Tag Archives: FLCCC

Shedding a Light on Covid Vaccine Shedding

Posted on by

COVID Vaccine Shedding Is ‘Real’, FDA & Pfizer Documents Are Proof: Clinicians

BY TYLER DURDEN
MONDAY, FEB 19, 2024 – 10:05 AM

Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The topic of COVID-19 vaccine shedding has long been controversial, but now, some doctors say it is real.

(myboys.me, Naeblys/Shutterstock)

“Shedding is unfortunately real,” said Dr. Pierre Kory at the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) conference in Phoenix, Arizona, in early February. “The FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) knows that.”

Dr. Kory is a co-founder of the FLCCC, a non-profit advocacy group founded by physicians for the treatment of COVID-19, long COVID, and postvaccine syndromes. He is also the co-founder of the Leading Edge Clinic and has treated over a thousand long-COVID and postvaccine patients.

Fact-checkers have largely denied shedding on the basis of definition. The commonly cited definition comes from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, which defines shedding as the release of viruses, bacteria, and their components from live vaccines.

While mRNA and adenovirus vaccines are not live vaccines, they function similarly to gene therapy products.

All gene therapy products pose a risk of shedding, according to the FDA.

FDA Documents

In a 2015 document titled Design and Analysis of Shedding Studies for Virus or Bacteria-Based Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products, the FDA defines shedding as “the release of [viral or bacterial gene therapy products] … from the patient through one or all of the following ways: excreta (feces); secreta (urine, saliva, nasopharyngeal fluids etc.); or through the skin (pustules, sores, wounds).”

In the same document, the FDA also explains what gene therapy products are: “All products that mediate their effects by transcription and/or translation of transferred genetic material.”

The COVID-19 mRNA and adenovirus vaccines fall into this category. They mediate their effects by inducing the body to translate mRNA genetic information into spike proteins.

Some gene therapy products known to shed include an eye treatment branded as Luxturna. Luxturna uses an adenovirus carrier to deliver eye protein DNA to retina cells in patients.

The Luxturna adenovirus and its DNA have been found in patients’ tears, according to the product’s package insert.

Similarly, mRNA and adenovirus COVID-19 vaccines may cause vaccinated patients to release spike proteins or other vaccine components, Dr. Kory explained.

For example, COVID-19 mRNA has been found in the breast milk of vaccinated mothers, indicating possible exposure of the vaccine to infants. Another study showed that spike protein, the product of COVID-19 vaccination, can last for at least half a year in the blood of vaccinated individuals, indicating prolonged spike protein persistence.

The FDA, however, denied that the 2015 document applies to COVID mRNA vaccines.

“COVID-19 vaccines are not regulated as gene therapy products by the FDA; therefore, the guidance document cited is not applicable to the COVID-19 vaccines,” an FDA spokeswoman told The Epoch Times.

Pfizer Investigators Told to Report ‘Environmental’ Vaccine Exposures

Another piece of evidence resides in Pfizer documents, Dr. Kory added.

In Pfizer’s COVID mRNA vaccine protocol, the company instructs investigators to report “environmental exposures” if trial participants expose people around them to the vaccine through inhalation or skin contact.

Examples of such environmental exposures are noted as follows:

  • “A male participant who is receiving or has discontinued [vaccine] intervention exposes a female partner prior to or around the time of conception.”
  • “A female family member or healthcare provider reports that she is pregnant after having been exposed to the [vaccine] intervention through inhalation or skin contact.”

The protocol also goes into what Dr. Kory and his clinic co-founder, Scott Marsland, call “secondary shedding.” This occurs when a person who has had environmental exposure to the vaccine then exposes another person.

“An example of environmental exposure during breastfeeding,” Pfizer writes, “is a female family member or healthcare provider who reports that she is breastfeeding after having been exposed to the study intervention (the vaccine) by inhalation or skin contact.”

Pfizer’s Documents Showing Indirect Exposures

Pfizer has documented hundreds of adverse events that occurred as a result of indirect exposures or exposure to babies during pregnancy or breastfeeding.

In its Periodic Safety Report submitted to the European Union, Pfizer listed several adverse events it deemed not attributable to the vaccine and that should be excluded from discussion.

The document listed 22 cases of adverse events in babies who had received “indirect exposure” to COVID mRNA boosters, suggesting exposure other than a direct vaccination.

The investigators also monitored several special adverse event cases. Two blood-related adverse events involved babies being exposed through breastfeeding. Ten cases of liver-related adverse events and one adverse event of the vasculature system were reported for the same reason.

Two cases of acute kidney or renal failure and eight respiratory cases also involved babies being exposed during pregnancy or breastfeeding.

Testimonies From Patients

Patients who may be affected by vaccine exposure tend to be those with a history of sensitivities and chronic diseases, said Dr. Kory and Mr. Marsland. They also tend to have bad experiences with pharmaceuticals and are more likely to be chronically debilitated by COVID-19 or the vaccine.

Dr. Kory said that after compiling over 800 anecdotal reports, they observed a clear pattern in symptoms that they determined to be shedding.

Typically, the manifestation of symptoms is repeatable and predictable, such as when a person repeatedly becomes symptomatic when going into supermarkets or crowded places.

Dr. Kory gave the example of a patient who noticed he could not handle going into grocery stores.

The patient told Dr. Kory that he just couldn’t “go into grocery stores anymore.” Within five minutes of entering a Trader Joe’s grocery store, he “feels so terrible” that he has to leave. He experienced the same aversion upon going to a crowded farmers market.

At the FLCCC event, Mr. Marsland also shared several cases where he believed shedding was involved.

One case involved a 54-year-old male, who previously suffered from symptoms after the COVID-19 vaccine, meeting up with a friend who received a COVID-19 booster.

They sat close to each other, talking and laughing. “Within hours of spending their time together, [the man] had a headache, myalgia, and joint pain, increased fatigue,” Mr. Marsland relayed.

When the patient went to a busy airport, he felt worse.

He returned home and had sexual contact with his spouse, exchanging bodily fluids. Within minutes, the spouse developed severe “nine out of 10” abdominal pain.

The two believed the pain was from shedding, so both took ivermectin, known to bind to and block spike proteins. Within about half an hour, the spouse’s abdominal pain receded.

“It’s the temporal association and the accumulation of symptoms,” Mr. Marsland reasoned.

Other doctors treating long COVID and postvaccine syndromes, such as Dr. Syed Haider and Dr. Ana Mihalcea, have also reported suspected cases of shedding.

Some Vaccinologists Disagree

Professors in vaccinology, however, do not acknowledge that mRNA vaccines may induce shedding.

“mRNA leads to the expression of proteins in cells, and this expression is different from shedding, as you would have if you are infected by certain viruses,” associate professor Paulo Verardi of the University of Connecticut told The Epoch Times.

“While SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to virus shedding, and, therefore, transmission of the virus from person to person, shedding of the spike protein does not occur in individuals receiving the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine,” he continued.

While another definition of shedding refers to the release of live viruses in people infected or vaccinated with live vaccines, Dr. Kory reiterated that the shedding discussed in the case of COVID-19 vaccines is different from the shedding of live viruses.

Professor Florian Krammer at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai also told The Epoch Times that shedding does not exist.

He did not reply when The Epoch Times presented him with information regarding the FDA’s documents on gene therapy and shedding.

from:    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/covid-vaccine-shedding-real-fda-and-pfizer-documents-are-proof-clinicians?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2287

Sooooo…. Ivermectin DOES Work -Safe AND Effective

Posted on by

Ivermectin Worked: New Peer-Reviewed Study Proves It

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked
ivermectin worked peer reviewed study proves it

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • A preprint paper showing ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID-19 in Peru convinced a group of doctors that widespread ivermectin distribution could end the pandemic in October 2020
  • Because the paper wasn’t yet peer-reviewed, it was brushed off; ivermectin for COVID-19 was vilified, as were those who dared to prescribe it
  • Now, the study has been peer-reviewed and published in Cureus, vindicating ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19
  • Not only did ivermectin work against COVID-19, it was remarkably effective, resulting in a 74% reduction in excess deaths in the 10 Peru states where it was used most intensively
  • There was a 14-fold reduction in nationwide excess deaths when ivermectin was readily available and then a 13-fold increase in excess deaths in the two months after ivermectin use was restricted

As the COVID pandemic wore on, with potential treatments supposedly unknown, New York pulmonologist Dr. Pierre Kory and others tried to get the word out about ivermectin. A widely used antiparasitic drug that’s listed on the World Health Organization’s essential medicines list1 and approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, ivermectin is widely available, inexpensive and has a long history of safe usage.

In fact, since 1987, 3.7 billion doses of ivermectin have been used among humans worldwide,2 but it was quickly vilified — as were those who dared to prescribe it. Now, the tables have turned. Not only did ivermectin work against COVID-19, it was remarkably effective, resulting in a 74% reduction in excess deaths in the 10 states where it was used most intensively.3

Ivermectin Dramatically Slashed COVID Deaths

Kory and other physicians with the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group (FLCCC) had success early on treating patients with ivermectin and other therapies during the pandemic. His efforts to get the word out on this treatment protocol were stifled by censorship, ridicule and colleagues brainwashed by the official narrative and unwilling to accept the science.

A preprint paper showing ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID-19 in Peru “was the final piece of evidence which convinced me, Paul [Marik] and the FLCCC that widespread ivermectin distribution could end the pandemic in Oct of 2020,” Kory tweeted.4 “Took 2 years but now peer-reviewed & published in a major journal.”

That study, published in Cureus,5 vindicates ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19. “Reductions in excess deaths over a period of 30 days after peak deaths averaged 74% in the 10 states with the most intensive IVM [ivermectin] use,” the study found.6 It used Peruvian national health data from Peru’s 25 states to evaluate ivermectin’s effects.

A natural experiment was set in motion in May 2020, when Peru authorized ivermectin for COVID-19. The significant reduction in excess deaths noted “correlated closely with the extent of IVM use,” the researchers noted.

Global Success Stories Highlight Ivermectin’s Potential

Few have heard about the astonishing success of ivermectin in Uttar Pradesh, India, which embraced large-scale prophylactic and therapeutic use of ivermectin for COVID-19 patients, close contacts of patients and health care workers.7

“The possibility of both preventative and treatment efficacies of IVM was raised by outcomes in another world region in which IVM was distributed to the population at risk for COVID-19 on a mass scale. This IVM distribution occurred in Uttar Pradesh, the largest state in India, having a population of 229 million,” the study added.8

There, widespread ivermectin distribution likely resulted in significantly lower COVID-19 deaths compared to areas not using the drug:9

“The cumulative total of COVID-19 deaths per million in population from July 7, 2021 through April 1, 2023 was 4.3 in Uttar Pradesh, as compared with 70.4 in all of India and 1,596.3 in the United States … The much lower number of COVID-19 deaths per population in all of India versus the United States in that period may reflect the use of these same home treatment kits containing IVM, doxycycline, and zinc in some other states of India.”

A similar series of events occurred in Itajai, Brazil, a city of 220,000 people. In June 2020, they implemented a prophylaxis program using ivermectin. The program was advertised throughout local media, and people were encouraged to participate and take ivermectin four times a month, on days 1, 2, 15 and 16.

On the appropriate days, they set up tents and centers where people could get the drug, and the entire program was carefully logged in an electronic database. In all, 159,000 Brazilians participated, of those 113,000 elected to take the ivermectin.

Kory and eight coauthors published a paper on the results, which showed “regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates.”10

Those who used ivermectin had a 44% reduction in COVID-19 infection rate, a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality and a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate compared to those who did not.11

Meanwhile, a study from Japan demonstrated that just 12 days after doctors were allowed to legally prescribe ivermectin to their COVID-19 patients, cases dropped dramatically.12 The chairman of the Tokyo Medical Association13 noticed the low number of infections and deaths in Africa, where many use ivermectin prophylactically and as the core strategy to treat river blindness.14D.

Government’s Ivermectin Restrictions Increased Deaths

In a striking revelation, ivermectin was used against COVID-19 in Peru for four months, before the new president put restrictions on its use. During that time, “there was a 14-fold reduction in nationwide excess deaths and then a 13-fold increase in the two months following the restriction of IVM use.”15

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has towed the anti-ivermectin narrative all along, with its infamous tweet reading, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”16 While commanding the U.S. public and physicians not to use ivermectin for an off-label use, the irony stands that close to 40% of U.S. prescriptions are for off-label uses.17

But now, after years of vilification, it had no choice but to admit what’s been right all along — doctors have the authority to prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19. Attorney Jared Kelson of Boyden Gray & Associates, who is representing physicians who have sued the FDA for interfering with their practice of medicine, including relating to ivermectin for COVID-19, explained:18

“The fundamental issue is straightforward. After the FDA approves a human drug for sale, does it then have the authority to influence or interfere with how that drug is used within the doctor-patient relationship? The answer is no.”

The FDA did just that, nonetheless, but finally admitted the truth on August 16, 2023, tweeting, “Health care professionals generally may choose to prescribe an approved human drug for an unapproved use when they judge that the unapproved use is medically appropriate for an individual patient.”19

In September 2021, the American Medical Association also told doctors to stop prescribing ivermectin for COVID-19. In a statement, AMA, along with the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), warned:20

“We are alarmed by reports that outpatient prescribing for and dispensing of ivermectin have increased 24-fold since before the pandemic and increased exponentially over the past few months. As such, we are calling for an immediate end to the prescribing, dispensing, and use of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 outside of a clinical trial.

In addition, we are urging physicians, pharmacists, and other prescribers — trusted health care professionals in their communities — to warn patients against the use of ivermectin outside of FDA-approved indications and guidance, whether intended for use in humans or animals, as well as purchasing ivermectin from online stores.”

How many died unnecessarily as a result of these commands? As noted by journalist Kim Iversen, even the FDA’s move advising doctors that they’re allowed to prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19 is too little, too late. “Now, two, three years later, too little, too late… ultimately, we now get this study that has been officially peer reviewed and published, and it shows significant, significant, significant reduction [of mortality] in COVID-19.”21

How Does Ivermectin Work Against COVID?

Ivermectin binds to SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein, limiting the virus’ morbidity and infectivity.22 The drug, while best known for its antiparasitic effects, also has demonstrated antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties. An in vitro study demonstrated that a single treatment with ivermectin effectively reduced viral load 5,000 times in 48 hours in cell culture.23

Studies have shown that ivermectin helps to lower the viral load by inhibiting replication.24 A single dose of ivermectin can kill 99.8% of the virus within 48 hours.25 A meta-analysis in the American Journal of Therapeutics also showed the drug reduced infection by an average of 86% when used preventively.26

Ivermectin has also been shown to speed recovery, in part by inhibiting inflammation and protecting against organ damage.27 This pathway also lowers the risk of hospitalization and death. Meta analyses have shown an average reduction in mortality that ranges from 75%28 to 83%.29,30

Additionally, the drug also prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 when taken before or after exposure.31 As the Cureus study noted, the latest data only adds further evidence that ivermectin has an important place in COVID-19 treatment:32

“These encouraging results from IVM treatments in Peru and similar positive indications from Uttar Pradesh, India, which have populations of 33 million and 229 million, respectively, offer promising models for further mass deployments of IVM, as needs may arise, for both the treatment and prevention of COVID-19.”

It’s worth noting, too, that ivermectin has notable antitumor effects, which include inhibiting proliferation, metastasis and angiogenic activity in cancer cells.33 It appears to inhibit tumor cells by regulating multiple signaling pathways, which researchers explained in the Pharmacological Research journal, “suggests that ivermectin may be an anticancer drug with great potential.”34

Why Was Ivermectin Suppressed?

Download Interview Transcript | Video Link

The average treatment cost for ivermectin is $58.35 Do you think this has anything to do with ivermectin’s vilification? The authors of the Cureus study certainly do:36

“The exceptional safety profile and low cost of IVM certainly support its use as in Peru’s operation MOT [Mega-Operación Tayta] and in Uttar Pradesh as an attractive national policy for COVID-19 mitigation. These significant reductions in mortality as achieved in Peru and Uttar Pradesh suggest that the impact of such a national IVM deployment would be observable within a relatively short period.

However, generic drugs have often fared poorly in competition with patented offerings in past decades, based upon the unfortunate vulnerability of science to commodification and regulatory capture … Such a potential bias against IVM was suggested by a February 4, 2021 press release from Merck, which was then developing its own patented COVID-19 therapeutic, claiming that there was ‘a concerning lack of safety data’ for IVM.

However, IVM is Merck’s own drug, found safe at doses considerably higher than its standard dose in several studies, as cited in the section on the background on IVM treatments of COVID-19, and the Nobel Prize committee specifically noted IVM’s safety record in honoring the discovery of this drug in its 2015 prize for medicine.”

If you’d like to learn more about ivermectin’s potential uses for COVID-19, FLCCC’s I-CARE protocol can be downloaded in full,37 giving you step-by-step instructions on how to prevent and treat the early symptoms of COVID-19.

Autopsy Reports Reveal…..

Posted on by

Study: 74% of Post-Jab Deaths Caused by the Shot

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked 

VIDEO LINK;

https://rumble.com/v2ykrv8-doctors-censored-by-lancet-in-paper-that-found-74-mrna-vaccine-related-caus.html

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • July 5, 2023, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, Dr. Roger Hodkinson, an expert clinical pathologist, and colleagues published a systematic review of autopsy findings in people who died after receiving a COVID shot on The Lancet journal’s preprint server
  • The autopsy review found that 62.5% to 73.9% of post-jab deaths were likely caused by the injection
  • Preprints with The Lancet pulled the study in less than 24 hours
  • The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) also rejected the paper, as did the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). The preprint server medRxiv and others also refused to post it
  • Belgian researchers report that two doses of the Pfizer mRNA COVID jab induced lethal “turbo cancers” in a mouse. Two days after receiving its second dose, one of the 14 injected mice (7%) died suddenly. No clinical signs of illness were present before its abrupt death. Upon post-mortem examination, the mouse was found to have lymphoma in several organs, including the heart, liver, kidneys, spleen and lungs

July 5, 2023, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, Dr. Roger Hodkinson, an expert clinical pathologist, and several other colleagues published a systematic review of autopsy findings in people who died after receiving a COVID shot on The Lancet journal’s preprint server.1

Disturbingly, but not surprisingly, they concluded that 62.5% to 73.9% of post-jab deaths were likely caused by the injection. Previous autopsy reviews have also concluded that the mRNA COVID jabs are a causative factor in sudden cardiac deaths.2

Nearly Three-Quarters of Post-Jab Deaths Caused by the Shot

As explained by the authors:3

“The aim of this systematic review is to investigate possible causal links between COVID-19 vaccine administration and death using autopsies and post-mortem analysis … We searched for all published autopsy and necropsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination up until May 18th, 2023.

We initially identified 678 studies and, after screening for our inclusion criteria, included 44 papers that contained 325 autopsy cases and one necropsy case. Three physicians independently reviewed all deaths and determined whether COVID-19 vaccination was the direct cause or contributed significantly to death.

The most implicated organ system in COVID-19 vaccine-associated death was the cardiovascular system (53%), followed by the hematological system (17%), the respiratory system (8%), and multiple organ systems (7%). Three or more organ systems were affected in 21 cases.

The mean time from vaccination to death was 14.3 days. Most deaths occurred within a week from last vaccine administration. A total of 240 deaths (73.9%) were independently adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination …

Among adjudicators, there was complete independent agreement (all three physicians) of vaccination causing or contributing to death in 203 cases (62.5%). The one necropsy case was judged to be linked to vaccination with complete agreement …

The consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine adverse events, their mechanisms, and related excess death, coupled with autopsy confirmation and physician-led death adjudication, suggests there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death in most cases.”

The Lancet Censors Paper

As has so often been the case over these past three years, the journal didn’t waste time censoring the paper. Preprints with The Lancet pulled it within 24 hours,4 stating “the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology.”5 In what way? They don’t say. As noted by McCullough, the methodology is as standard as it gets. Will Jones at the Daily Sceptic adds:6

“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 …

Dr. Clare Craig, a pathologist and co-Chair of the HART pandemic advisory group, says that in her view the approach taken in the study is sound. She told the Daily Sceptic:

‘The VAERS system … 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.

However, this is imperfect as a deficit of deaths would be expected after a period of excess deaths, making the accuracy of any baseline dubious. An alternative approach of auditing such deaths through autopsy is sound.

There may be a bias [in the study] towards reporting the autopsies of deaths where there was evidence of causation and the likelihood of causation might be exaggerated by that bias. For example, 19 of the 325 deaths were due to vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT) but these reports may be overrepresented because of the regulators’ willingness to acknowledge such deaths.

Nevertheless, 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.”

Prior to this, The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) had also rejected the paper, as had the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). NEJM rejected it within a few days, and JAMA within about an hour of submission. The preprint server medRxiv and others also refused to post it.

In the video above, Naomi Wolf with Daily Clout interviewed McCullough about the censoring of his paper. According to McCullough, overnight, while the paper was still on the Preprint server, downloads of the paper were in the hundreds per minute, demonstrating there’s a clear demand for this information.

The paper is currently only available for download on the preprint server Zenodo.7 Ironically, by pulling the paper off the server, The Lancet magnified its existence, as news of the censorship went viral on social media.

Mechanisms of Action

In the featured Daily Clout interview, McCullough explains the jab’s mechanisms of action that appear to be responsible for a majority of post-jab heart-related deaths. The first is myocarditis (heart inflammation). The other is progression of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

In myocarditis, the electrical current can no longer conduct smoothly through the heart muscle, causing an abnormal heart rhythm. This abnormal heart rhythm can then lead to sudden cardiac death. This is one of the primary reasons behind many athletic deaths, where players have died on the field.

In a letter to the editor of the Scandinavian Journal of Immunology published in late 2022,8,9 McCullough compared the pre- and post-COVID jab cardiac death rates among athletes, finding that before the jab, there were an average of 29 cardiac-related deaths among pro athletes per year.

After the rollout of the jab, which was mandated on players, it shot up to 283 per year — a 10-fold increase. And, in many cases, players have no prior symptoms. Wolf points out that lipid nanoparticles have been found to damage electrical conduction in the myelin sheath, so why would it not also damage electrical conduction in the heart? It makes sense that it would.

McCullough adds that when lipid nanoparticles are taken up by human somatic cells — nonreproductive cells, found in the heart and other internal organs — it causes syncytia formation where cell membranes fuse together.

And, because the heart prefers lipids over glucose for fuel, it may preferentially take up lipid nanoparticles, more so than other tissues. On top of that, exercise increases blood flow, which draws more lipid nanoparticles to the heart.

He also cites research showing there are two primary periods of sudden cardiac death: during exercise and between 3 AM and 6 AM. The common factor between these two is adrenaline. Adrenaline surges during exercise and in the natural waking process. If you have myocarditis, this adrenaline surge can be enough to trigger sudden cardiac death.

Shining a Light on Possible Treatments

As noted by Wolf, by clearly identifying how the COVID jab is killing people, McCullough’s paper also helps shed light on potential treatments. The spike protein produced by your body in response to the mRNA shot is the primary culprit that needs to be degraded and eliminated.

The enzymes in your body that would normally do this job are unable to degrade the synthetic spike protein, but there are products that can get the job done. McCullough refers to Japanese research that found nattokinase can be very helpful in this regard. However, lumbrokinase is a much stronger fibrinolytic enzyme and would likely work better.

Bromelain, an enzyme derived from pineapple stems, also works, McCullough says, as does curcumin, the active ingredient in turmeric. We also know that both hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin aid in the elimination of spike protein.

As noted by McCullough, it’s interesting that while the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the spike protein produced by the mRNA jab are synthetic and wholly unnatural, most of the best remedies are turning out to be all-natural compounds.

Reprehensible Medical Censorship

At the end of the interview, McCullough says that if the current censorship trend continues, medical history may well state that the COVID shots are perfectly safe, even though there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary — evidence that was never allowed to be seen.

In a three-part series for TrialSite News, published in 2021, investigative journalist Sonia Elijah reviewed how scientific journals were censoring the science on COVID. July 7, 2023, she published a follow-up based on the most recent censoring of McCullough’s paper:10

“This is just another example of a paper with findings, not fitting in with the ‘very good safety profile of the COVID-19 vaccines,’ being expelled from a prominent journal,” she writes. “Dr. McCullough commented exclusively for TrialSite about this highly concerning issue. This is what he said:

‘This act of medical censorship occurred after the paper met all the criteria for listing on the Lancet PrePrint Server and appears to be triggered by very heavy worldwide interest and rapid downloading of the paper.

This speaks to the importance of our findings as the largest summary of autopsies after COVID-19 vaccination. Elsevier and Lancet are trying to suppress critical scientific observations on COVID-19 vaccine safety. Their actions are reprehensible.’

My own research11 in analyzing the Periodic Safety Update Reports compiled by Pfizer for the European Medicines Agency revealed damning data. As of June 2022, 161 children have died shortly after taking the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

What is even more shocking is that an overwhelming majority of autopsies were not performed or followed up by the pharmaceutical behemoth … This is why McCullough et al.’s study is so key because there is an incredible lack of laboratory data and post-mortem information on these post-vaccine deaths …

This begs the all-important question — has this scarcity been carefully orchestrated to prevent sufficient evidence of a causal association of COVID-19 vaccines with the reported deaths?”

Case Report of mRNA Jab-Induced Turbo Cancers

In related news, Belgian researchers report that two doses of the Pfizer mRNA COVID jab induced lethal “turbo cancers” in a mouse. Two days after receiving its second dose, one of the 14 injected mice (7%) died suddenly. No clinical signs of illness were present before its abrupt death.

Upon post-mortem examination, the mouse was found to have lymphoma in several organs, including the heart, liver, kidneys, spleen and lungs. The case report, published in Frontiers in Oncology May 1, 2023, noted:12

“Two days following booster vaccination (i.e., 16 days after prime), at only 14 weeks of age, our animal suffered spontaneous death with marked organomegaly and diffuse malignant infiltration of multiple extranodal organs (heart, lung, liver, kidney, spleen) by lymphoid neoplasm.

Immunohistochemical examination revealed organ sections positive for CD19, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase, and c-MYC, compatible with a B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma immunophenotyped …

Given the paucity of data on the long-term safety of the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines, it is vital that clinicians and scientists report any adverse event to establish potential correlations.

Our case adds to previous clinical reports on malignant lymphoma development following novel SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Interestingly, we are the first to report a B-LBL subtype …

Although strong evidence proving or refuting a causal relationship between SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination and lymphoma development or progression is lacking, vigilance is required, with conscientious reporting of similar cases and a further investigation of the mechanisms of action that could explain the aforementioned association.”

Resources for Those Injured by the COVID Jab

Aside from autopsy assessments, case reports of harms and various other studies, things like job statistics, disability claims, life insurance claims and all-cause mortality statistics also tell us that the COVID jabs are having a devastating effect.13 All have skyrocketed since the introduction of these COVID jabs.

If you got one or more jabs and suffered an injury, first and foremost, never ever take another COVID booster, another mRNA gene therapy shot or regular vaccine. You need to end the assault on your body.

The same goes for anyone who has taken one or more COVID jabs and had the good fortune of not experiencing debilitating side effects. Your health may still be impacted long-term, so don’t take any more shots.

When it comes to treatment, it seems like many of the treatments that worked against severe COVID-19 infection also help ameliorate adverse effects from the jab. This makes sense, as the toxic, most damaging part of the virus is the spike protein, and that’s what your whole body is producing if you got the jab.

As mentioned earlier, eliminating the spike protein is a primary task to prevent and/or address post-jab injuries. Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine bind to and facilitate the removal of spike protein. According to McCullough, nattokinase, bromelain and curcumin also help degrade the spike protein.

For a comprehensive treatment plan, see the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) I-RECOVER protocol. It’s continuously updated as more data become available, so be sure to download the latest version straight from the FLCCC website at covid19criticalcare.com.14

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/07/18/post-covid-vaccination-deaths.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20230718_HL2&foDate=true&mid=DM1435273&rid=1858959125

SADS, Jab Injuries, & Immune System Destruction

Posted on by

Sudden Death: The No. 1 Cause of Death for Under 65s in 2021

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked
  • Mounting evidence shows the COVID shots are destroying people’s immune systems and are triggering turbo-charged cancers
  • A survey by Steve Kirsch found sudden death is the No. 1 cause of death among those under the age of 65 who got the COVID jab
  • Myocarditis as a cause of death is now registering across all age ranges but only for the vaccinated. Cardiac-related deaths are also significantly elevated among younger people (under 65) who got the jab compared to their unjabbed peers
  • Recent research shows repeated jabs trigger a switch in the types of antibodies your body produces and lower your ability to clear viruses. By switching from spike-specific neutralizing IgG antibodies to IgG4 antibodies, your body switches from tumor suppression mode into tumor progression mode
  • In addition to the potential for cancer cells to run amok, IgG4 dominance may also have severe autoimmune implications, as the COVID jab spike protein share similarities with human proteins

Evidence showing the COVID shots are a public health disaster keeps mounting. In late December 2022, Steve Kirsch1 and Jessica Rose,2 Ph.D., both published Substack articles detailing some of the latest evidence showing the shots are destroying people’s immune systems and have triggered an avalanche of turbo-charged cancers.

Kirsch’s article3 features results from a recent survey he conducted. It included four questions: age, whether the deceased was jabbed or not, year of death and cause of death. While the number of responses is low, major insights can still be gleaned by looking at the trends.

First, we have the baseline data from 2020, which show cancer was the No. 1 killer of Americans younger than 65, followed by hospital treatment for COVID. Turbo-charged cancers accounted for one-ninth of the cancer reports, and there were no reports of death from myocarditis.

Among seniors over the age of 65, preexisting conditions were the top cause of death in 2020. Cancer was second, COVID infection third and cardiac events fourth. There were no turbo-charged cancer deaths, nor any myocarditis deaths. Kirsch then gets into the differences between the vaxxed and the unvaxxed in 2021 and 2022.

What the Unvaxxed Died of in 2021 and 2022

In 2021 and 2022, the primary cause of death for people 65 and younger was hospital treatment for COVID. Incidences of sudden death, pulmonary embolism and turbo-charged cancers were all low, and there were no unknown causes of death, nor any myocarditis deaths.

record graph 1

The same went for people older than 65. Hospital treatment for COVID was the No. 1 killer. Heart attacks, turbo-charged cancer and sudden death were all low, and there were no deaths from myocarditis.

record graph 2

What the COVID-Jabbed Died of in 2021 and 2022

Among the COVID-jabbed aged 65 and younger, sudden death was the No. 1 cause of death in 2021 and 2022. The second was cardiac-related death and cancer was third. Importantly, the incidence of turbo-charged cancer among the jabbed was significant in this group, and myocarditis killed more than COVID-19.

record graph 3

Among those older than 65, cancer was the No. 1 cause of death, and the turbo-charged cancer rate is “huge compared to those without the vaccine.” Sudden death was also significantly elevated.

record graph 4

Stark Difference in Cancer Deaths Between Jabbed and Unjabbed

Kirsch summarizes the three most stunning differences between the jabbed and unjabbed:4

1.“Sudden death rates are off the charts for the vaccinated cf. unvaccinated for those <65 … It’s the #1 cause of death for this age group …

2.Myocarditis as a cause of death is registering now for both age ranges but only for the vaccinated …

3.Cardiac issues as a cause of death in vaccinated young people (<65) are significantly elevated vs. their unvaxxed peers.”

How COVID Jabs Raise Risk of Infections and Cancer

Exploding cancer rates is precisely what you would expect from a drug that impairs and destroys your immune system, which is what the COVID jabs do. The scientific paper “Innate Immune Suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccinations”5 describes how the COVID shots suppress your innate immune system by inhibiting the type-1 interferon pathway, which is the first-stage response to all viral infections.

The reason type-1 interferon is suppressed is because it responds to viral RNA, and there’s no viral RNA in the COVID shot. The RNA is modified to look like human RNA, so the interferon pathway doesn’t get triggered. As a result, the COVID jab makes you more susceptible to infections.

One mechanism by which the jab causes cancer has to do with the fact that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein obliterates 90% of the DNA repair mechanism in lymphocytes,6 a type of white blood cell that helps your body fight infections and chronic diseases such as cancer. That’s bad enough, yet that’s just one mechanism of many.

How the Jab Lowers Your Viral Clearance Capacity

Recent research7,8 also shows that repeated jabs trigger a switch in the types of antibodies your body produces and lower your ability to clear viruses. Jessica Rose reviews these findings in her Substack article:9

“A paper was published in Science Immunology on December 22, 2022 entitled: ‘Class switch towards non-inflammatory, spike-specific IgG4 antibodies after repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination’10 …

[It] explains in wonderful detail how a class of antibody that commands a non-inflammatory response (more like tolerizing) is prominent in people who have been repeatedly injected with the modified mRNA COVID-19 injectable products.

Translation: Instead of the intended pool of spike-specific neutralizing IgG antibodies being dominant in multiply-injected people, a pool of antibodies associated with spike-specific tolerance are dominant in multiply-injected people.

Besides the tolerizing capacity, they also showed that the phagocytic enabling capacities were much reduced overall. These activities lead to clearance of viral pathogens. Reduce them → reduction in viral clearance capacity …

To be clear, this wasn’t a ‘maybe the antibody profile was a little different’ … This was a ‘whoa there’s a 48,075% increase in spike-specific antibodies between the 2nd and 3rd injections …

IgG4 antibodies among all spike-specific IgG antibodies rose on average from 0.04% shortly after the second vaccination to 19.27% after the third … [I]mportantly, that is not a typical consequence of repeat antigen exposure from either natural infections and vaccination.”

Spike Overexposure Also Opens the Door for Cancer

As noted by Substack author Brian Mowrey:11

“This is a totally bonkers thing for an anti-spike-protein B cell to decide to do, and reflects B cell over-exposure to spike, which reflects super-excess production of spike by the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA code …

It is not normal to make IgG4 when repeat encounter with a virus is spaced out over a lifetime, but injection-prompted antigen exposure promotes this response, and mRNA vaccines accelerate this effect …

There is no reason to predict that this would be ‘good’ in an antiviral response … ‘Wearing out’ the immune response in this way is believed to contribute to the development of tolerance against tumors.”

So, to summarize the effects in layman’s terms, the switch from spike-specific neutralizing IgG antibodies to IgG4 antibodies switches your body from tumor suppression mode into tumor progression mode, as cancerous cells now can evade your immune system. You become “tumor tolerant” as your immune system is no longer scavenging for and eliminating cancer cells. Mowrey also points out that:12

“Once a B cell has switched to IgG4, it cannot switch to any other IgG subclass, as the genes for all those other base designs have been discarded. All future clones of this B cell will code for IgG4 receptor/antibody for the antigen in question.”

What Other Health Effects May Result?

For clarification, IgG4 is a subclass of the immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody type that responds to repeated and/or long-term exposure to an antigen. The mRNA shot evaluated here was that of Pfizer, and it was compared against Janssen’s viral vector-based shot. Moderna’s shot was not included. Notably, these results were not found among people who got Janssen’s shot, only Pfizer’s Comirnaty jab.

As noted by Rose:13

“… the bottom line here is that the Comirnaty product … induces a shift away from a viral clearing to a tolerance-inducing antibody class, and this is not the status quo for traditional vaccines or natural infections. The main problem here is … we have no idea of the effects of this ‘effect.'”

That said, we can look at what happens in people with IgG4-related disease, and start formulating hypotheses from there. As explained by Rose, a hallmark of IgG4-related disease is fibrosis, i.e., tissue scarring, which can lead to organ dysfunction, organ failure and even death if left untreated.

Rose is now researching the possible links between this antibody switching and the stringy white deposits found in COVID-jabbed people who died. Might it be a new form of connective tissue disease?

In addition to the potential for cancer cells to run amok (as discussed in the section above), IgG4 dominance may also have severe autoimmune implications seeing how the COVID jab spike protein share similarities with human proteins.

“Molecular mimicry has been shown14 in multiple publications to be a potential problem with regard to the spike protein whereby it has been shown to share motifs with human proteins,” Rose writes.15 “What this means is that autoimmunity potential against these human proteins is clear and present.

In the context of this recent publication showing a dominant IgG4 pool, I have to wonder what the implications of this dominant pool are for molecular mimicry. Are these IgG4 antibodies capable of tolerizing in the context of our own protein?”

Resources for Those Injured by the COVID Jab

If you got one or more jabs and suffered an injury, first and foremost, never ever take another COVID booster, another mRNA gene therapy shot or regular vaccine. You need to end the assault on your system.

The same goes for anyone who has taken one or more COVID jabs and had the good fortune of not experiencing debilitating side effects. Your health may still be impacted long-term, so don’t take any more shots.

When it comes to treatment, there are still more questions than answers, and most doctors are clueless about what to do — in part because they never bothered to give early treatment for COVID and therefore don’t understand how different medicines and supplements impact the spike protein.

So far, it seems like many of the treatments that worked against severe COVID-19 infection also help ameliorate adverse effects from the jab. This makes sense, as the toxic, most damaging part of the virus is the spike protein, and that’s what your whole body is producing if you got the jab.

Two doctors who have started tackling the treatment of COVID jab injuries in earnest include Dr. Michelle Perro (DrMichellePerro.com), whom I’ve interviewed on this topic, and Dr. Pierre Kory (DrPierreKory.com).

Both agree that eliminating the spike protein your body is now continuously producing is a primary task. Perro’s preferred remedy for this is hydroxychloroquine, while Kory’s is ivermectin. Both of these drugs bind and thereby facilitate the removal of spike protein.

As a member of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), Kory helped develop the FLCCC’s post-vaccine treatment protocol called I-RECOVER. Since the protocol is continuously updated as more data become available, your best bet is to download the latest version straight from the FLCCC website at covid19criticalcare.com16 (hyperlink to the correct page provided above).

The World Health Council has also published lists of remedies that can help inhibit, neutralize and eliminate spike protein. Inhibitors that prevent spike protein from binding to your cells include Prunella vulgaris, pine needle tea, emodin, neem, dandelion extract and the drug ivermectin.

Spike protein neutralizers, which prevent the spike from damaging cells, include N-acetylcysteine (NAC), glutathione, fennel tea, star anise tea, pine needle tea, St. John’s wort, comfrey tea and vitamin C. A March 2022 review paper17 suggests combating the neurotoxic effects of the spike protein using the flavonoids luteolin and quercetin.

Time-restricted eating (TRE) and/or sauna therapy can also help eliminate toxic proteins by stimulating autophagy. Several additional detox remedies can be found in “World Council for Health Reveals Spike Protein Detox.”

Other Helpful Treatments and Remedies

Other treatments and remedies that may be helpful for COVID jab injuries include:

•Hyperbaric oxygen therapy, especially in cases involving stroke, heart attack, autoimmune diseases and/or neurodegenerative disorders. To learn more, see “Hyperbaric Therapy — A Vastly Underused Treatment Modality.”

•Lower your Omega-6 intake. Linoleic acid is consumed in amounts ten times of ideal in well over 95% of the population and contributes to massive oxidative stress that impairs your immune response. Seed oils and processed foods need to be diligently avoided. You can review my previous post for more information.

•Pharmaceutical grade methylene blue, which improves mitochondrial respiration and aid in mitochondrial repair. It’s actually the parent molecule for hydroxychloroquine. A dose of 15 to 80 milligrams a day could go a long way toward resolving some of the fatigue many suffer post-jab.

It may also be helpful in acute strokes. The primary contraindication is if you have a G6PD deficiency (a hereditary genetic condition), in which case you should not use methylene blue at all. To learn more, see “The Surprising Health Benefits of Methylene Blue.”

•Near-infrared light, as it triggers production of melatonin in your mitochondria18 where you need it most. By mopping up reactive oxygen species, it too helps improve mitochondrial function and repair. Natural sunlight is 54.3% infrared radiation,19 so this treatment is available for free. For more information, see “What You Need to Know About Melatonin.”

•Lumbrokinase and serrapeptidase are both fibrinolytic enzymes taken on an empty stomach one hour before or two hours after to help reduce the risk of blood clots

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/01/06/sudden-death-after-covid-shots.aspx