A apresentar mensagens correspondentes à consulta COVID ordenadas por relevância. Ordenar por data Mostrar todas as mensagens
A apresentar mensagens correspondentes à consulta COVID ordenadas por relevância. Ordenar por data Mostrar todas as mensagens

sexta-feira, 16 de abril de 2021

DESENCRIPTAR DA PANDEMIA DE COVID por Paul Craig Roberts

                          



Tradução de artigo original do site Paul Craig Roberts :
«De Onde Veio e Qual o Propósito da "Pandemia de Covid"?»

Antes de mais nada, o Covid é um vírus real. Há fortes evidências de que o Covid é o produto de investigação ilegal em bioarmas. A investigação em fazer os vírus mais transmissíveis começou na Universidade de Carolina do Norte e foi transferida para o laboratório de Wuhan, China, onde foi parcialmente financiada pelo Dr. Fauci do N.I.H (= National Institute of Health, Instituto Nacional de Saúde dos EUA). 

A explicação oficial desta pesquisa é obter antecipado conhecimento de tais vírus de maneira a ser mais rápido e eficaz o desenvolvimento de uma vacina. Esta explicação pode ser, ou não ser, verdadeira.

O vírus do Covid é real, mas a «pandemia» foi orquestrada de quatro maneiras:

O teste conhecido por «Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR)» foi usado para dramaticamente exagerar as infecções. É agora um facto reconhecido de que fazer funcionar o teste com um número de ciclos de amplificação acima de 35 vezes,  produz uma percentagem de falsos positivos tão alta como 97%. A Organização Mundial de Saúde admitiu agora, discretamente, que o teste deveria ser efectuado no intervalo de 25-35 ciclos, e não no de 35-40 ciclos que esteve na base das taxas de infecção publicadas*. 

Os tratamentos eficazes, seguros e não dispendiosos da infecção com Covid, pela HCQ (Hidroxicloroquina) e Ivermectina foram bloqueados por autoridades governamentais de saúde e por associações de profissionais de Medicina subservientes. 

Foram criados e fornecidos incentivos financeiros aos hospitais que relatassem mortes devidas a causas outras que o Covid, como sendo devidas a Covid. Tal coisa é fácil de fazer com a percentagem elevada de falsos casos positivos dados pelo teste PCR. Note-se que não houve estação da gripe, neste ano e não foram relatados quaisquer casos de gripe. A razão disto é que a gripe foi contabilizada como Covid e as mortes devidas a gripe como devidas a Covid. 

A media prostituta serviu de propaganda do «ministério da pandemia de Covid». As prostitutas mediáticas entusiasticamente espalham desinformação e medo; censuram toda a opinião que seja contrária. Ignorantes «jornalistas» e «fact-checkers» classificam peritos de renome mundial como conspiracionistas, por porem em causa a narrativa oficialmente orquestrada.

Qual é o propósito desta pandemia orquestrada?

Um dos propósitos é obtenção de lucros para as Grandes Farmacêuticas.

Outro propósito é o controle da população e a supressão das liberdades cívicas que as autoridades públicas conseguiram levar a cabo, através dos confinamentos («lockdowns») e da obrigatoriedade de porte de máscara. As autoridades públicas estão agora a usar as mutações do Covid para alargarem e intensificarem estas medidas de controlo.

A ineficácia e consequências contraproducentes dos «lockdowns» e das máscaras são factos tão aparentes, para muitos prestigiados peritos, que a questão se colocou, se uma agenda intencionalmente mal intencionada não tem estado a ser seguida. Mike Whitney relata as preocupações dum perito, ex-cientista e vice-presidente da Pfizer. Leia “Pure, Unalloyed Evil”**

Aqueles que nascem e sociabilizam em sociedades que já transitaram para o mal, não sabem de nada diferente. Eu tenho estado a observar o crescimento disto nos últimos 30 anos. Parte do sucesso do mal é devido ao desacreditar da verdade, um desenvolvimento que tenho vindo relatando há muitos anos.  Os factos e as evidências têm perdido influência nas agendas baseadas na emoção. A subordinação dos factos aos sentimentos permite que o mal controle a narrativa. 

Coloca-se a questão de saber se as vacinas de Covid são parte de uma agenda de redução da população mundial. É uma questão séria e real**. 

domingo, 6 de fevereiro de 2022

DECLARAÇÃO SOBRE MORTES E LESÕES APÓS VACINAS COVID (declaração de D4CE)

 Declaração traduzida a partir de...

 « The Gene-based "Vaccines" Are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve»


Um movimento de massa contra a obrigatoriedade de vacinação Covid está em marcha em todo o mundo.

De costa a costa no Canadá e nos EUA, em solidariedade aos camionistas, muitos milhares de pessoas se juntaram  em Ottawa no sábado, 29 de janeiro de 2022.

***

Abaixo está a  declaração Importante dos Médicos para a Ética Covid (D4CE).

Esta declaração deve ser subscrita em todo o mundo. 

Publicado pela primeira vez em 21 de julho de 2021, última atualização, a 28 de janeiro de 2022

***

Carta aberta urgente para informação de:

Todos os Cidadãos da União Europeia (EU), da Área Económica Europeia (EEA) e da Suíça

Todos os Cidadãos do Reino Unido (UK)

Todos os Cidadãos dos Estados Unidos da América (USA)

Para:

Agência do Medicamento Europeia (EMA)

Agência Reguladora de Fármacos e Produtos de Saúde (MHRA)

Administração dos Estados Unidos de Alimentos e Medicamentos (FDA)

Centros para Controlo e Prevenção de Doenças (CDC)

De:

Doctors For Covid Ethics (D4CE)

21 Julho 2021

Caros/as Senhoras/Senhores,

1. Fontes Oficiais, nomeadamente, EudraVigilance (EU, EEA, Suíça), MHRA (UK) e VAERS (USA), registam agora muito mais mortes e lesões da aplicação de «vacina» de COVID-19, do que de todas as vacinas prévias combinadas, desde que começaram a ser efetuados registos.

Abaixo, encontram-se os dados mais recentes, datados de 28 de Janeiro de 2022 - quinta atualização (os dados mais antigos encontram-se no Apêndice, abaixo, no documento em Inglês):

EU/EEA/Suíça até 15 de Janeiro 2022 – 37,927 mortes relacionadas com injeções da vacina Covid-19 e 3,354,705 lesões, segundo a Base de Dados EudraVigilance.

Reino Unido, até 5 de Janeiro 2022 – 1,982 mortes relacionadas com injeções da vacina Covid-19 e 1,414,293  lesões, segundo o «MHRA Yellow Card Scheme».

EUA até 7 de Janeiro de 2022 – 21,745 mortes relacionadas com injeções da vacina Covid-19 e 4,986,087 lesões, segundo a base de dados VAERS.

TOTAL para EU/UK/USA – 61,654 mortes relacionadas com injeções da vacina Covid-19 e 9,755,085 lesões relatadas até 28 de Janeiro de 2022.

Nota Bene:

É importante ter consciência de que os números oficiais acima (dados ao conhecimento das autoridades de saúde) são somente uma pequena percentagem (1 a 10%) dos valores reais.

Além disso, as pessoas continuam a morrer e sofrer lesões das injeções cada dia que passa.

Por favor, tenha em conta que no momento de escrita deste relatório (28 de Janeiro de 2022) os valores dos dados oficiais são superiores aos dados para os tempos mostrados acima, como sejam: 15 de Janeiro 2022 (EU/EEA/Suíça), 5 de Janeiro (UK), 7 de Janeiro 2022 (USA).

Este número catastrófico de mortes relacionadas com injeções NÃO  foi noticiado pela media convencional, apesar dos dados oficiais acima estarem publicamente disponíveis.

2. O sinal de prejudicial é agora avassalador e, em consonância com o que é universalmente aceite enquanto padrões éticos para ensaios clínicos, Doctors for Covid Ethics exige que o programa de vacinação de COVID-19 seja suspenso imediatamente ao nível mundial.

3. A continuação deste programa, no pleno conhecimento de como tem causado sérias lesões e mortes, tanto em adultos como em crianças, constitui um Crime Contra a Humanidade/Genocídio, pelo qual as pessoas que sejam consideradas responsáveis ou cúmplices, serão pessoalmente constituídas arguidas.

MENSAGEM IMPORTANTE PARA OS POVOS:

1. Os governos em todo o mundo estão a mentir-vos, aos povos e populações que eles têm obrigação de servir.

2. Os dados acima demonstram que as vacinas baseadas em genes são causadoras de morte.

 

Fielmente Vossos,

 

Doctors for Covid Ethics


sábado, 15 de outubro de 2022

LISTAGEM DOS «JOVENS LÍDERES GLOBAIS» DO WEF + artigo de F. W. Engdahl


O Fórum Económico Mundial é uma organização conspirativa mundial contra a democracia e os povos. Eles captam (desde 1992) jovens líderes políticos e económicos, artistas e pessoas célebres. Estes, são recrutados para avançar, nos respetivos países, com a agenda globalista. 

Leia o artigo de Global Research, de autoria de Jacob Nordangard «World Economic Forum’s “Young Global Leaders” Revealed»*.

Aos nomes abaixo, juntaram-se os respetivos cargos mais relevantes que têm ou que tiveram. 



Angela Merkel, Chanceler da Alemanha 

Tony Blair, Primeiro Ministro do Reino Unido

 Nicolas Sarkozy, Presidente da França

 Bill Gates, Microsoft

Jack Ma, Fundador de Alibaba

Larry Page, Fundador de Google

Ricken Patel, Fundador de Avaaz

David de Rothschild  (da família dos banqueiros Rothschild)

Jimmy Wale, Fundador de Wikipedia

Jacob Wallenberg, Presidente de «Investor»

Niklas Zennström, Fundador de Skype

Mark Zuckerberg, Fundador de Facebook

 Bono,  cantor-compositor

 Richard Branson (Virgin)

 Jorma Ollila (Shell Oil)

 José Manuel Barroso (Presidente da Comissão Europeia 2004–2014)

Victoria - Princesa Herdeira da Coroa da Suécia  

Haakon da Noruega - Príncipe Herdeiro

Fredrik Príncipe da Dinamarca 

Jaime de Bourbon de Parme, Príncipe da Holanda

Reema Bint Bandar Al-Saud, Princesa, Embaixadora da Arábia Saudita nos EUA

Jacinda Arden, Primeira Ministra da Nova Zelândia

Alexander De Croo, Primeiro Ministro da Bélgica

Emmanuel Macron, Presidente de França

Sanna Marin, Primeiro Ministro Finlândia

Carlos Alvarado Quesada, Presidente, Costa Rica

Faisal Alibrahim, Ministro da economia e do Plano, da Arábia Saudita

Shauna Aminath, Ministro  Ambiente, Alterações Climáticas, Tecnologia, Ilhas Maldivas 

Ida Auken, Deputada, ex-ministra do ambiente da Dinamarca (autora do artigo “Welcome To 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy And Life Has Never Been Better”)

Annalena Baerbock,Ministra dos Negócios Estrangeiros, Líder da Alliance 90/Die Grünen, Alemanha

Kamissa Camara, Ministro da Economia Digital e Planificação do Mali

Ugyen Dorji, Ministro dos Assuntos Domésticos do Bhutan

Chrystia Freeland, Vice-primeira ministro e ministra das finanças do Canada

Martín Guzmán, Ministro das finanças, Argentina

Muhammad Hammad Azhar, Ministro da Energia do Paquistão

Paula Ingabire, Ministra da Informação e das tecnologias de comunicação e inovação, do Ruanda

Ronald Lamola, Ministro da Justiça e serviços correcionais da África do Sul

Birgitta Ohlson, Ministra dos Assuntos da União Europeia de 2010-2014, Suécia

Mona Sahlin, Líder do Partido Social Democrata de 2007–2011, Suécia

Stav Shaffir, Líder do Partido os Verdes, Israel

Vera Daves de Sousa, Ministra das Finanças de Angola

Leonardo Di Caprio, ator e ativista do clima

Mattias Klum, fotógrafo e ambientalista

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

https://www.globalresearch.ca/world-economic-forum-young-global-leaders-revealed/5769766


Como complemento, apresento uma análise aprofundada do WEF por F. William Engdahl:



Klaus Schwab trained our politicians in WEF Global Leaders program


© F. William Engdahl 16 February, 2022



Davos and the Purloined Letter Conspiracy

The famous short story by Edgar Allen Poe, The Purloined Letter, is apt in describing the agenda of Klaus Schwab, founder some 50 years ago of what is today the globally influential Davos World Economic Forum (WEF)–Hidden in plain sight. Schwab published a book in 2020 titled The Great Reset, which calls on world leaders to use the "opportunity" of the COVID-19 pandemic to fundamentally reorganize the global economy into a dystopian top-down version of the technocratic UN Agenda 2030.

For those willing to do patient research, Schwab's WEF reveals an astonishing degree of the current globalist agenda for a technocratic totalitarianism. Even more he has been developing hand-picked cadre to implement this agenda over three decades, with a select global "cadre school" for "future global leaders." In effect it is what we might call the Davos Conspiracy, agents promoted around the world to infiltrate top policy circles and push the sinister Davos Reset agenda.

One of the most astonishing features of the COVID pandemic fear hysteria is the degree to which politicians worldwide have followed in lockstep, along with global media and key health figures, to embrace an unprecedented agenda of economic and human destruction in the name of fighting a virus. It turns out that most all key players all have something in common. They are hand-picked graduates or "alumni" as he calls them, of Klaus Schwab's Davos cadre school, his annual program called Young Global Leaders and, pre-2004, called Global Leaders for Tomorrow.

Since the first group of Davos cadre were selected in 1993, more than
1,400 "future global leaders" have been trained in a highly secret process which is rarely ever mentioned in the bio of Davos graduates.

With the patience of a spider weaving a vast web, Klaus Schwab and his wealthy backers at the World Economic Forum have created the most influential network of policy actors in modern history, or perhaps ever.

In a 2017 video with David Gergen at Harvard, Schwab boasts of being proud that, "we penetrate the cabinets" with Davos Young Global Leader cadre. Schwab states, "I have to say then I mention names like Mrs Merkel…and so on, they all have been Young Global Leaders of The World Economic Forum. But what we are really proud of now with the young generation like Prime Minister Trudeau, President of Argentina and so on, is that we penetrate the cabinets… It is true in Argentina and it is true in France now…"

Great Reset

The Great Reset, as explained by Schwab in his co-authored June 2020 book of the same title, and elaborated in full on the website of the World Economic Forum, is there for anyone curious to discover. It lays out a program to reorganize the global economy top-down, using the COVID disruptions to push among other things a green zero carbon agenda, elimination of meat protein and traditional agriculture, an elimination of fossil fuels, air travel contraction, eliminating cash for central bank digital currencies and a totalitarian medical system of mandatory vaccinations.

In the June 2020 virtual Davos summit of global leaders, aptly titled The Great Reset, Schwab declared, "Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a 'Great Reset' of capitalism… There are many reasons to pursue a Great Reset, but the most urgent is COVID-19." The Great Reset, he continues, requires that, "governments should implement long-overdue reforms that promote more equitable outcomes. Depending on the country, these may include changes to wealth taxes, the withdrawal of fossil-fuel subsidies… The second component of a Great Reset agenda would ensure that investments advance shared goals, such as equality and sustainability."

What Schwab does not mention is that it has been his network of Davos "global leaders" who have been at the heart of advancing the COVID draconian agenda from unnecessary lockdowns to forced vaccinations to mandatory mask. The pandemic has been the necessary first phase of the Great Reset. Without it he would not be able to talk about fundamental global changes.

Here Schwab's agenda is global wealth redistribution for creating the infamous UN Agenda 2030 "sustainable" economy: "The US, China, and Japan also have ambitious economic-stimulus plans. Rather than using these funds… to fill cracks in the old system, we should use them to create a new one that is more resilient, equitable, and sustainable in the long run. This means, for example, building "green" urban infrastructure and creating incentives for industries to improve their track record on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics." He adds, "The third and final priority of a Great Reset agenda is to harness the innovations of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to support the public good, especially by addressing health and social challenges."

Purloined Letter

The 1844 short story by American author Edgar Allen Poe, The Purloined Letter, tells of a stolen letter of the French Queen being used to blackmail her by an unscrupulous minister. When Paris police search the house of the suspected thief meticulously without result, a friend of the chief inspector is able to find the purloined document by looking for it, "hidden in plain sight."

So, it is with what is without doubt the most brazen and criminal conspiracy of modern times, the Davos Great Reset. Everything is there, open for anyone with patience to wade through the pages of WEF press releases and web pages. Notable is that the global players, the Davos "cadre" carefully chosen over the past thirty years to be groomed for positions of power to implement the Great Reset agenda, are openly named on the Davos website, found with a little patient searching. Partial lists have appeared naming a small handful of the Davos "Young Global Leaders." A more exhaustive search of some 1400 names in the annual cadre school classes since 1992 reveals an astonishing, detailed conspiracy. The WEF website states the global leaders are "trained to be aligned with the World Economic Forum's mission," to "drive public-private co-operation in the global public interest."

The following is the result of reviewing every WEF class of future global leaders since 1993.

What is most striking is that key players linked to Schwab are involved in the decisive measures that have made the COVID-19 "pandemic" the economically and physically destructive process it is. WEF alumni are in the middle of everything covid.

Davos, Gates and mRNA Vaccines

At the heart of the COVID-19 agenda is clearly the "warp speed" rollout of untested experimental mRNA gene-edited concoctions, misnamed vaccines, by two pharma companies—Pfizer (with BioNTech of Germany) and Moderna of USA.

Bill Gates (WEF 1993) and his Gates Foundation are at the heart of the mRNA gene-edited jab rollout along with Tony Fauci of the US NIAID.

Gates was selected by Schwab before he had even created the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, in 1993, for the first group of WEF cadre together with Angela Merkel, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and others. Was Schwab influential in getting Gates to create the foundation?
Gates Foundation money, hundreds of millions, have in effect bought control of the corrupt UN World Health Organization, according to WHO whistleblower, Swiss epidemiologist, Astrid Stuckelberger, who in a recent interview stated, "WHO has changed since I was there…There was a change in 2016…It was special: Non-governmental organizations – such as GAVI – Global Alliance for Vaccine Immunization - led by Bill Gates – they joined the WHO in 2006 with a fund. Since then, the WHO has developed into a new type of international organization. GAVI gained more and more influence, and total immunity, more than the diplomats in the UN."
Gates' foundation, along with Schwab's WEF created the global GAVI-The Vaccine Alliance in 2000. Another infamous alumnus of the Gates WEF Global Leaders class, José Manuel Barroso (WEF 1993), – President of the European commission from 2004-2014, former head Goldman Sachs International, member of the Bilderberg Steering Committee – was named CEO of the Gates-financed GAVI vaccine alliance in January 2021, as the mRNA jabs were rolled out. Barroso now oversees global spending on the mRNA vaccines for Gates and WHO.

Albert Bourla chief executive officer of Pfizer, is a WEF Agenda Contributor. His Pfizer Vice President, Vasudha Vats (WEF 2021), is a WEF "global leader" recruit.

The other key mRNA jab maker is Moderna, whose CEO, Stéphane Bancel (WEF 2009) is another Davos alumnus. The very next year, 2010, Bancel was selected to be CEO of a new company, Moderna, in Massachusetts. In 2016, with no successful mRNA product yet approved, Bancel's Moderna signed a global health project framework agreement with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to advance mRNA-based development projects for various infectious diseases. The same year Bancel signed a global health project framework agreement with Tony Fauci and the NIAID. In a January 2018 speech to the JP Morgan Healthcare Conference, more than a year before the world heard of COVID-19 out of Wuhan China, Gates declared, "We are backing companies like CureVac and Moderna on mRNA approaches for vaccine and drug development…" Prescience?

Davos Politicians

The second key component for the Davos pandemic agenda has been an international collection of key politicians in the EU and North America especially, who have backed the most draconian lockdown and forced vaccination measures in history. Most all the key actors are Davos WEF Global Leaders.
In Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel led one of the most severe COVID lockdowns until she retired in December 2021. She was from the first 1993 WEF Global Leaders for Tomorrow class. Her Health Minister, Jens Spahn (WEF 2012), was also a Davos alumnus. Spahn coerced mass mRNA jabs and pushed unnecessary lockdowns and masking. He was a former pharma lobbyist. Philipp Rösler, Merkel’s Minister of Health from 2009 until 2011, was appointed the WEF Managing Director by Schwab in 2014. In December a new coalition government as formed after Merkel retired, under Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who was invited to give a Special Address to the January 2022 Davos WEF Meeting by Schwab. Germany's new Foreign Minister, Green leader Annalena Baerbock (WEF 2020), was chosen to be a Global Leader just prior to her becoming Chancellor candidate. Baerbock's controversial pick as State Secretary for climate change diplomacy, Greenpeace head, Jennifer Morgan, a US citizen, is a WEF Agenda Contributor and close friend of WEF Board member Al Gore. Former German Green Party head, Cem Özdemir (WEF 2002), is new Minister of Agriculture and Nutrition.
In France President Emmanuel Macron (WEF 2016) mysteriously rose from an obscure Cabinet Minister to become President of France in 2017 with no party, just a year after being selected to join the WEF Global Leaders program. As President, Macron has instituted some of the most draconian COVID measures in the world including internal passports and mandated vaccines.
Other EU politicians from the Davos club include Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis (WEF 2003), Prime Minister of Belgium, Alexander De Croo, (WEF 2015). Both have imposed severe COVID measures. Sanna Marin (WEF 2020), the controversial Prime Minister of Finland invoked a state of emergency in Finland, with severe lockdowns and other drastic measures. In the UK former Labour Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, (WEF 1993) was named by WHO in April 2021 to promote a $60 billion program for COVID vaccination in "poor countries." Brown became WHO Ambassador for Global Health Financing in September 2021.
In North America the Canadian government of Justin Trudeau, now subject to a massive popular revolt against his severe vaccine mandates and other measures, is riddled with Davos agents. Trudeau himself is a Davos WEF Agenda Contributor and frequent speaker at Davos. Schwab introduced Trudeau in 2016 stating, "I couldn't imagine anyone who could represent more the world that will come out of the Fourth Industrial Revolution."
The key COVID actor for Trudeau is Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland who is on the WEF Board of Trustees, and leads Trudeau's COVID response. Other WEF agents in Ottawa are Foreign Minister, Mélanie Joly (WEF 2016), Family Minister Karina Gould (WEF 2020). Canada’s Government is a Davos domain.
In the USA top Biden Administration appointees include Jeffrey Zients (WEF 2003), White House Coronavirus Coordinator. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg (WEF 2019) who suddenly announced for President after being chosen by Davos is another. US deep state operative Samantha Power (WEF 2003) is Biden's head of USAID, the major foreign aid agency closely tied to CIA activities abroad. Rebecca Weintraub (WEF 2014) a Harvard professor who works for total vaccination of everyone in the world with mandatory vaccines even for children, is adviser to the Department of Health and Human Services' National Vaccine Advisory Committee.
California Governor Gavin Newsom (WEF 2005) imposed some of the nation's most severe lockdowns and mask mandates as did Jared Polis (WEF 2013) Governor of Colorado, with a public health order that made Colorado one of the first states to require proof of full vaccination to be admitted into the large indoor events.
Australia and New Zealand have been two of the world's most severe COVID tyranny regimes. In Australia, Health Minister Greg Hunt was WEF Director of Strategy in 2001 and WEF Global Leader in 2003. He controls the extreme government COVID-19 policies. In New Zealand, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern (WEF 2014) met with Bill Gates in New York in September
2019 as featured speaker at the Gates Foundation annual Sustainable Development Goals conference, just before the China COVID events and days before the October Event 201 "pandemic simulation" by World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. As Prime Minister, Ardern has imposed waves of lockdowns, removing most civil rights and virtually banned international travel.

Think Tanks and Academics

This is far from the extent of the carefully-cultivated and promoted Davos global network behind orchestrating global COVID-19 pandemic measures. Instrumental roles are also played by the Rockefeller Foundation, whose President, Rajiv Shah (WEF 2007) was a leading figure for the Africa Green Revolution when he was at the Gates Foundation, as well as vaccine programs. As head of the influential Rockefeller Foundation, Shah plays a key role promoting the Davos Great Reset where he is WEF Agenda Contributor. Another highly influential US policy think tank, the New York Council on Foreign Relations, has deep engagement in the COVID-19 agenda. Thomas Bollyky (WEF 2013) is Director of the CFR Global Health Program, and is a former Gates Foundation as well as WHO consultant. He directed the CFR Task Force on Improving Pandemic Preparedness: Lessons from COVID-19 (2020).

Jeremy Howard (WEF 2013) is an Australian who at the start of the COVID-19 organized a worldwide campaign for mandatory face masks.

Mustapha Mokass (WEF 2015) developed a vaccine passport system for the Schwab 4th Industrial Revolution agenda.

Mainstream Media

The role of managed media has been at the heart of the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic propaganda offensive. Davos and the WEF of Schwab are in the midst of this as well.

CNN is one of the most notorious propaganda outlets promoting fear and advocating the mRNA jabs while attacking any proven remedial treatment. CNN and Davos are well-connected.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta (WEF 2010), chief medical correspondent for CNN played a key role promoting the official narrative in the COVID-19 deep event. Dr. Leana Sheryle Wen (WEF 2018) is a columnist with The Washington Post and a CNN medical analyst. As a CNN 'medical contributor' Wen suggested that life needs to be "hard" for Americans who have not received a COVID-19 vaccine. Anderson Cooper (WEF 2008), a former CIA "intern," is a major CNN host. Jeffrey Dean Zeleny (WEF 2013) is the Chief National Affairs Correspondent for CNN.

While CNN produces one-sided commentary on the mRNA jabs and COVID, highly-influential owners of social media corporations engage in unprecedented banning of any critical or contrary opinion in censorship that would make a Goebbels blush. Among them is Mark Zuckerberg (WEF 2009) the billionaire owner of CIA-backed Facebook, and Twitter board member Martha Lane Fox (WEF 2012), a member of the UK Joint Committee on National Security Strategy and on House of Lords COVID-19 Committee. Larry Page (WEF 2005) is a billionaire co-founder of Google, arguably the world’s most used search engine.

Marc Benioff (WEF Board of Trustees) billionaire owner of Time magazine and Salesforce cloud computing, is also connected to Bill Gates's “The Giving Pledge.” Dawood Azami (WEF 2011) is multi-media editor at the BBC World Service, the influential UK state-owned broadcaster. Jimmy Wales (WEF 2007) is founder of Wikipedia which notoriously alters content of COVID-related entries to promote the WHO and Davos agenda. Lynn Forester de Rothschild (WEF 1995) with her husband, Sir Evelyn Robert de Rothschild, owns The Economist magazine, which promotes the COVID Davos agenda along with the coming Green reset. She was introduced to Sir Evelyn by Henry Kissinger at the 1998 Bilderberg Conference in Scotland.

Other figures among the Davos stable of “global future leaders” alumni include Jamie Dimon (WEF 1996), CEO JP Morgan Chase, Nathaniel Rothschild (WEF 2005) son and heir apparent to Baron Jacob Nathaniel "Nat" Rothschild. David Mayer de Rothschild (WEF 2007), a British billionaire green agenda advocate with a fortune of estimated 10 billion dollars is another Davos protege.

WEF “Strategic Corporate Partners" helping mentor the Davos Global Leaders include Barclays Bank, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Deutsche Bank AG, General Motors Company, The Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Google Inc., HSBC Holdings Plc, McKinsey & Company and UBS AG and such.

The Powerful Board of Trustees

Is this concentration of global power just coincidence or part of a genuine outright conspiracy? A reading of the current World Economic Forum Board of Trustees helps to answer.

The WEF Board of Trustees includes, in addition to those already named, some of the world’s most influential people. Along with Chairman Klaus Schwab, it includes Mukesh D. Ambani, Chairman of India’s Reliance Industries. Ambani's net worth is estimated at US$96 billion making him the second richest person in Asia and the 8th richest in the world. WEF Board also includes Larry Fink, Chairman of BlackRock, the world’s largest investment group with some $9 trillion under management. Also included are Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and Christine Lagarde, President, European Central Bank.
Fabiola Gianotti, Director-General, European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) and Green Agenda guru and former US politician, Al Gore, backer of Greta Thunberg. Thomas Buberl Chief Executive Officer, AXA Insurance; Orit Gadiesh, Chairman, Bain & Company; Andre Hoffmann of Swiss drug giant, Hoffmann-La Roche, and a director of Club of Rome and WWF. As well as Lubna S. Olayan, billionaire former head, Olayan Financing Group; Joe Kaeser, Chairman of Siemens Energy; Jim Hagemann Snabe, Chairman, Siemens and Maersk Shipping; Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director-General, World Trade Organization (WTO). As well, Julie Sweet, CEO of global management consultants, Accenture; David M. Rubenstein, Chairman, Carlyle Group; Queen Rania Al Abdullah of Jordan; Mark Schneider, CEO of Nestlé.

This Davos WEF network is without doubt one of the most influential groups of powerful people in the world. This Davos WEF network begins to suggest how pandemics and destructive Green Agenda policies are imposed on an unwitting world.

quarta-feira, 21 de julho de 2021

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.
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.

sexta-feira, 4 de junho de 2021

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