por vários estudos, a ideia de transmissão assintomática é simplesmente falsa). 

Mas, subitamente a associação passou a advogar uso de máscara para crianças acima dos dois anos. Então qual é a causa da mudança brusca, da viragem de 180º? A resposta está na página dos «sponsors» da referida associação. Em destacado lugar vem a Pfizer. Vejam a notícia AQUI.

 

------------------------------

2/ Um célebre e respeitado patologista holandês, Frank van der Goot está convicto que os números de óbitos relacionados com Covid estão incorretos. A razão é que os médicos que passam as certidões de óbito quase nunca o fazem com base numa autópsia. Eles apenas preenchem o formulário e têm de registar uma cadeia de causalidade que, na prática, corresponde a perjúrio. De facto, assinam uma certidão das pessoas como tendo sido falecidas do Covid, quando apenas terão um teste PCR que indica positivo. Ora, este meio não é diagnóstico, isso está mais que provado.

(ver link, com tradução* em inglês, se necessário https://www.blckbx.tv/videos/patholoog-spreekt-zich-uit-dodencijfers-rivm-kloppen-niet).

Tal como este médico neerlandês, os médicos de toda a Europa poderão constatar que também é assim em todos os países da UE. Com efeito, nestes países, uma normativa emitida pelas entidades de coordenação sanitária ao nível da EU, estipula que os médicos legistas deverão colocar como causa imediata de morte Covid, se um paciente possuía um teste positivo, até 28 dias antes do óbito. Ora, existem muitas razões para suspeitar das «mortes por covid»:

a) Segundo relatório de médicos italianos (que fizeram autópsias, apesar de «desaconselhadas» pela OMS) era superior a 90% a existência de co-morbilidades (uma, duas ou mais doenças, ao mesmo tempo que a infeção com coronavírus). Mais pessoas morreram com coronavirus do que de coronavírus, segundo eles.

b) O teste de PCR, tal como foi inicialmente usado com 35 (ou mais) ciclos foi considerado pela própria OMS, mais tarde, como inapropriado, por permitir um número demasiado elevado de falsos positivos (ou seja, pessoas que não tinham realmente coronavírus, mas o teste dizia que sim), sendo agora proposto para este teste um número muito menor (25 ciclos).

c) A forma como os médicos foram forçados a preencher as certidões de óbito tornava completamente irrisória a validade destas. Os médicos foram instruídos pelas autoridades de saúde, nos vários países da Europa, a declararem um doente «morto de Covid», com um teste positivo ou até com sintomas muito vagos e que podiam ser de uma pneumonia, de uma gripe, etc. Isto pode ser comprovado pelo protesto da Associação de Médicos Clínicos Britânicos, que denunciou esta grosseira ingerência nas competências individuais dos médicos, por parte dos burocratas da saúde e do governo. Outros protestos de organismos médicos poderão ter existido noutros países europeus.

d) Após a introdução das vacinas, as ordens modificaram-se, de tal maneira que houve uma descida «administrativa» das mortes por Covid (supostamente) logo a seguir a esta introdução. Isto tinha o objetivo de fazer com que as pessoas aceitassem que a campanha de vacinação estava a trazer frutos imediatos. Só que que, primeiro, as pessoas não se infetam e imediatamente morrem; o processo leva tempo; a taxa de morbilidade e de mortalidade não deveria, em situação normal, baixar tão cedo e tão repentinamente.

 Então, o que sucedeu? As modalidades de deteção do Covid com teste PRC tornaram-se muito mais «sensatas»; muitas pessoas - que antes teriam tido um teste (falsamente) positivo - passaram a teste negativo. Por outro lado, o número (real) de pacientes com Covid nos hospitais nunca foi tão elevado como nos quiseram fazer crer, nunca houve risco de avalanche nas urgências com doentes de Covid. 

Finalmente, tal como os positivos saudáveis (falsos positivos) desapareceram, também os testes a doentes hospitalizados acusando presença de SAR-Cov-2, diminuíram na mesma proporção, ou seja, tornaram-se mais próximos da realidade. O preenchimento das certidões de óbito, já não iria dar -tão frequentemente - como causa de morte «covid», visto muitos mais testes serem negativos. Eis como se deu a mágica e súbita descida da morbilidade e mortandade por «covid» na UE. Tudo isto, devido às vacinas, ao efeito mágico, milagroso das vacinas! 

Portanto, a manipulação das estatísticas, a indução duma psicose de medo, a falsificação dos testes de deteção, a indução (pelos burocratas) à fraude nas certidões de óbito, são factos suficientemente estabelecidos, por inúmeros testemunhos e pelas próprias estatísticas oficiais, que não deixam margem para dúvida; existe um enorme número de indícios («smoking guns»), apesar das manobras de ocultação.

--------------------------

*Pathologist speaks out; "Death figures RIVM are not correct!"

Doctor and Pathologist Frank van der Goot is convinced; “I am not impressed by the figures that Statistics Netherlands and RIVM communicate. The Covid-19 death figures are also incorrect. Simply because there are hardly any autopsies in the Netherlands and therefore the cause of death by the doctor is highly careless. After all, you cannot determine the cause of death from the outside and that makes the registration a legal obligation for perjury”.

Strong language but Dr. Van der Goot substantiates his views well. “Physicians are, of course, loyal and have to fill in something on the A / B form and then associate by recording the chain of causality. They do this in good faith, but at the same time they also know that they are not sure. From a legal point of view, that makes it perjury and puts doctors in an ethical dilemma.”

Pathologist Frank van der Goot, together with program maker Flavio Pasquino, goes through a video from CBS, which explains how the cause of death is determined. The case used in the video is already debatable and makes for a fascinating conversation about causality and underlying suffering. In the corona crisis this is super relevant because the number of Covid-19 deaths is of great importance to determine the IFR, the Infection Fatality Rate. How many people actually die after infection? But what if the people who died are mislabeled and died of something else?

dr. Frank van der Goot is no stranger to TV. For example, he made an NPO series "Doden Liegen Niet" about determining the cause of death, where he - just like in this broadcast - argued and even showed that the cause of death is often incorrect.

Van der Goot is in both Clinical and Forensic Pathologist and is affiliated with the National Forensic Research Office . He also works in a hospital where he mainly researches biopsies and does not so much perform autopsies.

APELO DE 57 CIENTISTAS E MÉDICOS: QUESTÕES URGENTES ÀS AUTORIDADES SANITÁRIAS E GOVERNOS

  A MAIOR PARTE DAS PESSOAS LIMITA-SE A SEGUIR AS ORDENS DOS SEUS GOVERNOS. Mas estes cientistas e médicos de renome não fizeram isso; antes levantam uma série de questões que têm sido sonegadas ao grande público e que obrigam os órgãos de poder e de gestão da saúde a tomar uma posição. 

Já não poderão - nem eles nem ninguém, daqui por diante - dizer «não sabíamos.»

É favor divulgar amplamente este apelo/carta aberta.

...............................

Original Source: Authorea

SARS-CoV-2 mass vaccination: Urgent questions on vaccine safety that demand answers from international health agencies, regulatory authorities, governments and vaccine developers

Abstract

Since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, the race for testing new platforms designed to confer immunity against SARS-CoV-2, has been rampant and unprecedented, leading to emergency authorization of various vaccines. Despite progress on early multidrug therapy for COVID-19 patients, the current mandate is to immunize the world population as quickly as possible. The lack of thorough testing in animals prior to clinical trials, and authorization based on safety data generated during trials that lasted less than 3.5 months, raise questions regarding the safety of these vaccines. The recently identified role of SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein Spike for inducing endothelial damage characteristic of COVID-19, even in absence of infection, is extremely relevant given that most of the authorized vaccines induce the production of Spike glycoprotein in the recipients. Given the high rate of occurrence of adverse effects, and the wide range of types of adverse effects that have been reported to date, as well as the potential for vaccine-driven disease enhancement, Th2-immunopathology, autoimmunity, and immune evasion, there is a need for a better understanding of the benefits and risks of mass vaccination, particularly in the groups that were excluded in the clinical trials. Despite calls for caution, the risks of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination have been minimized or ignored by health organizations and government authorities. We appeal to the need for a pluralistic dialogue in the context of health policies, emphasizing critical questions that require urgent answers if we wish to avoid a global erosion of public confidence in science and public health.

Introduction

Since COVID-19 was declared a pandemic in March 2020, over 150 million cases and 3 million deaths have been reported worldwide. Despite progress on early ambulatory, multidrug-therapy for high-risk patients, resulting in 85% reductions in COVID-19 hospitalization and death [1], the current paradigm for control is mass-vaccination. While we recognize the effort involved in development, production and emergency authorization of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, we are concerned that risks have been minimized or ignored by health organizations and government authorities, despite calls for caution [2-8].

Vaccines for other coronaviruses have never been approved for humans, and data generated in the development of coronavirus vaccines designed to elicit neutralizing antibodies show that they may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) and Th2 immunopathology, regardless of the vaccine platform and delivery method [9-11]. Vaccine-driven disease enhancement in animals vaccinated against SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV is known to occur following viral challenge, and has been attributed to immune complexes and Fc-mediated viral capture by macrophages, which augment T-cell activation and inflammation [11-13].

In March 2020, vaccine immunologists and coronavirus experts assessed SARS-CoV-2 vaccine risks based on SARS-CoV-vaccine trials in animal models. The expert group concluded that ADE and immunopathology were a real concern, but stated that their risk was insufficient to delay clinical trials, although continued monitoring would be necessary [14]. While there is no clear evidence of the occurrence of ADE and vaccine-related immunopathology in volunteers immunized with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines [15], safety trials to date have not specifically addressed these serious adverse effects (SAE). Given that the follow-up of volunteers did not exceed 2-3.5 months after the second dose [16-19], it is unlikely such SAE would have been observed. Despite92 errors in reporting, it cannot be ignored that even accounting for the number of vaccines administered, according to the US Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System (VAERS), the number of deaths per million vaccine doses administered has increased more than 10-fold. We believe there is an urgent need for open scientific dialogue on vaccine safety in the context of large-scale immunization. In this paper, we describe some of the risks of mass vaccination in the context of phase 3 trial exclusion criteria and discuss the SAE reported in national and regional adverse effect registration systems. We highlight unanswered questions and draw attention to the need for a more cautious approach to mass vaccination.

SARS-CoV-2 phase 3 trial exclusion criteria

With few exceptions, SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials excluded the elderly [16-19], making it impossible to identify the occurrence of post-vaccination eosinophilia and enhanced inflammation in elderly people. Studies of SARS-CoV vaccines showed that immunized elderly mice were at particularly high risk of life-threatening Th2 immunopathology [9,20]. Despite this evidence and the extremely limited data on safety and efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the elderly, mass-vaccination campaigns have focused on this age group from the start. Most trials also excluded pregnant and lactating volunteers, as well as those with chronic and serious conditions such as tuberculosis, hepatitis C, autoimmunity, coagulopathies, cancer, and immune suppression [16-29], although these recipients are now being offered the vaccine under the premise of safety.

Another criterion for exclusion from nearly all trials was prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2. This is unfortunate as it denied the opportunity of obtaining extremely relevant information concerning post-vaccination ADE in people that already have anti-SARS-Cov-2 antibodies. To the best of our knowledge, ADE is not being monitored systematically for any age or medical condition group currently being administered the vaccine. Moreover, despite a substantial proportion of the population already having antibodies [21], tests to determine SARS-CoV-2-antibody status prior to administration of the vaccine are not conducted routinely.

Will serious adverse effects from the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines go unnoticed?

COVID-19 encompasses a wide clinical spectrum, ranging from very mild to severe pulmonary pathology and fatal multi-organ disease with inflammatory, cardiovascular, and blood coagulation dysregulation [22-24]. In this sense, cases of vaccine-related ADE or immunopathology would be clinically-indistinguishable from severe COVID-19 [25]. Furthermore, even in the absence of SARS-CoV-2 virus, Spike glycoprotein alone causes endothelial damage and hypertension in vitro and in vivo in Syrian hamsters by down-regulating angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and impairing mitochondrial function [26]. Although these findings need to be confirmed in humans, the implications of this finding are staggering, as all vaccines authorized for emergency use are based on the delivery or induction of Spike glycoprotein synthesis. In the case of mRNA vaccines and adenovirus-vectorized vaccines, not a single study has examined the duration of Spike production in humans following vaccination. Under the cautionary principle, it is parsimonious to consider vaccine-induced Spike synthesis could cause clinical signs of severe COVID-19, and erroneously be counted as new cases of SARS-CoV-2 infections. If so, the true adverse effects of the current global vaccination strategy may never be recognized unless studies specifically examine this question. There is already non-causal evidence of temporary or sustained increases138 in COVID-19 deaths following vaccination in some countries (Fig. 1) and in light of Spike’s pathogenicity, these deaths must be studied in depth to determine whether they are related to vaccination.

Unanticipated adverse reactions to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines

Another critical issue to consider given the global scale of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is autoimmunity. SARS-CoV-2 has numerous immunogenic proteins, and all but one of its immunogenic epitopes have similarities to human proteins [27]. These may act as a source of antigens, leading to autoimmunity [28]. While it is true that the same effects could be observed during natural infection with SARS-CoV-2, vaccination is intended for most of the world population, while it is estimated that only 10% of the world population has been infected by SARS-CoV-2, according to Dr. Michael Ryan, head of emergencies at the World Health Organization. We have been unable to find evidence that any of the currently authorized vaccines screened and excluded homologous immunogenic epitopes to avoid potential autoimmunity due to pathogenic priming.

Some adverse reactions, including blood-clotting disorders, have already been reported in healthy and young vaccinated people. These cases led to the suspension or cancellation of the use of adenoviral vectorized ChAdOx1-nCov-19 and Janssen vaccinesin some countries. It has now been proposed that vaccination with ChAdOx1-nCov-19 can result in immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) mediated by platelet-activating antibodies against Platelet factor-4, which clinically mimics autoimmune heparin-induced thrombocytopenia [29]. Unfortunately, the risk was overlooked when authorizing these vaccines, although adenovirus-induced thrombocytopenia has been known for more than a decade, and has been a consistent event with adenoviral vectors [30]. The risk of VITT would presumably be higher in those already at risk of blood clots, including women who use oral contraceptives [31], making it imperative for clinicians to advise their patients accordingly.

At the population level, there could also be vaccine-related impacts. SARS-CoV-2 is a fast-evolving RNA virus that has so far produced more than 40,000 variants [32,33] some of which affect the antigenic domain of Spike glycoprotein [34,35]. Given the high mutation rates, vaccine-induced synthesis of high levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike antibodies could theoretically lead to suboptimal responses against subsequent infections by other variants in vaccinated individuals [36], a phenomenon known as “original antigenic sin” [37] or antigenic priming [38]. It is unknown to what extent mutations that affect SARS-CoV-2 antigenicity will become fixed during viral evolution [39], but vaccines could plausibly act as selective forces driving variants with higher infectivity or transmissibility. Considering the high similarity between known SARS-CoV-2 variants, this scenario is unlikely [32,34] but if future variants were to differ more in key epitopes, the global vaccination strategy might have helped shape an even more dangerous virus. This risk has recently been brought to the attention of the WHO as an open letter [40].

Discussion

The risks outlined here are a major obstacle to continuing global SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Evidence on the safety of all SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is needed before exposing more people to the184 risk of these experiments, since releasing a candidate vaccine without time to fully understand the resulting impact on health could lead to an exacerbation of the current global crisis [41]. Risk-stratification of vaccine recipients is essential. According to the UK government, people below 60 years of age have an extremely low risk of dying from COVID-191 187 . However, according to Eudravigillance, most of the serious adverse effects following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination occur in people aged 18-64. Of particular concern is the planned vaccination schedule for children aged 6 years and older in the United States and the UK. Dr. Anthony Fauci recently anticipated that teenagers across the country will be vaccinated in the autumn and younger children in early 2022, and the UK is awaiting trial results to commence vaccination of 11 million children under 18. There is a lack of scientific justification for subjecting healthy children to experimental vaccines, given that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that they have a 99.997% survival rate if infected with SARS-CoV-2. Not only is COVID-19 irrelevant as a threat to this age group, but there is no reliable evidence to support vaccine efficacy or effectiveness in this population or to rule out harmful side effects of these experimental vaccines. In this sense, when physicians advise patients on the elective administration of COVID-19 vaccination, there is a great need to better understand the benefits and risk of administration, particularly in understudied groups.

In conclusion, in the context of the rushed emergency-use-authorization of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and the current gaps in our understanding of their safety, the following questions must be raised:

• Is it known whether cross-reactive antibodies from previous coronavirus infections or vaccine206 induced antibodies may influence the risk of unintended pathogenesis following vaccination with COVID-19?
• Has the specific risk of ADE, immunopathology, autoimmunity, and serious adverse reactions been clearly disclosed to vaccine recipients to meet the medical ethics standard of patient understanding for informed consent? If not, what are the reasons, and how could it be implemented?
• What is the rationale for administering the vaccine to every individual when the risk of dying from COVID-19 is not equal across age groups and clinical conditions and when the phase 3 trials excluded the elderly, children and frequent specific conditions?
• What are the legal rights of patients if they are harmed by a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine? Who will cover the costs of medical treatment? If claims were to be settled with public money, has the public been made aware that the vaccine manufacturers have been granted immunity, and their responsibility to compensate those harmed by the vaccine has been transferred to the tax-payers?

In the context of these concerns, we propose halting mass-vaccination and opening an urgent pluralistic, critical, and scientifically-based dialogue on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among scientists, medical doctors, international health agencies, regulatory authorities, governments, and vaccine developers. This is the only way to bridge the current gap between scientific evidence and public health policy regarding the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. We are convinced that humanity deserves a deeper understanding of the risks than what is currently touted as the official position. An open scientific dialogue is urgent and indispensable to avoid erosion of public confidence in science and public health and to ensure that the WHO and national health authorities protect the interests of humanity during the current pandemic. Returning public health policy to evidence-based medicine, relying on a careful evaluation of the relevant scientific research, is urgent. It is imperative to follow the science.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Notes on Authors

1Epidemiólogos Argentinos Metadisciplinarios. República Argentina.

2Baylor University Medical Center. Dallas, Texas, USA.

3Monestir de Sant Benet de Montserrat, Montserrat, Spain

4INSERM U781 Hôpital Necker-Enfants Malades, Université Paris Descartes-Sorbonne Cité, Institut Imagine, Paris, France.

5School of Natural Sciences. Autonomous University of Querétaro, Querétaro, Mexico.

6Retired Professor of Medical Immunology. Universidad de Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico.

7Médicos por la Verdad Puerto Rico. Ashford Medical Center. San Juan, Puerto Rico.

8Retired Professor of Clinical Diagnostic Processes. University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain

9Urologist Hospital Comarcal de Monforte, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

10Biólogos por la Verdad, Spain.

11Retired Biologist. University of Barcelona. Specialized in Microbiology. Barcelona, Spain.

12Center for Integrative Medicine MICAEL (Medicina Integrativa Centro Antroposófico Educando en Libertad). Mendoza, República Argentina.

13Médicos por la Verdad Argentina. República Argentina. ´

14Médicos por la Verdad Uruguay. República Oriental del Uruguay.

15Médicos por la Libertad Chile. República de Chile.

16Physician, orthopedic specialist. República de Chile.

17Médicos por la Verdad Perú. República del Perú.

18Médicos por la Verdad Guatemala. República de Guatemala.

19Concepto Azul S.A. Ecuador.

20Médicos por la Verdad Brasil. Brasil.

21Médicos por la Verdad Paraguay.

22Médicos por la Costa Rica.

23Médicos por la Verdad Bolivia.

24Médicos por la Verdad El Salvador.

25Correspondence: Karina Acevedo-Whitehouse, karina.acevedo.whitehouse@uaq.mx

Sources

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-reported-sars-cov-2-deaths-in-england/covid-19-confirmed-deaths-in-england-report

Notes

1. McCullough PA, Alexander PE, Armstrong R, et al. Multifaceted highly targeted sequential multidrug treatment of early ambulatory high-risk SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19). Rev Cardiovasc Med (2020) 21:517–530. doi:10.31083/j.rcm.2020.04.264
2. Arvin AM, Fink K, Schmid MA, et al. A perspective on potential antibody- dependent enhancement of SARS-CoV-2. Nature (2020) 484:353–363. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2538-8
3. Coish JM, MacNeil AJ. Out of the frying pan and into the fire? Due diligence warranted for ADE in COVID-19. Microbes Infect (2020) 22(9):405-406. doi:10.1016/j.micinf.2020.06.006
4. Eroshenko N, Gill T, Keaveney ML, et al. Implications of antibody-dependent enhancement of infection for SARS-CoV-2 countermeasures. Nature Biotechnol (2020) 38:788–797. doi:10.1038/s41587-020-0577-1
5. Poland GA. Tortoises, hares, and vaccines: A cautionary note for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development. Vaccine (2020) 38:4219–4220. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.04.073
6. Shibo J. Don’t rush to deploy COVID-19 vaccines and drugs without sufficient safety guarantees. Nature (2000) 579,321. doi:10.1038/d41586-020-00751-9
7. Munoz FA, Cramer JP, Dekker CL, et al. Vaccine-associated enhanced disease: Case definition and guidelines for data collection, analysis, and presentation of immunization safety data. Vaccine (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.01.055
8. Cardozo T, Veazey R. Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID-19 vaccines worsening clinical disease. Int J Clin Pract (2020) 28:e13795. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.13795
9. Bolles D, Long K, Adnihothram S, et al. A double-inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus vaccine provides incomplete protection in mice and induces increased eosinophilic proinflammatory pulmonary response upon challenge. J Virol (2001) 85:12201–12215. doi:10.1128/JVI.06048-11
10. Weingartl H, Czub M, Czub S, et al. Immunization with modified vaccinia virus Ankarabased recombinant vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome is associated with enhanced hepatitis in ferrets. J Virol (2004) 78:12672–12676. doi:10.1128/JVI.78.22.12672-12676.2004272
11. Tseng CT, Sbrana E, Iwata-Yoshikawa N, et al. Immunization with SARS coronavirus vaccines leads to pulmonary immunopathology on challenge with the SARS virus. PLoS One (2012) 7(4):e35421. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0035421
12. Iwasaki A, Yang Y. The potential danger of suboptimal antibody responses in COVID-19. Nat Rev Immunol (2020) 20:339–341. doi:10.1038/s41577-020-0321-6
13. Vennema H, de Groot RJ, Harbour DA, et al. Early death after feline infectious peritonitis virus challenge due to recombinant vaccinia virus immunization. J Virol (1990) 64:1407-1409
14. Lambert PH, Ambrosino DM, Andersen SR, et al. Consensus summary report for CEPI/BC March 12-13, 2020 meeting: Assessment of risk of disease enhancement with COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccine (2020) 38(31):4783-4791. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.05.064
15. de Alwis R, Chen S, Gan S, et al. Impact of immune enhancement on Covid-19 polyclonal hyperimmune globulin therapy and vaccine development. EbioMedicine (2020) 55:102768. doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.102768
16. Folegatti PM, Ewer KJ, Aley PK, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV287 19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2: a preliminary report of a phase 1/2, single-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet (2020) 396:467–783. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31604-4
17. Polack FP, Thomas SJ, Kitchin N. Safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine. N Engl J Med (2020) 383:2603–2615. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
18. Ramasamy MN, Minassian AM, Ewer KJ, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine administered in a prime-boost regimen in young and old adults (COV002): a single-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial. Lancet (2021) 396:1979–93. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32466-1
19. Chu L, McPhee R, Huang W, et al. mRNA-1273 Study Group. A preliminary report of a randomized controlled phase 2 trial of the safety and immunogenicity of mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Vaccine (2021) S0264-410X(21)00153-5. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.02.007
20. Liu L, Wei Q, Lin Q, et al. Anti-spike IgG causes severe acute lung injury by skewing macrophage responses during acute SARS-CoV infection. JCI Insight (2019) 4(4):e123158. doi:10.1172/jci.insight.123158.
21. Ioannidis PA. Infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data. Bull WHO (2021) 99:19–33F. http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.20.265892
22. Martines RB, Ritter JM, Matkovic E, et al. Pathology and Pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 Associated with Fatal Coronavirus Disease, United States Emerg Infect Dis (2020) 26:2005-2015. doi:10.3201/eid2609.202095
23. Wu Z, McGoogan JM. Characteristics of and Important Lessons From the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak in China: Summary of a Report of 72 314 Cases From the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. JAMA (2020) 323:1239-1242. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.2648
24. Xu Z, Shi L, Wang Y, et al. Pathological findings of COVID-19 associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Lancet Respiratory Med (2020) 8:420-422 doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30076-X
25. Negro F. Is antibody-dependent enhancement playing a role in COVID-19 pathogenesis? Swiss Medical Weekly (2020) 150:w20249. doi:10.4414/smw.2020.20249317
26. Lei Y, Zhang J, Schiavon CR et al., Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE 2. Circulation Res (2021) 128:1323–1326. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.318902
27. Lyons-Weiler J. Pathogenic priming likely contributes to serious and critical illness and mortality in COVID-19 via autoimmunity, J Translational Autoimmunity (2020) 3:100051. doi:10.1016/j.jtauto.2020.100051
28. An H, Park J. Molecular Mimicry Map (3M) of SARS-CoV-2: Prediction of potentially immunopathogenic SARS-CoV-2 epitopes via a novel immunoinformatic approach. bioRxiv [Preprint]. 12 November 2020 [cited 2020 April 19] https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.12.344424
29. Greinacher A, Thiele T, Warkentin TE, Weisser K, Kyrle PA, Eichinger S. Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1 nCov-19 Vaccination. N Engl J Med (2021). doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2104840
30. Othman M, Labelle A, Mazzetti I et al. Adenovirus-induced thrombocytopenia: the role of von Willebrand factor and P-selectin in mediating accelerated platelet clearance. Blood (2007) 109:2832–2839. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-06-032524
31. Ortel TL. Acquired thrombotic risk factors in the critical care setting. Crit Care Med (2010) 38(2 Suppl):S43-50. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181c9ccc8
32. Grubaugh ND, Petrone ME, Holmes EC. We shouldn’t worry when a virus mutates during disease outbreaks. Nat Microbiol (2020) 5:529–530. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-020-0690-4
33. Greaney AJ, Starr TN, Gilchuk P, et al. Complete Mapping of Mutations to the SARS-CoV339 2 Spike Receptor-Binding Domain that Escape Antibody Recognition. Cell Host Microbe (2021) 29:44–57.e9. doi:10.1016/j.chom.2020.11.007.
34. Lauring AS, Hodcroft EB. Genetic Variants of SARS-CoV-2—What Do They Mean? JAMA (2021) 325:529–531. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.27124
35. Zhang L, Jackson CB, Mou H, et al. The D614G mutation in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein reduces S1 shedding and increases infectivity. bioRxiv [Preprint]. June 12 2020 [cited 2021 Apr 19] https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.12.148726
36. Korber B, Fischer WM, Gnanakaran S et al. Sheffield COVID-19 Genomics Group. Tracking changes in SARS-CoV-2 spike: evidence that D614G increases infectivity of the COVID-19 virus. Cell (2020) 182:812-827.e19. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2020.06.043
37. Francis T. On the doctrine of original antigenic sin. Proc Am Philos Soc (1960) 104:572–578.
38. Vibroud C, Epstein SL. First flu is forever. Science (2016) 354:706–707. doi:10.1126/science.aak9816
39. Weisblum Y, Schmidt F, Zhang F, et al. Escape from neutralizing antibodies by SARS354 CoV-2 spike protein variants. Elife (2020) 9:e61312. doi:10.7554/eLife.61312
40. Vanden Bossche G (March 6, 2021) https://dryburgh.com/wp-356content/uploads/2021/03/Geert_Vanden_Bossche_Open_Letter_WHO_March_6_2021.pdf
41. Coish JM, MacNeil AJ. Out of the frying pan and into the fire? Due diligence warranted for ADE in COVID-19. Microbes Infect (2020) 22(9):405-406. doi:10.1016/j.micinf.2020.06.006

Declaração Global COVID Summit Representando 17.000 Médicos e Cientistas Médicos

Por Dr. Robert Malone

Uma declaração conjunta*, representando 17.000 médicos e cientistas médicos para acabar com a emergência nacional, restaurar a integridade científica e abordar crimes contra a humanidade

A hora é agora. Como a maioria dos leitores já sabe, não se trata apenas do COVID. A constituição está na balança. Por favor, ajude-nos a espalhar essas mensagens por toda parte. Os 17.000 médicos e cientistas médicos em nossa organização, que não estão em conflito financeiro e permanecem comprometidos com o Juramento de Hipócrates, estão fazendo a sua parte. Agora, pedimos que você nos ajude a ajudá-lo. Nós precisamos da sua ajuda.

Cimeira Global COVID, Declaração IV

Uma Declaração Conjunta, representando 17.000 Médicos e Cientistas Médicos 

Para restaurar a integridade científica

17.000 médicos e cientistas médicos declaram que o estado de emergência médica deve ser levantado , a integridade científica restaurada e os crimes contra a humanidade abordados.

Nós, os médicos e cientistas médicos do mundo , unidos por nossa lealdade ao Juramento de Hipócrates, reconhecemos que as desastrosas políticas de saúde pública COVID-19 impostas aos médicos e nossos pacientes são o culminar de uma aliança médica corrupta de farmacêuticos, seguros e instituições de saúde, juntamente com os fundos financeiros que os controlam. Eles se infiltraram em nosso sistema médico em todos os níveis e são protegidos e apoiados por uma aliança paralela de grandes empresas de tecnologia, mídia, acadêmicos e agências governamentais que lucraram com essa catástrofe orquestrada.

Essa aliança corrupta comprometeu a integridade de nossas sociedades médicas de maior prestígio às quais pertencemos, gerando uma ilusão de consenso científico ao substituir a verdade pela propaganda. Essa aliança continua a promover alegações não científicas censurando dados e intimidando e demitindo médicos e cientistas por simplesmente publicar resultados clínicos reais ou tratar seus pacientes com medicamentos comprovados que salvam vidas. Essas decisões catastróficas ocorreram às custas dos inocentes, que são forçados a sofrer danos à saúde e morte causados ​​pela retenção intencional de tratamentos críticos e urgentes, ou como resultado de injeções de terapia genética coagidas, que não são seguras nem eficazes.

A comunidade médica negou aos pacientes o direito humano fundamental de fornecer consentimento informado verdadeiro para as injeções experimentais de COVID-19 . Nossos pacientes também estão impedidos de obter as informações necessárias para entender os riscos e benefícios das vacinas e suas alternativas, devido à ampla censura e propaganda espalhada por governos, autoridades de saúde pública e mídia. Os pacientes continuam a ser submetidos a confinamentos forçados que prejudicam a sua saúde, carreira e educação dos filhos e prejudicam os laços sociais e familiares críticos para a sociedade civil. Isto não é uma coincidência. No livro intitulado “COVID-19: The Great Reset”, a liderança desta aliança afirmou claramente que sua intenção é alavancar o COVID-19 como uma “oportunidade” para redefinir toda a nossa sociedade, cultura, estruturas políticas e economia globais.

Nossos 17.000 médicos e cientistas médicos do Global COVID Summit representam uma comunidade médica global muito maior e esclarecida que se recusa a ser comprometida e está unida e disposta a arriscar a ira da aliança médica corrupta para defender a saúde de seus pacientes.

A missão do Global COVID Summit é acabar com essa crise orquestrada, que foi ilegitimamente imposta ao mundo, e declarar formalmente que as ações dessa aliança corrupta constituem nada menos que crimes contra a humanidade.

Devemos restaurar a confiança do povo na medicina , que começa com o diálogo livre e aberto entre médicos e cientistas médicos. Devemos restaurar os direitos médicos e a autonomia do paciente. Isso inclui o princípio fundamental da sagrada relação médico-paciente. A necessidade social para isso está atrasada há décadas e, portanto, nós, os médicos do mundo, somos obrigados a agir.

Após dois anos de pesquisa científica, milhões de pacientes tratados , centenas de ensaios clínicos realizados e dados científicos compartilhados, demonstramos e documentamos nosso sucesso na compreensão e no combate ao COVID-19. Ao considerar os riscos versus benefícios das principais decisões políticas, nosso Global COVID Summit de 17.000 médicos e cientistas médicos de todo o mundo chegaram a um consenso sobre os seguintes princípios fundamentais:

1. Declaramos e os dados confirmam que as injeções de terapia genética experimental COVID-19 devem terminar.
2. Declaramos que os médicos não devem ser impedidos de fornecer tratamento médico que salva vidas.
3. Declaramos que o estado de emergência nacional, que facilita a corrupção e prolonga a pandemia, deve ser imediatamente encerrado.
4. Declaramos que a privacidade médica nunca mais deve ser violada e todas as restrições sociais e de viagem devem cessar.
5. Declaramos que as máscaras não são e nunca foram uma proteção eficaz contra um vírus respiratório transmitido pelo ar no ambiente comunitário.
6. Declaramos que o financiamento e a pesquisa devem ser estabelecidos para danos, morte e sofrimento da vacinação.
7. Declaramos que nenhuma oportunidade deve ser negada, incluindo educação, carreira, serviço militar ou tratamento médico, por falta de vontade de tomar uma injeção.
8. Declaramos que as violações da Primeira Emenda e a censura médica por parte do governo, empresas de tecnologia e mídia devem cessar, e a Declaração de Direitos deve ser mantida.
9. Declaramos que Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, Janssen, Astra Zeneca e seus facilitadores retiveram e omitiram intencionalmente informações de segurança e eficácia de pacientes e médicos, e devem ser imediatamente indiciados por fraude.
10. Declaramos que o governo e as agências médicas devem ser responsabilizados.

*Retirado do site de Global Research. Versão em inglês, aqui: https://www.globalresearch.ca/global-covid-summit-declaration-iv/5780294

Nota aos leitores: Sinta-se à vontade para republicar e compartilhar amplamente os artigos da Global Research.

A imagem em destaque é da Children's Health Defense

A fonte original deste artigo é Quem é Robert Malone

Copyright © Dr. Robert Malone , Quem é Robert Malone , 2022