Myocarditis Cases in U.S. Military Spiked by 130 Percent



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Data presented to Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin by a U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) whistleblower highlights reports that American servicemen and servicewomen have suffered serious injuries related to COVID-19 shots, including a 130 percent increase in myocarditis cases.1

Sen. Johnson said:

Based on data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), Thomas Renz, an attorney who is representing three Department of Defense whistleblowers, reported that these whistleblowers found a significant increase in registered diagnoses on DMED for miscarriages, cancer, and many other medical conditions in 2021 compared to a five-year average from 2016-2020.2

The DoD whistleblower provided Sen. Johnson’s office with new information showing significant increases in specific registered diagnoses from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) in 2021 compared to a five-year average from the period 2016-2020. The whistleblower downloaded the DMED data early this year after DoD acknowledged in 2022 that DMED data had been corrupted and that they would fix the database system.3

In 2022, Maj. Charlie Dietz, a spokesperson for the Pentagon, explained that an internal review found that the DMED was not accurate for a span of five years:

DHA’s Armed Forces Surveillance Division (AFSD) conducted a complete review of the data contained in the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) and found that the data was incorrect for the years 2016-2020.4

According to DoD, the corruption of the data in the DMED was fixed shortly after the review’s findings.5

In 2021, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin ordered all members of the U.S. military to get COVID shots. Active duty units were required to receive the shots by Dec. 15, 2021, and Reserve and National Guard units were required to receive them by June 30, 2022.6

Myocarditis, Malignant Neoplasms, Embolisms, and Ovarian Dysfunction Increased After COVID Shot Mandate

The updated data provided by the whistleblower showed the most significant increases in registered diagnoses in DMED in 2021 compared to a five-year average from 2016-2020. The data showed an increase in myocarditis by 130.5 percent; malignant neoplasms of the esophagus by 56.6 percent; pulmonary embolism by 41.2 percent; ovarian dysfunction by 38.2 percent, and complications of heart disease by 37.7 percent.7

On Feb. 15, 2022, DoD provided Sen. Johnson’s office with a chart listing the 15 registered diagnoses and showed the percentage change in the adverse health condition diagnoses before and after DoD fixed the DMED.8 However, the most recent DMED data provided to Sen. Johnson by the whistleblower showed different percentages of diagnoses compared to the data that DoD provided in 2022 after the DMED was allegedly fixed.9

Discrepancies Between Whistleblower and DoD Data from 2022

The newly disclosed data by the whistleblower shows higher increases in health diagnoses than that provided by DoD last year. The whistleblower’s data showed that diseases of the nervous system increased by 9.5 percent in 2021 compared to 5.7 percent according to DoD’s data. The whistleblower’s data also showed that hypertension increased by 12.6 percent, while DoD’s data showed a 1.9 percent increase. Testicular cancer increased 16.3 percent according to the whistleblower’s data, while DoD’s data showed an increase of 3 percent. The whistleblower’s data showed that pulmonary embolism increased by 41.4 percent, while DoD’s data showed it increased by 25.4 percent.10 11

Some percentages reported by the whistleblower were lower than DoD’s reports. The whistleblower’s data showed that female infertility increased by 4.3 percent, but DoD’s data showed an increase of 13.3 percent. According to the whistleblower’s data, Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) increased by 3.2 percent, while DoD’s data showed an increase of 17.2 percent.12

Commenting on the data discrepancies, Sen. Johnson said:

It remains unclear how DoD calculated the percent changes for these specific registered diagnoses after the DMED data issue was allegedly fixed. Further, the recent whistleblower data highlighted above raises additional questions as to why the whistleblowers percent changes differ from DoD’s percent changes if the data source for both calculations was DMED.13

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

The Facebook Files: The Effort To Censor Vaccine Information

In this photo illustration, a smart phone screen displays the logo of Facebook on a Facebook website background, on April 7, 2021, in Arlington, Virginia - Facebook usage has held steady in the United States despite a string of controversies about the leading social network, even as younger users tap into rival platforms such as TikTok, a survey showed Wednesday. (Photo by OLIVIER DOULIERY / AFP) (Photo by OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images)



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Republican Representative Jim Jordan released what he called “smoking-gun documents” on social media proving that Facebook had been censoring Americans on behalf of the Biden Administration.

Posting to Twitter, Jordan (R-Ohio) said that he has internal documents that were obtained only after Mark Zuckerberg was threatened to be held in contempt, which “PROVE” the censoring across the social media platforms due to “unconstitutional pressure from the Biden White House.”

“Never-before-released internal documents subpoenaed by the Judiciary Committee PROVE that Facebook and Instagram censored posts and changed their content moderation policies because of unconstitutional pressure from the Biden White House,” Jordan wrote.

He went on to explain that during the first half of 2021, Facebook executives were “facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the [Biden] White House” according to an email from Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg.

Jordan went on to say that the White House had wanted a meme removed from the platform.

Facebook employees had informed the White House that removing content like the meme would be an incursion in “traditional boundaries of free expression in the U.S.” However, Andy Slavitt, a Senior Advisor to President Joe Biden ignored the warning and the First Amendment altogether.

The Biden White House also demanded to know why a video from Tucker Carlson had not been removed from the platform. Even though Facebook had replied and gave them the reasons why they could not remove the video, Biden eventually went on to publicly denounce the social media platform claiming that they were “killing people.”

In August of 2021, Facebook started working on changing its policies in order to “be more aggressive against misinformation.” The Facebook leadership said that the change in policy stemmed from the increasing pressure by the Biden administration.

In the second batch of files released by Jordan on Friday, he showed that in the summer of 2021 Facebook was working with the White House in order to “push for Americans to get vaccinated” and to “get Facebook to more aggressively police vaccine-related content, including TRUE content.”

In July 2021, Facebook’s head of Global Affairs was asked why they had been censoring the COVID lab leak theory. The answer was because of pressure from the Biden administration.

After President Biden claimed that Facebook was “killing people” because Americans were hesitant to get vaccinated after seeing vaccine related content online, Facebook employees were upset.

However, the comment by the president had caused Facebook to “re-evaluate its policies about COVID-19 content.”

Jordan goes on to explain that the administration wanted almost all information about the vaccine removed from the platform unless it agreed with their stance. This included jokes and true information alike.

In August 2021, Facebook’s leadership once again agreed to further change their content moderation policy because of mounting pressure from the administration.

Jordan ended his thread saying that the documents show how the Biden administration is working to “censor speech” and that he will be releasing even more documents in the future.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here.

White House Suspends Funding For Wuhan Lab

BY Shawntel Smith-Hill  


Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Residents queue to take nucleic acid tests for the coronavirus in Wuhan in China’s central Hubei province on August 3, 2021, as the city tests its entire population for Covid-19. (Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images)

OAN’s Shawntel Smith-Hill                                       
5:54 PM – Wednesday, July 19, 2023

In a Monday memo, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requested that the Biden administration suspend all federal funding to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), citing a month-long review that determined WIV “is not compliant with federal regulations and is not presently responsible,” according to the memo.

The controversial Chinese research center has long been suspected of being the source of the COVID-19 virus, and recent reports indicate that the location and its staff are, in fact, the most plausible suspects.

The memo added that on numerous occasions, WIV refused to provide documents and answers to questions from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) regarding the lab’s safety and procedures.

The review of WIV found that the lab has not been compliant with federal regulations for some time. The memo also informed Wuhan lab representatives that it would be looking to permanently stop any future funding. 

“This action aims to ensure that WIV does not receive another dollar of federal funding,” an HHS spokesperson said in a statement. “The move was undertaken due to WIV’s failure to provide documentation on WIV’s research requested by NIH related to concerns that WIV violated NIH’s biosafety protocols.”

The funding cut to WIV comes amid increased concerns over China’s lack of transparency regarding the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic.

U.S. federal agencies, as well as Republican members of the House Oversight Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, have continued rigorously to find more information in proving that the deadly virus was a result of a lab leak.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here.

One In Three Pfizer Vaccine Shots May Have Been A Placebo

There’s new evidence that many of the batches of the Pfizer [COVID-19] vaccine administered to the public, up to 30 percent, were placebos. And even worse, the evidence points to regulators knowing about it and willingly administering them. Now, either they were actively experimenting on the public or they were covering up for the fact that the vaccines came with numerous side effects.

Meta Review of Autopsies Finds Link Between COVID Shots and Death-The Vaccine Reaction




Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

An independent meta-review of autopsies on people who died after COVID-19 vaccination, published as a preprint in The Lancet online on July 5, 2023, found that 74 percent of the deaths were causally related to the shots. The review included 44 published papers that contained 325 autopsy cases and one necropsy case. According to one of the study’s co-authors, cardiologist Peter McCullough, MD, MPH of the Wellness Company, the review is the “final retort” to, “you cannot prove the vaccine caused the death.”1

Other co-authors of the study include doctors from Alberta (Canada) Health Services, the University of Michigan School of Public Health, Yale University School of Public Health, and the Wellness Company, as well as a former senior COVID pandemic advisor to the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).1

The most implicated organ system in COVID vaccine-associated death was the cardiovascular system (53 percent), followed by the hematological (blood) system (17 percent), the respiratory system (8 percent), and multiple organ systems (7 percent). The mean time from vaccination to death was 14.3 days, with most deaths occurring within a week from the last administration of a shot.1

Most of the deaths occurred among individuals who received Pfizer/BioNTech’s Comirnaty COVID shot (41 percent), followed by Sinovac Biotech’s CoronaVac (37 percent), AstraZeneca/Oxford University’s Vaxzevria (13 percent), Moderna/NIAID’s Spikevax (7 percent), Johnson & Johnson/Janssen’s Ad26.COV2.S (1 percent) and Sinopharm’s BBIBP-CorV (1 percent).1

Call for Research to Explain Mechanisms of Deaths Occurring After COVID Shots

The study’s authors suggest there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID shots and the deaths that occurred soon afterward in most cases and that “a further urgent investigation is required aimed at confirming our results and further elucidating the mechanisms underlying the described fatal outcomes with the goal of risk mitigation for the large numbers of individuals who have taken one or more COVID-19 vaccines.”1

More than 70 percent of the population of the United States is considered to have been “fully vaccinated” for COVID. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends the shots for anyone over six months old. The agency also recommends COVID shots for pregnant women.2 3

Dr. McCullough stated:

Going forward in response to sudden unexplained deaths reported in the press, it is reasonable to conclude the cause of death is a fatal covid-19 vaccine injury until proven otherwise. Proof the decedent is unvaccinated or an alternative diagnosis is now required for the vaccine to be exonerated. In the absence of this information, medical examiners, coroners, physicians, and government officials should attribute the death to COVID-19 vaccination.4

Sudden Removal of Study by The Lancet ‘Smacks of Raw Censorship’

The preprint of the study was removed from The Lancet less than 24 hours after it was published—prior to the initiation of an anticipated peer review. It was removed with the sole explanation that “the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology.” Dr. McCullough said that the study was removed “after large volume download” from The Lancet’s preprint server.4

Will Jones of The Daily Sceptic wrote:

Without further detail from the Preprints with the Lancet staff who removed the paper it is hard to know what substance the claim that the conclusions are not supported by the methodology really has. A number of the authors of the paper are at the top of their fields so it is hard to imagine that the methodology of their review was really so poor that it warranted removal at initial screening rather than being subject to full critical appraisal. It smacks instead of raw censorship of a paper that failed to toe the official line.5 

Study Methodology is ‘Sound’

Clare Craig, BM, BCh, FRCPath, a diagnostic pathologist and co-chair of the HART (Health Advisory & Recovery Team) pandemic advisory group in the United Kingdom, noted:

It is important that attempts are made to quantify the risk of harm and censorship of these attempts, rather than open scientific critique, does nothing to help reassure people.

The VAERS system [of vaccine adverse event reporting] is designed to alert to potential harms without necessarily being the best way of measuring the extent of those harms. Quantifying the impact of deaths can be done by looking at overall mortality rates in a country, but that is an imperfect system with dubious accuracy.

The alternative approach of auditing deaths through autopsy is sound.5 

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Hulscher N, Alexander P A Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths After Covid-19 Vaccination. (available at SSRN) July 5, 2023
2 What’s the nation’s progress on vaccinations? May 10, 2023.
3 U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. COVID-19 Vaccines for People Who Would Like to Have a Baby July 14, 2022.
4 McCullough P. COVID-19 Vaccine is the Culprit in Majority Found Dead after Injection. Substack July 5, 2023.
5 Jones W. Lancet Study on Covid Vaccine Autopsies Finds 74% Were Caused by Vaccine—Journal Removes Study Within 24 Hours. The Daily Sceptic July 6, 2023.

CDC Altered Death Certificates to Remove ‘COVID Vaccine’ as Cause



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

The CDC removed “COVID vaccine” as the cause of death on a number of Minnesota death certificates, according to an anonymous tipster — and that has the Brownstone Institute referring to the health agency as the “Centers for Data Concealment.”

The tipster — and I’m sure you can understand why they chose to remain anonymous — was able to get their hands on the complete set of Minnesota death certificates from 2015 on.

Aaron Hertzberg’s deeply detailed report digs deep into the federal bureaucratic requirements involved in filling out local death certificates all over the country. The extremely short version is that while local coroners fill out death certificates with the cause or causes of death (CoD), the CDC later applies an International Classification of Diseases (ICD 10) code. ICD has an alphanumeric code for everything from “Fall involving ice skates, skis, roller-skates, or skateboards” to “Florida Man got drunk and tried to kiss a barracuda.”

I’m kidding about that second one but just barely.

“The critical thing to keep in mind is that the person filling out the death certificate writes a text description of the CoDs, but doesn’t assign the ICD 10 codes for the CoDs,” explains Hertzberg. The application is usually made by a “secret algorithm,” but there is “a tiny percentage of cases adjudicated by CDC staff when the algorithm is unable to confidently assign an ICD code.”

What you need to know next is that ICD 10 code T88.1 is the CoD for “Other complications following immunization, not elsewhere classified,” and that Y59.0 is for “Viral vaccines.”

“There are three death certificates in the MN tranche that contain either T88.1 or Y59.0. One is for a flu vaccine reaction, and – surprisingly – the other two are for a covid vaccine.”

What the tipster found — and I’m glossing over a lot of details here that you can find at the link — was that the CDC removed or refused to add the T88.1 or Y59.0 IDC codes from Minnesota death certificates that indicated that someone died from complications involving a COVID vaccine.

“In almost every death certificate that identifies a covid vaccine as a cause of death,” Hertzberg concluded, “the CDC committed data fraud by not assigning the ICD 10 code for vaccine side effects to the causes of death listed on the death certificate.”

Hertzberg’s report lists only nine altered death certificates, so, admittedly, we aren’t talking about big numbers here for COVID vaccines that were basically universal for adults in the given timeframe. The takeaway from this story for me is the lengths to which public officials will go just to squash any dissent or data contrary to the official narrative.

Maybe the best part of being an adult — aside from developing an appreciation for single-malt scotches, of course — is the right to gather the facts, assess the risks, and make your own decisions about what’s best for you.

Because you’re a grownup. And because it’s your life, not the government’s. We fought a revolution over that ideal almost 250 years ago, but the city named after the man who won it seems to have forgotten that.

Billions of Dollars in U.S. COVID Relief Aid Stolen



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

COVID-19 relief aid fraud ran rampant in the United States during the pandemic. Billions of dollars of government relief aid that was meant to stabilize the U.S. economy was instead pilfered. Social security numbers of federal prisoners and people who had previously passed away were used to redeem unemployment checks, while federal loan applicants were not thoroughly vetted. All of this, along with other blatant scams, may have led to the biggest case of fraud in many years.1

According to the Associated Press, more than $280 billion was stolen from the government’s COVID relief fund, while another $123 billion was misspent or wasted. The total loss exceeding $400 billion amounted to 10 percent of the total $4.2 trillion the government doled out in COVID relief aid, which was the “the largest rescue package in American history.”2

The COVID funds in question were authorized by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES ACT) in 2020 and the Consolidated Appropriations Act in 2021.3 The CARES Act was enacted in an attempt to lessen the devastating economic impact of U.S. government policies, which were implemented in response to the COVID pandemic, had on families and businesses.4

Independent investigators and analysts surmise that the government, in an effort to rapidly spend the trillions of dollars authorized in COVID relief funds, failed to exert proper control during the start of the pandemic and acted too leniently with loan applicants.5

Dan Fructer, chief of the fraud and white-collar crime unit at the U.S. Attorney’s office in the Eastern District of Washington said:

Here was this sort of endless pot of money that anyone could access. Folks kind of fooled themselves into thinking that it was a socially acceptable thing to do, even though it wasn’t legal.6

COVID Relief Assistance Programs Lacked Proper Safeguards

The Small Business Administration Association (SBAA) provided $1 trillion in an effort to aid small businesses during the COVID pandemic.7 The agency was in charge of two major COVID relief assistance programs—the COVID-19 Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program and the Paycheck Protection Program.

Proper safeguards to prevent fraud were not implemented as the agency gave out an unprecedented amount of money quickly. Loan applicants could “self-certify” that their applications were true. As a result, experts estimate that the COVID-19 Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program cost taxpayers $86 billion in fraud so far with updated numbers to be released soon.

The Paycheck Protection Program is estimated to have squandered $20 billion in fraud. The Paycheck Protection Program allowed banks and other financial institutions to issue government-backed loans, many of which were millions of dollars, to businesses that would not be required to pay them back if they used the money for business expenses. Some of these companies were fraudulently created just for the loan, while other criminals stole existing business names already registered with the state, and some legitimate companies inflated the number of employees in order to secure more money.8

According to the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, a government watchdog on COVID funds, almost 70,000 social security numbers that did not match names or birthdates on applications for the Paycheck Protection Program went unnoticed.9

Government Given More Time to Catch the Criminals

Currently, the SBAA has more than 80,000 criminal actions in COVID-related fraud which would take 100 years to follow-up on. Fortunately, In August 2022, legislation was signed to extend the statute of limitations from five to 10 years for the prosecution of fraud related to these two programs.10

The amount of money the SBAA admits has been stolen may just be the tip of the iceberg. The amount of fraud reported by the SBAA is challenged by a University of Texas study published in 2022 that discovered $117 billion in likely fraudulent loans by the Paycheck Protection Program.11

According to Labor Department Inspector General Larry Turner, there has been at least $76 billion in unemployment assistance scams together with the $115 billion that was inadvertently provided to the wrong people. The five-year statute of limitations has not yet been extended for unemployment fraud.

A March 2023 press release by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) shows that the agency has investigated 975 tax and money laundering cases totaling $3.2 billion in COVID relief fund fraud. 458 of these cases have led to indictments and 236 people have been sentenced to federal prison for an average of 37 months.12

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Lardner R, McDermott J, Kessler A. The Great Grift: How billions in COVID-19 relief aid was stolen or wasted. Associated Press June 13, 2023.
2 Ibid.
3 About the CARES Act and the Consolidated Appropriations Act. U.S. Department of the Treasury.
4 What’s In The Cares Act? Here’s A Summary. Peter G. Peterson Foundation Apr. 22, 2020.
5 Ljubas Z. U.S. Billions of Dollars Lost in COVID-19 Relief Fund Fraud. Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project June. 14, 2023.
6 Lardner R, McDermott J, Kessler A. The Great Grift: How billions in COVID-19 relief aid was stolen or wasted. Associated Press June 13, 2023.
7 COVID Relief:Fraud Schemes and Indicators in SBA Pandemic Programs. U.S. Government Accountability Office May 18, 2023.
8 Dilanian K, Strickler L. Biggest fraud in a generation’: The looting of the Covid relief plan known as PPP. NBC News Mar. 28, 2022.
9 Haslett C. House Republicans kick off fraud investigation into billions in COVID pandemic relief money. ABC News Feb. 1, 2023.
10 Lardner R, McDermott J, Kessler A. The Great Grift: How billions in COVID-19 relief aid was stolen or wasted. Associated Press June 13, 2023.
11 Ibid.
12 IRS-CI releases COVID fraud statistics ahead of the 3rd anniversary of the CARES Act. Internal Revenue Service Mar. 23, 2023.

Twelve Infants Die During Clinical Trials for FDA-Endorsed RSV Drug



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

On June 8, 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Antimicrobial Drugs Advisory Committee (AMDAC) voted unanimously (21-0) in favor of AstraZeneca and Sanofi’s new nirsevimab (Beyfortus) monoclonal antibody drug believed to provide protection for infants from respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease and other lower respiratory tract infections during their first year of life.1

Citing a “favorable benefit-risk profile for the prevention of RSV lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD) in newborns and infants born during or entering their first RSV season,” AstraZeneca/Sanofi stated in a press release that the antibody may also have the potential to protect those born healthy at term or preterm, as well as with conditions that make them more susceptible to RSV disease.2

RSV is a common, typically-mild lower respiratory illness. In serious cases, the disease can lead to pneumonia or bronchiolitis, putting infants and the elderly at high risk for complications.

The RSV antibody comes on the heels of the world’s first RSV vaccine, GSK’s Arexvy, which was approved by the FDA last month for use in people 60 years of age and older. Pending final FDA approval, nirsevimab would become the first single-dose pharmaceutical intervention in the U.S. aimed at protecting babies from RSV infections through the age of two years.3

RSV Labeled a Major Public Health Threat After Unprecedented Surge in Cases

After COVID infections decreased, there was an “unprecedented” spike in RSV infections in infants that overwhelmed hospitals in 2022 and prompted pediatric health organizations to call on President Biden to declare a public health emergency after 17 states reported that more than 80 percent of their beds were full last fall.4

While some experts suggest the surge in respiratory viruses is a result of relaxing COVID-19 measures, others attribute the spike to “immunity debt,” or the idea that people’s immune systems were weakened from lack of normal, natural exposure to pathogens like RSV and influenza because of stay-at-home orders, prolonged mask-wearing, and social distancing that persisted for the better part of three years.5

The path to pharmaceutical RSV protection spans several decades, with clinical trials for an RSV vaccine ending abruptly in the 1960s after the shot unexpectedly sickened and hospitalized 80 percent of children in the trial. The inactivated virus used in the shot exacerbated the disease once trial participants caught RSV naturally, leading to two children’s deaths and researchers going back to the drawing board.6

Today, more than 60 years later, 12 infants have died during clinical trials of the new nirsevimab, two from “unknown causes” thought to be linked to sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).7

Infant Deaths Attributed to Underlying Disease Despite Clinical Trials Requiring Healthy Participants

The other 10 infant deaths were attributed to “underlying disease.” However, according to Pfizer, clinical trials typically include healthy participants to assess the safety of the drug and any side effects, and only certain types of trials—such as those for oncology—would warrant the inclusion of sick patients versus healthy people.7 8

Before joining a clinical trial, according to the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), participants must be given informed consent, as well as any information that allows the research team to determine whether or not they can participate in the study safely.9

As for the other 10 children’s deaths—attributed to a number of varying causes such as cardiac disease, a tumor, COVID, a skull fracture, pneumonia, two from gastroenteritis, and two from unknown causes—FDA official Melissa Baylor, MD said none of the deaths appeared to be related to the experimental drug nirsevimab.7

SIDS and the Importance of Black Box Warnings on Drugs

By definition, SIDS is an unexpected and unexplainable death that occurs in a “seemingly normal, healthy infant under one year of age.” In fact, nine out of 10 deaths in the study occurred around the two- and four-month mark, when well-baby visits to the pediatrician commonly precede the administration of multiple vaccines, such as the combined DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis) in one visit, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Immunization Schedule.10

Many drugs, including some routine childhood vaccinations for newborns, contain black box warnings on the manufacturer’s product inserts. A black box warning, the highest safety-related warning intended to alert the consumer to major risks of the drug, stamps the insert of any drug where trial participants died during clinical studies. Still, more often than not, as with the clinical trials of nirsevimab, the diagnosis of SIDS often overrules the occurrence of a potentially lethal drug reaction as the cause of death in an otherwise healthy infant.11

The FDA is slated to make a final decision on nirsevimab later this year. To date, the agency maintains it has not identified any safety concerns in its review of the drug.7

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

THE PATRIOT NURSE: Defending Yourself Against the Medical Industrial Complex

I sat down with @Bigfamilyhomestead to discuss the shift in Healthcare and how preparedness-minded people can protect themselves and make provision for a rapidly changing medical reality.

You MUST Know THIS to Avoid Being a Medical Victim

In this video, Patriot Nurse discusses the realities one must face in the current health system infrastructure when taking someone to the hospital. Becoming an unwitting victim or a statistic in an increasingly polarized medical world is avoidable if you know how. Follow your intuition, know the limitations of your provider, and own the dogma and the nature of the system.

What you BETTER KNOW Before Going to the Hospital

In this video, Patriot Nurse discusses the realities one must face in the current health system infrastructure when taking someone to the hospital. The nursing and caregiver shortage is only part of the equation, and today we delve into the deeper issues of the medical industrial complex and state-mediated kidnapping of children under the guise of 'protecting' patients. You need to know.

BOMBSHELL: COVID-19 Developed by Chinese Military at Wuhan Lab, Says Report~U.S. Experts Unknowingly Helped the Chinese Military Create COVID-19

BOMBSHELL: COVID-19 Developed by Chinese Military at Wuhan Lab, Says Report



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

It’s been clear to many of us for some time now that COVID-19 was not created by nature, and likely leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Despite what was becoming increasingly clear to the public, U.S. health officials (including Anthony Fauci) insisted for three years that COVID-19 came from nature, essentially acting as willing accomplices in trying to cover up the truth to protect China.

But according to a bombshell report from the Sunday Times (UK), COVID-19 was indeed the result of genetic engineering carried out by the Chinese military.

Why would U.S. health officials want to cover this up? Because the funding for this effort originated in the United States, coming from the National Institute of Health via the EcoHealth Alliance. The Chinese military got involved with the coronavirus research around 2017 once significant progress was being made in gain-of-function research.

From the Sunday Times:

Scientists in Wuhan working alongside the Chinese military were combining the world’s most deadly coronaviruses to create a new mutant virus just as the pandemic began.

Investigators who scrutinised top-secret intercepted communications and scientific research believe Chinese scientists were running a covert project of dangerous experiments, which caused a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and started the Covid-19 outbreak.

The US investigators say one of the reasons there is no published information on the work is because it was done in collaboration with researchers from the Chinese military, which was funding it and which, they say, was pursuing bioweapons.

The Sunday Times conducted an extensive review of hundreds of documents, including confidential reports, internal memos, scientific papers, and email correspondences obtained from various sources spanning three years since the start of the pandemic. Interviews were also conducted with U.S. State Department investigators who specialized in China, emerging pandemic threats, and biowarfare.

It’s been alleged for some time that the EcoHealth Alliance has been circumventing the U.S. ban on gain-of-function research that was imposed during the Obama administration, and congressional investigations have made it quite clear that China has been covering up the truth. But the Sunday Times describes its investigation as “paint[ing] the clearest picture yet of what happened in the Wuhan laboratory.”

The facility, which had started hunting the origins of the Sars virus in 2003, attracted US government funding through a New York-based charity whose president was a British-born and educated zoologist. America’s leading coronavirus scientist shared cutting-edge virus manipulation techniques.

The institute was engaged in increasingly risky experiments on coronaviruses it gathered from bat caves in southern China. Initially, it made its findings public and argued the associated risks were justified because the work might help science develop vaccines.

This changed in 2016 after researchers discovered a new type of coronavirus in a mineshaft in Mojiang in Yunnan province where people had died from symptoms similar to Sars.

Rather than warning the world, the Chinese authorities did not report the fatalities. The viruses found there are now recognised as the only members of Covid-19’s immediate family known to have been in existence pre-pandemic.

They were transported to the Wuhan institute and the work of its scientists became classified. “The trail of papers starts to go dark,” a US investigator said. “That’s exactly when the classified programme kicked off. My view is that the reason Mojiang was covered up was due to military secrecy related to [the army’s] pursuit of dual use capabilities in virological biological weapons and vaccines.”

According to the US investigators, the classified programme was to make the mineshaft viruses more infectious to humans.

China’s relentless efforts focused on the manipulation of harmless SARS-like viruses, transforming them into variants capable of infecting humans. Furthermore, they ventured into the realm of dark experimentation by manipulating a MERS virus sourced from camels and fashioning it into a dangerous variant with the ability to infect people.

As the Sunday Times investigation makes clear, there is a substantial body of evidence supporting the claim that COVID-19 was engineered in a Wuhan laboratory, funded by both the United States and the Chinese military. Our government knew this and has lied to us to protect China, and, frankly, themselves, since the NIH used the EcoHealth Alliance to bypass a U.S. ban on gain-of-function research.

Related: Unfollow the Science: 300 COVID Articles Pulled, Many Over Lack of Ethical Standards

Millions have died from COVID, and our government was behind the efforts that created the virus. China has so far managed to avoid accountability for what it did. Had it been revealed in 2020 that China had engineered the virus, the uproar would have resulted in severe consequences for that country. But instead, our health officials lied, claiming COVID was born in nature, and several elected leaders dubbed anyone who wanted to blame China a racist. This didn’t just protect China; it protected our nation’s own corrupt health bureaucracy, which funded COVID’s creation.


The Sordid Details of How U.S. Experts Unknowingly Helped the Chinese Military Create COVID-19



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Once Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) got his hands on a published study from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, gain-of-function research became part of the conversation about the origins of COVID-19. Former NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci has repeatedly denied the NIH-funded experiments for that study qualified as a gain of function under repeated questioning from Paul and that they had anything to do with COVID-19.

It appears the chimeric virus from that study is not a precursor to the virus that causes COVID-19. However, a new investigative report from The Sunday Times in the U.K. makes a convincing case the virus was developed in parallel with the 2015 study at the Wuhan lab and that its creation relied on technology and techniques taught to Wuhan researchers by U.S. experts.

The in-depth investigation reviewed hundreds of documents obtained by freedom of information requests, court cases, and internal investigations. Journalists Jonathan Calvert and George Arbuthnott also interviewed three U.S. State Department investigators who were part of the team given access to metadata, phone information, and internet information collected by U.S. intelligence services.

The investigation provides a detailed timeline for creating SARS-Cov-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in a collaboration between the Wuhan Institute and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). It concludes that the research that led to COVID-19 started in 2012 and ran concurrently with a program run by Dr. Peter Daszak.

In the PREDICT program, which the NIH and USAID partially funded, Dr. Shi Zhengli and researchers from the Wuhan Institute collected bat-dropping samples from at least two sites in China. The first was a cave called Shitou. The viruses discovered there were studied, combined, and tested by Daszak, Shi, and Dr. Ralph Baric from the University of North Carolina. They published their findings in the 2015 paper cited by Paul.

The U.S.-China team’s work resulted in a chimeric virus that killed 75% of the humanized mice the team inoculated. It was three times as lethal as the unaltered sample virus given to the control group. The investigative journalists summed up the project by saying, “The scientists had created a highly infectious super-coronavirus with a terrifying kill rate that in all probability would never have emerged in nature.” And while the creation and the potential existence of this Frankenstein virus are terrifying enough, it is only half the story, according to the investigation.

Recommended: Why Is Fox News so Desperate to Silence Tucker Carlson?

In 2012, Wuhan researchers also took samples from bats in an abandoned copper mine in south China called Mojiang. Six researchers were struck with a mystery illness and tested positive for antibodies to an unknown coronavirus. Three of them died. The Sunday Times pieced together what happened from a master’s thesis by a medic at the hospital that treated the men and a Ph.D. paper by a student of the director of the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention.

Following the deaths, Shi’s team spent four years collecting 1,300 samples from bats in the mine while withholding the information about the sampling and the dead researchers from EcoHealth and the U.S. government. If the six researchers fell ill after contracting a virus found in bats, it would have been the first recorded incident of direct infection from bats to humans. It was precisely the situation the PREDICT program was set up to identify. Yet the team in China remained mum.

Instead, the samples were transported to the Wuhan Institute, and work on them became classified according to State Department investigators. In the mine, Shi and her team discovered nine viruses in a lineage of coronaviruses from a previously undiscovered family. She identified one of them as RaBtCoV/4991. It is the closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19. The nine viruses discovered were the only members of the SARS-CoV-2 line known to exist before the pandemic.

The intelligence reviewed by State Department investigators suggests that the same kind of experiments with chimeric viruses outlined in the 2015 paper by Shi and Baric were conducted on the SARS-CoV2-like viruses from the copper mine. This work was kept from Daszak.

“They were working with the nine different Covid variants,” one of the investigators said. They believe one virus at the Wuhan institute was an even closer match to Covid-19 than RaTG13 [previously called RaBtCoV/4991].“We are confident they were working on a closer unpublished variant — possibly collected in Mojiang [the copper mine],” the source added (emphasis added).

The investigators also learned that experiments inserting a furin cleavage site were conducted on at least one of the mine viruses. SARS-Cov2 is the only coronavirus that displays a furin cleavage site. Daszak proposed that insertion in a $14 million grant application to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The proposal outlines a project Shi and Baric on the team to find large numbers of SARS-like viruses and mix them with the deadly strains developed in the 2015 study. The proposal was denied.

According to all three investigators, the work on the mine viruses was funded by the Chinese military. According to their report:

Despite presenting itself as a civilian institution, the United States has determined that the Wuhan Institute of Virology has collaborated on publications and secret projects with China’s military. The Wuhan Institute of Virology has engaged in classified research, including laboratory animal experiments, on behalf of the Chinese military since at least 2017.

The intelligence sources link the Wuhan Institute and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) research arm. It also shows military personnel holding positions of responsibility at the Wuhan lab. A 2015 book by military researchers collaborating with Wuhan scientists discussed how SARS viruses could be manipulated through serial passaging into an emerging disease, weaponized, and unleashed

The intelligence sources link the Wuhan Institute and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) research arm. It also shows military personnel holding positions of responsibility at the Wuhan lab. A 2015 book by military researchers collaborating with Wuhan scientists discussed how SARS viruses could be manipulated through serial passaging into an emerging disease, weaponized, and unleashed.

The investigators also believe that the Chinese military is attempting to create vaccines for their chimeric viruses so they can innoculate their population and use the viruses as bioweapons. One PLA vaccine specialist, Zhou Yousen, produced a patent for a COVID-19 vaccine in February 2020. That led U.S. experts to believe Zhou worked on the vaccine before the pandemic began.

Intelligence intercepts indicating that three Wuhan researchers fell ill with coronavirus symptoms in November 2019 reinforce this theory. One investigator said, “We were rock-solid confident that this was likely COVID-19 because they were working on advanced coronavirus research in the laboratory of Dr. Shi. They’re trained biologists in their thirties and forties. Thirty-five-year-old scientists don’t get very sick with influenza.”

Recommended: White House Sends Out Guidance Mandating Face Masks and Social Distancing for the Unvaccinated

A complete crackdown on the Mojiang mine, strange equipment requests from the Wuhan lab, a visit from the safety director of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and Zhou’s death all occurred when COVID-19 emerged globally. A study showed that the initial cases of COVID-19 in Wuhan occurred several miles away from the much-maligned Hunan seafood market. The biggest hotspot was right next to the Wuhan Institute.

The collaboration between Baric and Shi using funds from U.S. agencies is one reason experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci and Daszak insisted on a natural emergence story for SARS-CoV-2. The brutal truth is that Baric provided Shi with two skills critical to the work done on the mine viruses. When Shi found SHC014, one of the viruses used to make the chimeric in the 2015 study, she could not grow sufficient copies to study it. Baric helped her recreate the spike protein on the virus from the genetic sequence.

Baric also developed a technique for modifying viruses called “seamless ligation,” supported by $220.5 million from the NIH. The method supposedly hid all evidence that a virus was manipulated in a laboratory. Unfortunately for Baric, researchers have found a way to identify these modifications. And they found that signature in the genome of SARS-CoV-2.

So, while Baric and Daszak may have remained in the dark about the parallel research on the viruses from the mine, they were acutely aware of the technological skill set provided to the Wuhan Institute. It appears to be how the Chinese researchers added the furin cleavage site and made enough of the viruses to study.

Perhaps that is why the world had to remain in the dark about the origins of COVID-19. Because while the Chinese Communist Party may have pulled the trigger on the deadly gain-of-function research that created the virus, U.S. collaborators gave them the metaphorical bullets. And there is no way to know how many more Frankenstein viruses may have been made from the viruses in the SARS-CoV2 lineage or when they might emerge from their home in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

1 2 3 4 58