On August 4, an interesting event took place: “Stop the Shot”. This was a video press conference organized by the Truth for Health Foundation in the US, which was live streamed online and has since been uploaded to various alternative video hosting platforms—on the main one advertised, it has already received three quarters of a million views. I was in the audience for the live event, and have since decided to write a summary report after reviewing and adding some complementary research.
The video press conference lasted from 12:00pm EST until roughly 2:00pm—a fast-paced event, with numerous speakers. Pre-conference releases from the foundation indicated that the event would present new information, shared by the lead attorney in a US lawsuit against the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) regarding the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and the under-reporting of deaths and injuries. We were informed that the presentation would include an update on the CDC Whistleblower affidavit, which indicates “more than 45,000 actual deaths have taken place following the COVID shot, versus the VAERS reports of only 11,000”. In fact, the news was even more astounding than that. In addition, the press conference was to provide previously undisclosed data from both Pharma-clinical trials and subsequent additional studies on the injectables related to “specific, serious, immediate, and long-term impacts on fertility in both men and women”. Finally, updates on medical studies concerning actual “vaccine” immunity would be discussed, as well as information about current lawsuits, and the theological implications of pandemic management.
The event was chaired by Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet MD, who is the President and CEO of the Truth for Health Foundation, and a privately practising physician. She opened the event with some strong remarks about what she has observed among patients of hers, saying that among them were some of the worst “vaccine” reactions she has ever seen. This gathering would help to reveal some of the suppressed scientific data, statistics, and research that has been routinely silence or sidelined by the CDC, the FDA, the NIH, and the WHO. She stressed that common sense, important questions deserve answers. Dr. Vliet directed special attention to the case of Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely well-regarded and thus prominent medical expert who is also the Chief Medical Advisor for the same Truth for Health Foundation. Dr. Vliet noted that attempts to punish Dr. McCullough also had the effect of harming the work of a public, not-for-profit charitable foundation, which also violates the charity’s rights to freedom of speech. Medical censorship now underway, is the greatest threat to both truth and health ever witnessed, she emphasized. Dr. Vliet also noted the unpardonable contradiction between banning unvaccinated Americans from certain public venues in particular states, while admitting circa 50,000 “illegals” each week, almost all of whom are unvaccinated and many carry Covid-19. On entering the US, she remarked, they are then transported to places where locals face “vaccine” mandates—all of this happening with US taxpayers funding the DHS so that it can undertake this national distribution.
Up next was Dr. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, internist, cardiologist and epidemiologist, and a pioneer of early multi-drug combination medicines for early ambulatory treatment of COVID-19, and one of the most widely published, peer-reviewed physicians in the world (in cardiovascular and renal disease) with over 600 peer-reviewed publications in the National Library of Medicine, including 45 peer-reviewed papers on Covid-19 itself. Dr. McCullough, in line with his public advocacy, established the necessity for alternate treatments. He also noted that on the same day that Baylor Scott and White Health mandated vaccination for its staff, he was sued for allegedly misrepresenting the hospital system’s views when making his own case. Dr. McCullough is fighting back, and the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) has also condemned the lawsuit by Baylor. Meanwhile Baylor University continues to have an endowed scholarship in McCullough’s name and he and his wife are major donors to the Baylor medical system. Besides being sued, his positions with the hospital and a college of medicine have been terminated—all for not backing a “vaccine” or nothing approach. The AAPS, Dr. McCullough noted also supports the kinds of early treatment that others doctors have neglected.
Dr. McCullough made the point that Americans have generally seen no reports on the safety of the Covid-19 injectable treatments (and are therefore deprived of their right to informed consent). He noted that in the US, roughly 100,000 individuals have been hospitalized due to adverse reactions or have died after being injected—while other fully “vaccinated” persons are still getting Covid-19, with some getting sick and even dying. Dr. McCullough ended by arguing that the real misinformation that has been inflicted on Americans is that the “vaccines” are “safe and effective”.
The next speaker was Dr. Michael Yeadon, PhD, Chief Scientific Advisor Truth for Health Foundation, a former Pfizer Vice-President, and a consultant to over 30 Biotech companies. Dr. Yeadon’s presentation essentially restated what was already covered in the symposium that happened a week earlier, and which was written about in detail in two parts here. He presented information that raises serious concerns about the safety of the injectables. Yeadon insisted: we are being lied to; there are next to no reports on the serious risks of the injectable products; we are not be treated as adults. In particular, he emphasized, we have never given experimental drugs to pregnant women, not since the Thalidomide crisis. Citing information obtained from a freedom of information access filing with Japan’s medical regulatory body, we have learned about the biodistribution of Pfizer’s Covid-19 treatment in rats (for more, see the notes on Dr. Michael Palmer’s presentation in the previously mentioned symposium). The “vaccine” distributes throughout the body, and it concentrates 20 times more in the ovaries than in other tissues. We still do not know what that might do, Yeadon noted. However he worried about the current experimentation with human females, observing the similarities between the spike protein and placental protein, which could hypothetically produce an “echo,” resulting in antibodies targeting the placenta. He noted a study of 15 women that were given the Pfizer injectable, and over one to four days there was a 200-300% increase in antibodies that acted against the placenta. Yeadon is thus extremely worried that the “vaccines” could well induce autoimmune attacks. The still unknown effects—because we are at an early stage—could be very serious. As a result, he advised those viewing: “Don’t accept the vaccines”.
Pastor Stephen Broden spoke next. Pastor Borden is on the Board of Directors of the Truth for Health Foundation, a founder and Senior Pastor of Fair Park Bible Fellowship, in Dallas, Texas, and an Executive Director and Co-Founder of the National Black Pro-Life Coalition. Pastor Borden began his presentation by stating that the “pandemic” is based on false data premises—which is an empirically correct argument. He also noted that legitimate treatments have been ignored or censored—which is also a fact. Pastor Borden continued by stating that mRNA injections have caused deaths and adverse reactions—again, a fact. He underlined the fact that mandated injection is a violation of Constitutional rights and the Nuremberg Code. Vaccination, Pastor Borden argued, is an individual medical choice. From a religious standpoint, he rejected as flatly wrong the notion that injection is a moral responsibility. Churches, he pointed out, are not agents of the Federal Government. It is not the duty of churches to either coordinate injection, or urge people to get injected. Finally, Pastor Borden explained that churches can help to overcome censorship because they gather people together and disseminate information—which, we could add, is no doubt one reason churches have been especially targeted during lockdowns.
Tom Renz followed, speaking as a lead attorney on a federal lawsuit against the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) to overturn the entire Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the experimental Covid vaccines, and a leader in a national network of attorneys fighting to protect patients’ Constitutional rights against “vaccine” dictates. Renz began by stating that he could confirm that individuals under the age of 30 in the US, were more at risk of death from the Covid injections, than from the virus itself. Clinical trials have already shown that at least one out of every 1,000 children is paralyzed, and he noted that the FDA is continuing to investigate this. Renz praised the work of whistle-blowers. What he confirmed from their statements was quite shocking and new to me: many persons who have been counted as “vaccinated,” were in fact deceased at the time they were supposedly vaccinated. We look forward to seeing substantiation for this, as it would suggest extreme fraud. Renz also suggested that official reports that upwards of 70% of Americans have received at least one injection, is a lie—inflated figures can be used to influence behaviour, as with phony opinion polling during elections. He also indicated that hospitals in the US are reporting that over 40% of new admissions are due to breakthrough infections among the fully vaccinated, and in the cases of some hospitals that number can rise as high as 100%. These numbers are consistent with those for the UK and Israel—overall, however, the US and Canada are “strange exceptions,” suggesting that the lower numbers have been fabricated (it is a fact that those numbers have been actively suppressed in Canada).
Renz’s presentation, which was perhaps the most explosive one of the press conference, also accused HHS of working to promote commercial pharmaceutical products, against the public interest. He also blasted the Federation of State Medical Boards for publicly threatening doctors in order to silence them. As for clinical data on hydroxychloroquine use, Renz condemned those journals that published studies reporting the dangers of hydroxychloroquine use, noting one in particular where 2.5 times the lethal dose had been given to prove its dangers (when an overdose of even aspirin can kill). He ended his presentation by pointing out that none of the critics and skeptics taking part in the day’s press conference had been paid to mount opposition to the “vaccines”.
Reverend Sister Deidre Byrne—a retired US military surgeon, a practising physician and medical missionary in Baltimore, who is also a member of the Truth for Health Foundation Advisory Council and a member of the Catholics for Preservation of Life initiative—was one of the presenters whose work straddled both religion and medicine. She began by recalling what followed the 9/11 attacks, and the kind of fear that spread. In December of 2019, a new “enemy” had “invaded,” according to the prominent public narratives of officials. Fear still prevails, Sister Byrne commented, a fear that continues dividing people and causes them to fight each other. She reminds us that “emergency use authorization” for the “vaccines” was granted because, allegedly, there were no other treatments. Vaccination was promoted as upholding the public or common good. Sister Byrne’s specific objection was that the injectables were tested using the tissues of aborted fetuses (Johnson & Johnson uses aborted fetal cells in the actual production of its vaccine). On top of this, she added, “vaccines” are being forced on children through mandates, even though children are proven to be at little risk from the coronavirus. Sister Byrne exclaimed that even two-year-old children are being masked, in what seems like either a barbaric act or one simply devoid of medical sense. She pointed out how during this period there has been a surge in teenage rage and suicide as a result of psychological stress induced by severe restrictions. Sister Byrne thus ended by quoting Matthew 10:28: “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell”.
Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, a leading German immunologist and professor who has spoken extensively of the new data on widespread natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2, followed next. His was a truncated version of a presentation he has previously given, with a written summary and video provided previously here. To summarize even further, Dr. Bhakdi repeated his “end of the narrative” argument, which rests on acknowledgements contained in recently published research that revealed our immune systems are already trained for dealing with coronaviruses. He affirmed that Covid-19, and its variants, are now less dangerous than the seasonal flu, for the average person. When Dr. Bhakdi and his colleagues speak of “danger,” they mean the actual lethality of a virus—whereas dominant media use “dangerous” when speaking of a virus being infectious, which misleads the public and promotes unwarranted panic.
Speaking along lines similar to Sister Byrne above, Dr. Jose Trasancos, Executive Director of Children of God for Life, a member of the Truth For Health Advisory Council, and of Catholics for Preservation of Life Initiative, came next. Dr. Trasancos began by stating his opposition, as a Catholic who is pro-life, of the use of tissues from aborted fetuses in the development of injectables. He strongly denounced the heavy-handed politics of fear, and the acute degree of propaganda, that has marked this entire “pandemic”. He was critical of how “vaccination” has been pounded into people’s heads as a patriotic duty, or an act of charity, while dismissing alternative treatments that have proven beneficial as testified by doctors in their practise. In particular he criticized how human dignity and human conscience have been degraded. What is at risk, he argued, is out right to decide what is best for ourselves and our families. “Generated fear, political agendas, and perhaps the lure of economic gain and power,” collectively constitute, in his words, a direct assault on individual liberty and the dignity of human life. As a Catholic, he lamented the reasons why so many Catholics feel abandoned and betrayed by church leadership at the higher echelons who have been “coopted by the politics of the day”. Dr. Trasancos noted how response of church leaders to laity has often seemed unfeeling, unconcerned, and at times reproachful. Dr. Trasancos then laid out the bases for conscientious objection to “vaccination”. Here he quoted directly from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part 3 (Section 1), Article 6 (Section 3), points 1788 and 1789, which he read:
“1788—To this purpose, man strives to interpret the data of experience and the signs of the times assisted by the virtue of prudence, by the advice of competent people, and by the help of the Holy Spirit and his gifts.
“1789—Some rules apply in every case:
– One may never do evil so that good may result from it;
– the Golden Rule: ‘Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them’
– charity always proceeds by way of respect for one’s neighbor and his conscience: ‘Thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience…you sin against Christ’. Therefore ‘it is right not to…do anything that makes your brother stumble’”.
We need “honesty, mutual respect, and transparency,” he concluded, in order to avoid damage that could become even cataclysmic.
Pamela A. Popper, a co-founder of Make Americans Free Again, president of Wellness Forum Health, and co-author of COVID Operation: What Happened, Why it Happened, and What’s Next, was the next person to speak. Popper was not overstating matters when she opened her remarks by stating that what we are witnessing is the biggest ever episode of medical tyranny, if anything because of its global scope. She defined medical tyranny as the situation where governments, pharmaceutical companies, and the health industry generally as the ones producing ever-changing and ever-escalating mandates, dictating what is now an increasing number of injections. The pharmaceutical cartel, Popper stated, is guilty of pushing drugs that are both problematic and unnecessary. We have the right to decide what goes into our bodies, she said. In terms of active organization to resist these mandates, Popper—like others have done in this and related venues—emphasized the need for local meetings of local people. She stressed the need for a very simple platform, such as, “No Medical Tyranny”. She also emphasized the importance of raising money for lawsuits, and of building a coalition together with medical professionals, much like the one presenting this press conference. Popper closed by directing attention to Americans for Medical Freedom and its related site.
The Rev. William Cook—founder of the US’ Black Robe Regiment, a member of both the Truth for Health Advisory Council and the Medicine and Ministry United initiative—referred to the “pandemic” as an alleged one, pointing to the arbitrary and unilateral manner in which “pandemics” are defined and declared. In addition, Rev. Cook argued, the so-called “pandemic” rested on a base of fraudulent data stemming from discredited PCR tests. He also agreed that Covid-19 is easily treatable, and can be treated early—thus making experimental mRNA shots completely unnecessary. Instead what we have are states that push “vaccination” only, with an emphasis on mRNA products. He also expressed his fear that the current campaign is part of a broader program to reduce the world’s population (which, we should note, has long been a stated eugenicist goal of liberal developmentalists, corporate philanthropists, environmentalists and “climate emergency” alarmists today). Rev. Cook also issued a warning about the growing totalitarianism that is being built on the basis of mandatory, i.e., forced vaccination.
The next speaker was the always engaging Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, a leading attorney on international lawsuits, and member of the Bar in Germany and California. He lamented the fact that the “other side” has installed many of its “placeholders” (we might call them “force multipliers”) in numerous strategic locations, including courts of law. (I should note that one of the biggest frustrations for anti-lockdown activists in Quebec has been getting courts to seriously consider their cases—normally, the response of the courts boiled down to, “it’s a state of emergency, so the government can do what it likes,” which renders the legal system useless and marks it as a candidate for abolition.) In normal times, Dr. Fuellmich commented, we could not expect courts to be at the forefront of new socio-political changes—then in these times that is even more so the case. “In today’s times, the least they [courts of law] could have done is to enforce the existing laws,” he noted. At a very minimum, the Nuremberg Code, has to be observed particularly for its stress on voluntary informed consent—a basic ethical principle of medical practice that has been adopted in countries’ medical codes around the world. Instead, as Dr. Fuellmich observed, around the world individuals are not being properly informed by either “their” politicians or the media, and they are being improperly pressured and coerced into accepting injections. He noted escalating reports of serious adverse reactions—and we can add that this includes over 35,000 deaths caused by the “vaccines” to date in just the EU and North America (a number which might end up dwarfing the total number of persons who actually died from Covid-19, if a legal ruling from Portugal could be used as any indication of the true count, i.e., 0.9% of all reported Covid deaths were caused by the virus itself). Dr. Fuellmich explained that this was a good reason why many are feeling disinclined to being badgered and rushed into “vaccination”. While courts do not normally break new ground, they do respond and follow the court of public opinion, he argued, and in this regard he noted a successful lawsuit in Florida that challenged one district’s mask mandate; in South Africa, a legal challenge to the constitutionality of the lockdowns was successful, and is currently being appealed by the government; he also referenced the class action lawsuit filed against the Canadian and Ontario governments by Ottawa lawyer, Michael Swinwood, which is intended to become an international class action, and another one concerning children only; and, Fuellmich, had he more time, would have likely mentioned Portugal, where the Lisbon Court of Appeal concluded that PCR tests were both inaccurate and inappropriate, plus an appeal court judge who denounced mandates amounting to “sanitary apartheid”; and the ruling of a German District Court that concluded that lockdown measures were unconstitutional and violated existing laws. Also, the International Criminal Court in The Hague has accepted the filing of a complaint concerning violations of the Nuremberg Code by the Israeli government, with a decision pending on whether it will hear the case; the complaint is being simultaneously filed in a number of other courts, including in Israel.
In addition to these mounting legal challenges, whose empirical findings Dr. Fuellmich noted previously can be applied across national jurisdictions, he stressed the need to continue educating the public and to work for transparency. He explained that, while he hesitated to talk about it, there is a crucial religious/spiritual aspect that will need to be factored in. Dr. Fuellmich thus outlined how the fight has to continue on three fronts: 1) the legal front; 2) public education; and, 3) the religious front.
For Dr. Fuellmich, speaking of the legal front, stressed that the most important thing to attack is the validity of using the PCR test, which has been a foundation of this “pandemic”. He has personally interviewed 110 experts on PCR tests in preparation for the launch of lawsuits, and noted that there have already been three court decisions on the use of PCR tests that strengthen this campaign. He predicted that in the coming weeks and months, more such rulings would be issued—which, he noted, may be why the other side is becoming so openly desperate and panicking. Massive legal actions are happening, and we will soon see the results.
Dr. Fuellmich is now part of a group of more than 1,000 lawyers and over 10,000 medical experts who have initiated legal proceedings against the CDC, the WHO, and the Davos Group for crimes against humanity.
Dr. Roger Hodkinson, MA, MB, B.Chir. (Cantab), FCAP, FRCPC, a leading Canadian pathologist, graduate of Cambridge University, and chairman of an American Biotech company in DNA sequencing, was the final speaker. Dr. Hodkinson called this “pandemic” a totally unnecessary tragedy that has been fuelled by lies and propaganda—a “horror show,” he called it, “the worst in medical history”. It is a “grotesque tragedy…that somehow still continues,” he added. He emphasized that, at present, Covid-19 is for the majority of people nothing worse than the seasonal flu. What we have dealt with, he argued, is a pandemic of fear that has been driven by two major factors: 1) notoriously ineffective PCR tests, and, 2) blanket censorship and silencing of any competing research findings. He added that PCR tests create over 95% false positives in people who are perfectly well—but these results are then wrongly called “cases” which then populate the graphs published by the media. Meanwhile, politicians, the media, and physicians have engaged in silencing the truth, thus depriving people of the kind of information that would have needed to make up their own minds. He zeroed in on the majority of MDs, who have apparently put “income ahead of ethics,” namely ethics such as do no harm and informed consent. Fear became the excuse for politicians and unelected bureaucrats to enforce “ridiculous, arbitrary mandates that had no consensus for any effectiveness in the medical literature—none,” and among the mandates he mentioned masks, social distancing, travel bans, and lockdowns. “They couldn’t work; had not worked; and would not work,” he stated firmly. He criticized politicians for playing doctor, for appropriating to themselves the exclusive right to “protect” all people. However, Dr. Hodkinson countered, “I can tell you with categorical certainty, as a pathologist, death happens; life is risky; get used to it—just like you did with past flu epidemics, and every day when you drive your car”. He pressed governments to recognize a very basic fact: “modern medicine is totally impotent at controlling the spread of respiratory viruses,” adding, “we must simply accommodate to them in ways that we have done most effectively with past flu epidemics”. Dr. Hodkinson directly denounced Dr. Anthony Fauci for sponsoring gain-of-function research undertaken at the Wuhan Insitute of Virology, which he in turn blamed for starting this crisis. “Don’t let them scare you into get vaxxed,” he concluded, “tell them to stop the shot”.
Questions and Answers
The formal program concluded there, and then opened up to a question-and-answer session that last 45 minutes. Questions received focused on workplace mandates for injections, and adverse reactions. On mandatory vaccination, the response from the panel was that the legality (in the US) was, at best, unclear, but that religious exemptions can counter such mandates. They also underlined the fact that by religious exemption, what is not meant is that one needs some sort of letter of certification from a religious leader—one’s own personal religious views are sufficient. Catholics who disagree with the church hierarchy’s position on the Covid-19 “vaccines,” do not need a priest to certify their exemption, it can be rooted in one’s individual beliefs. On the other hand, while some might think that labour laws (as in Germany and the US) could come to their aid, because one cannot force any unapproved substance on an employee; however, the problem is that many courts have been brought into line with the dominant program. What is necessary is a “high-profile case” to turn the tide.
On natural immunity vs. vaccine immunity, the answer was that up until May of 2021, the CDC had roughly 10,000 cases of “vaccine failure” (what others politely call “breakthrough infections”)—these were cases of fully vaccinated people, who had ample time to develop immunity, with 9% of these people being hospitalized, and 3% dying (which, we should note, are not noticeably better statistics than we have had for the “pandemic” prior to “vaccines” hitting the market). During that same time period, there were zero cases of infection of people who had previously acquired natural immunity. Bring matters up to the immediate present, they conceded there were some highly sketchy cases of people who may or may not have had Covid-19, and may or may not have developed antibodies. Overall, there is a 0.2% chance, over the course of a year, of a person with natural immunity becoming reinfected. “Natural immunity is robust, complete, and durable,” in the words of Dr. McCullough, “and there is no [significant] threat of a second infection” (for more on natural immunity and Covid-19, see this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and this). He added this: “Under no circumstances should a Covid recovered patient be forced to take the vaccine—under no circumstances,” and he cited three papers which show increased rates of side effects, including those that require hospitalization, in patients that were Covid recovered and then needlessly vaccinated”. With the Delta variant, already data suggest that we are looking at wholesale failure of the “vaccines,” particularly the Pfizer product—84% of individuals in Israel who have the virus, are fully vaccinated; 42% of those infected with Delta in the UK are fully vaccinated with either Pfizer, Moderna, or AstraZeneca, and 65% of deaths from Delta in the UK are among people previously vaccinated. The so-called “pandemic of the unvaccinated” is a complete falsehood. Dr. Mike Yeadon made a much broader point: that he was unsure about either effectiveness or ineffectiveness, while we continue to use PCR tests—with such flawed testing, we cannot even be certain about what specifically is making patients ill. Dr. Yeadon underlined the fact that those who have been most at risk from Covid, are those who are already close to the end of their lives (indeed, Canada’s very first “vaccine” recipient died mere months later anyway). On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of persons who reportedly acquire this infection, “easily shrug it off” and then “they develop deep, broad, robust immunity”. Meanwhile, the vaccine merely encodes for one specific element, the spiked protein, and not the virus as a whole. Dr. Yeadon affirmed that “it is a trivially easy argument to make, that if you have been exposed to the virus you will have superior immunity to any that you could get from these vaccines,” agreeing that once one has been naturally exposed to Covid-19, one should not be subsequently vaccinated. Dr. Vlient at this point reintroduced Dr. Bhakdi’s observations about how studies showing that the first response immediately provoked by vaccines were precisely those recall antibodies that had been formed from prior exposures to either this or related previous coronaviruses, and not the delayed response antibodies that normally form first in reaction to infection. In other words, it is a false premise that this virus, Covid-19, is an entirely new virus and our bodies had established ability to react to it—this is a critical point, she stressed, that the listeners needed to understand. Our bodies are naturally able to recognize similarities between this coronavirus and previous coronaviruses to which we have been exposed, such as many common colds. Dr. McCullough added that the CDC’s findings were that at least 15% of Americans were already immune to Covid-19 because of such past exposures which built cross-over immunity (the numbers are significantly higher elsewhere: 80% and 50% of the German and UK populations respectively, are naturally resistant to Covid-19). Not everyone is susceptible, and he pointed to common accounts from everyday people about how with, say, six persons in a household in which Covid-19 circulated, perhaps two never got infected.
Another set of questions had to do with with the safety of injected persons donating blood, and whether pregnant women should receive the injections. Dr. Yeadon expressed his concern and anger at the regulatory failure of the authorities, including doctors who failed to do due diligence, and he reminded listeners that at no time do we ever give experimental substances to pregnant women. Initial studies are already showing the vaccines spreading to and depositing harmful elements in the ovaries. In addition, he worried about the similarity between the spiked protein and the placental protein. He was not declaring that there was a certain threat, but that he would not risk it. In any case, young and healthy people, like most who bear children, are not a serious risk from the virus and have no need to risk adverse effects from the injectables. Dr. Vliet pointed to research that already shows that women, during the early stages of pregnancy (especially the first trimester), are at higher risk of miscarrying if they have been vaccinated. She also warned that, on the advice of an expert in fetal medicine in their network, the mRNA injectables do cross the placental barrier and risk harming unborn babies. Dr. Yeadon applied the same caution to breast-feeding mothers who risk inadvertently ending their children’s lives, either because the “vaccine” itself, or what it produces, can be transferred from mother to baby.
On the safety of donated blood from vaccinated individuals, Dr. McCullough cited a Harvard study that showed that for two weeks following first dose injection, there were elevated levels of the spike protein. After the second dose, conditions appeared to return to normal. He also said that they informed blood bank authorities that the blood supply had been contaminated with spike protein and probably liquid nanoparticles containing mRNA. Dr. Yeadon added that the spike protein is biologically active and causes blood platelets to adhere to one another which results in blood coagulation—not everyone suffers any noticeable effects, but micro-level blood clotting is quite common. German studies conducted by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and Dr. Bhakdi, showed that an overwhelming majority of vaccinated persons had elevated D-dimer readings that register micro blood-clotting. People receiving donated blood should be warned that they could be receive blood with coagulation levels beyond what is normal. Dr. Vliet confirmed that in her own practise, she has had to treat vaccinated patients who had elevated D-dimer levels.
Dr. Vliet also addressed the issue of the impact of the experimental “vaccines” on male fertility. She pointed out that the testes have a high density of ACE2 receptors, making them more susceptible to the spike protein generated by experimental mRNA injections. A number of her vaccinated male patients suffered testicular pain and inflammation. She added that we still do not know what may be the long-term consequences of concentrating the spike protein in testicles—but for younger, healthy men who are not any real risk of dying from Covid, this would seem to be a needless risk.
Dr. McCullough informed listeners that whenever we have more than 25% of a population being vaccinated, we start to put non-lethal pressures on a virus and then, instead of having a diversity of strains, now we actually force the virus into several dominant strains. One example of this is, as he said, the emergence of the Delta variant as a dominant strain. The Delta strain is an outcome of mass vaccination during pandemic spread—vaccinations if any, he added, should have been restricted to nursing home patients and workers in nursing homes.
On the legal front, Dr. Vliet reminded viewers that the Truth for Health website has legal resources that can help put people in the US into contact with organizations that fight for the liberty to refuse an experimental treatment. Tom Renz, as an attorney, strongly argued that the legal front should be where emphasis is placed, ahead of public awareness. He advised people to start their fight locally, with their town councils and country commissioners—to start small and then work big: “if they’re working from the top down, we’re working from the bottom up”. Before getting involved with an organization, Dr. Fuellmich advised, one has to first get informed. Dr. Fuellmich recommended the website of his Corona committee as an important starting point, with its numerous video interviews with experts and written transcripts—that site, https://corona-ausschuss.de/en/ was unfortunately experiencing interruptions to loading, at the time of writing, due to a 522 error. One may need to try the site at different times, as it subsequently loaded successfully (but slowly) about 15 minutes after I first tried to gain access.
Dr. Yeadon closed with these remarks: “Don’t be frightened of the virus…governments and others have exaggerated the risk persistently…do be frightened of the policy responses. Be frightened of your government”. He advised ordinary people to share their doubts about what they are being told by the authorities, and to do so publicly—even if it is as basic as saying that one is not really convinced or is confused. The pseudo-consensus on television is not real.
Mind and Body, Religion and Science: Resistance to Dictatorship
One of the intriguing features of this event is that it combined doctors and research scientists with lawyers and religious leaders. In particular, the mixing of religion and science might strike some as akin to mixing oil and water. We have historical experience of science that owes some of its roots to selective and motivated studies of the Bible, such as Scientific Racism. However, while the Bible and our scientific knowledge are relatively finite in content at any given moment, that does not mean that combinations of the two are restricted to one or two possible outcomes—in other words, Scientific Racism will not, and is not, the predetermined outcome of combining religion and science. Clearly, this brief discussion cannot possibly hope to exhaust the full breadth and depth of the history of the religion and science relationship. But did this press conference even combine religion and science? What was the logic behind having religious leaders and scientists speak on the same panel?
There are a number of possible answers. One has to do with an integrated approach to health, that does not divorce mind and body, and that incorporates the spiritual, psychological, and what we normally recognize as medical.
Another explanation has to do with the powerful presence of religion in the lives of tens of millions in the US, so that speaking to people in terms they understand, recognize, and value, is a necessary mode of successfully reaching out—more on this below.
A third explanation is that religious practice is local—local congregations, local churches, local events—and as censorship online is unrestrained, local organizing through community institutions becomes more important than ever.
Otherwise, most of the religious persons in this event also seemed to be very much aware of the relevant scientific facts, which they incorporated into their discourse. Their presentations focused heavily on ethics. There was virtually no overt religious proselytizing in their arguments of the kind that would have suggested they were searching for religious converts.
A broader observation concerns religion and cultural roots in formulating responses to state mandates and the alternative science narrative tied to the vested interests of pharmaceutical corporations and politicians. Religion and culture are among the most overlooked aspects of so-called “vaccine resistance,” and it is rising already to a level that will confront the dominant, nominally “liberal” elites in ways that will demolish whatever they hoped to have left of their credibility, while underscoring the illegality of their measures. This has to do with exemptions from mandatory injection on religious grounds. Already the dominant elites have two strikes against them which can be the basis for severe litigation: one is the mandate that people divulge their personal health information, their confidential medical histories—which is illegal in Canada and elsewhere; the second is the total violation of the right to informed consent, which is enshrined under international law. But the third has to do with the identity politics regime set up by the same dominant elites, which established religion and ethnicity as two of the areas to be protected from discrimination under a whole range of “equity, diversity, and inclusivity” policies. It would unravel these elites’ entire argument against “systemic racism,” bankrupting their rhetorical repertoire and claims to the moral high ground, if they revealed how little they in fact understood about either the concept of racism, or the people to which they are appealing for support, i.e., those systemically oppressed and marginalized on the basis of their ethnic and religious affiliations.
In a word, what we are facing here is domination and persecution on another front: ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism is witnessed by the complete disregard for the fact that some of the strongest resistance to “vaccine” dictates has been registered among African-Americans, among members of the Caribbean diaspora in Canada, and among a range of religious communities. Those who claim to be fighting “systemic racism,” are in fact rapidly expanding and updating it.
In Canada, besides witnessing how informed consent has been rendered impossible and is dismissed by state-imposed “vaccine” mandates, I am also seeing that cultural and religious exemptions are not even momentarily considered. No wonder churches were among the first, and the longest, to be locked down: many are actual or potential centres of opposition. Indeed, some of the harshest police actions in Canada have been directed at synagogues in Montreal, and Protestant evangelical churches in Alberta. We already know of the conflicts between Hasidic Jews and the municipal government of New York City. Given how much religion matters to particular cultural minorities, mandatory vaccination is becoming a veneer for ethnocentrism. In a society where adults are being returned to a stage of life they last experienced in primary school, abusive and coercive measures that impact overwhelmingly on cultural and religious communities will be nothing less than a continuation of Residential Schooling—a history that, one might have thought, had started to embarrass Canadians.
As readers may recall, I have been simultaneously tracking developments in Quebec, the rest of Canada, the UK, the rest of Europe, and particularly the Caribbean where the current conflict of dictatorship and resistance is unfolding. Regarding the Caribbean, some of the main forces of opposition to mandatory “vaccination” in the English-speaking Caribbean include Rastafarians, many Muslims, and breakaway organizations of Seventh Day Adventists. Each religious body has done extensive research on the policies surrounding “vaccination” as well as studies of the “vaccines” themselves, knowledge which is then incorporated and interpreted within their religious frameworks.
An interesting footnote: “follow the science” can have diverse meanings in the Caribbean, and is not understood the way non-Caribbean readers might expect. In Jamaica as in other parts of the world where Rastafarian populations are prominent, “the scientists” is a reference to Rasta herbalists and religious healers, with “the science” being a combination of both spiritual insight and natural medicinal use. In Trinidad, some use the term “science” to refer to what others might call “black magic,” known in Trinidad and elsewhere as Obeah, which is a complex cultural and religious knowledge system and body of practice, with deep knowledge of local botany and herbal medicines. That some pretend that Pfizer and Moderna can march unabashedly into such a zone, as if it were a tabula rasa, reminds us of the hubris so many other preceding developmentalist programs of modernization.
At the time of writing, protests against “vaccine” mandates are underway across the Caribbean, with the more notable cases being in St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Antigua & Barbuda, Grenada, Barbados, and Guadeloupe—much more on this will follow later (in the meantime, those who wish to learn more can check daily updates and reports posted in the Zero Anthropology Channel in Telegram). In Barbados, Rastafarians and Muslims worked together, particularly local members of the Nation of Islam.
Almost everywhere, Rastafarians have been at the forefront of resistance against the “vaccines,” witnessed not just by leading protests but also in the production of numerous anti-“vaccine” songs of protest in Jamaica. One suspects that the government of Jamaica will be treading very carefully: always teetering on the edge, it would be reckless to provoke a massive, country-wide Rastafarian uprising. Indeed, the Jamaican government has been very careful: “Jamaica’s government is aware of the Rastafari community’s doubts, and prepared for the reality that not every Jamaican would take the vaccine, health ministry Permanent Secretary Dunstan Bryan told Reuters. ‘Herd immunity can be achieved without having all those populations vaccinated,’ he said”. Only 32% of Jamaicans said they would agree to be injected, according to a Gallup poll, making Jamaica one of the leading “vaccine” resistant nations in the world—and it is thanks to Rastafarian cultural resistance. Jamaica has thus vaccinated only 2% of its population thus far. Contrary to dire assumptions of doom, Jamaica has had among the lowest number of infections and deaths from Covid-19 in the Caribbean region, much lower than even some of its closest neighbours. Rastafarians “credit traditional medicine, like root wine and herbs such as neem, bitterwood and ginger, for helping fend off the virus, and do not want to take the vaccine”. Rastafarians generally tend to shun Western medicine and Western development programs, preferring their own natural solutions instead. As one Rasta Reggae artist, Jah Bouks, told Reuters: “It is a false alarm. They are fabricating a lot of things, government and scientists. It is a money-making thing you know”. In Grenada, Rasta musician Johnnie “Black Iron” Williams rejected not all vaccines, but specifically the Covid-19 injectables, saying that if they became mandatory his family would refuse and his five children would be home-schooled—there too, Grenada’s government has sworn it would not impose vaccination. This is despite the fact that Grenada has suffered some of the most extreme emergency measures of the region over the past year and a half. Rooting his concerns in a history of medical experimentation with Black people, and a belief that this vaccination campaign is biowarfare aimed at reducing population, Williams’ concerns were also rooted in knowledge of the marketed injectables, and the reign of silence that pervades public “discussion” about them:
“I do not know of any pharmaceutical product that does not come with side effects, so we must never ignore the side effects. If there are side effects, then there should be exemptions for people like myself, whose vegan dietary lifestyle is a part of my way of life. One of my main concerns is the ingredients used to create the vaccine and from my investigation, I became concerned that one of the ingredients in the vaccine is MRC5, which is tissues from aborted foetus”.
Evangelical churches in Jamaica, as in Trinidad, are also advising followers against vaccination. Again disproving predictions of doom if “measures are not followed,” Haiti stands out as a key case. Until the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse on July 6, the government had rejected the importation of the AstraZeneca vaccine which was made available to Haiti. Masking was generally not adopted, and social distancing was ignored. While the media call it an “unproven remedy,” many poor Haitians came up with their own remedy for treating coronavirus symptoms: “…Like many Haitians, she turned to a home remedy—in her case, a tea made with parsley, garlic, lime, thyme and cloves….”. Non-masking, and non-testing, were also partly determined by the high relative cost of both. Haiti has also not been one of the Caribbean’s worst cases for Covid-19 infections and deaths, having few of either, and far fewer than even its next-door neighbour, the Dominican Republic. Projections of catastrophe are nonetheless spread by Reuters, where the Chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation just happens to also sit on the Board of Directors of Pfizer. Surely this has no bearing on Reuters’ obsessive, opinionated “fact checking” of anything critical of the Pfizer “vaccine” and the “pandemic” used to sell its product?
On the same day this report was published, the same Truth for Health Foundation conducted another live-streamed press conference, this time dealing with the issue of the impacts of the injectables on fertility.
Publishing on Zero Anthropology can be infrequent. However, to receive daily updates—in the form of blog posts, reports, articles, documents, videos, and other resources—join our Telegram Channel: