Does the mortality rate justify the measures put in place, especially global vaccination programmes involving risky and scantily testing novel medical devices?  Many experts are resolutely saying: no. Burning questions include:

What are these “vaccines”? These are new technologies and many detractors argue that both the RNA vaccines and Johnson & Johnson’s Adenovirus vector vaccine should be classified as medical treatment/ devices.

• Will vaccination on a mass scale stop the transmission?

No, these vaccines were not designed with the endpoint of stopping infection.

• Have these vaccines been proven to effective and safe?

In regard to the mRNA vaccines, preliminary trials against SARS had disastrous results in animals, since susceptibility to the wild type virus increased, leading to widespread death in the animals experimented on. There are also serious issues raised with the J&J vaccine, as outlined below. Thus, many analysts are arguing that humanity is being experimented on, through this mass rollout of untested vaccines that have been licensed under emergency use only, which limits the liability of manufacturers even more than the already constrained liability in place for existing vaccines.

• Would allowing herd immunity to develop be a better and safer route, ultimately?

Many experts concur that this would be, and still is, the best way forward, particularly since there is so little know about the longer term impacts. In fact, there are many scientists and doctors, including those who are generally pro-vaccination, who have come forward to express their vehement opposition to these “vaccines”, for various reasons, including the fact that they are based on technologies that do not fall under the definition of vaccines, and they have not been proven safe, effective or needed.

Although the manufacturers claim these vaccines will not alter human genetic code, there are scientists who disagree, referring to their own experiment results, published in peer-reviewed journals, where they show that viral DNA can integrate into the chromosomes in cells and therefore it is possible that these vaccines could irreversibly alter human DNA. Then there are also other the other serious adverse events (known and unknown), including death – that are coming to light, not least of which is dangerous blood clotting – an adverse event that is now shown to occur after all three vaccines, which has led to temporary and permanent suspension of vaccine rollouts in many countries.

Timing of vaccine development

On 6 March 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), the organisation set up to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases, made an urgent call for US$2 billion, to support the development of a vaccine. The CEPI was founded in Davos by the governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), the Wellcome Trust, and the World Economic Forum. It is funded by several governments, and Wellcome and BMGF, which has also funded the development of a vaccine with a US$ 200 million grant to the National Institutes of Health.

Yet, as evident from the global statistics, the world has not been in the throes of a pandemic, by any stretch, and thus this vaccine push, even if the vaccines had been designed to stop transmission, (which they haven’t), is completely unnecessary, albeit very lucrative for the pharmaceutical companies.

Rising adverse events

Already, many people have paid the ultimate price – with their lives – after having a vaccine. The number of adverse events and deaths following the vaccine is rising, but it is only with the recent spate of temporary or permanently suspensions of vaccine rollouts in several countries, based on life-threatening blood clots presenting in a small number of vaccinated, that these issues are becoming more ventilated. While this is but one potential  effect, which could turn out to be very rare, there are many others that are also life-threatening and debilitating. Scientists are also investigating the question as to whether these vaccines can alter human DNA, with some saying yes and warning that the effects could be irreversible and very risky.

AstraZeneca vaccine rollout halted in many countries

In March 2021, the AstroZeneca vaccine rollout was halted or suspended in 10 countries – a domino effect, with more countries joining, following the high rate of adverse events and deaths that came to light. (Despite this, France 24 reports on 15 March 2021, the WHO, the European Medical Agency (EMA), and regulators of countries continue to recommend that everyone be vaccinated, while downplaying the risks.

This prompted Doctors for COVID Ethics, founded by retired microbiologist Sucharit Bhakdi (co-author of Corona False Alarm: facts and figures,) to send a private letter to the EMA. When this elicited no response they sent an open letter, on 10 March 2021, asking if potentially life-threatening adverse events, including blood clotting and auto immune responses showing up in people (leading to death in some cases) had been excluded in the pre-clinical studies.

In the open letter, they note that while they, “are supportive in principle of the use of new medical interventions,” if their questions regarding safety could not be answered, then the EMA authorisation of these vaccines should be withdrawn. “[T]here are serious concerns […] that the administration of the vaccines […] constitute ‘human experimentation’, which was and still is in violation of the Nuremberg Code.”

Doctors for covid ethics

The group report that shortly after delivery, the “Norwegian Medicines Agency warned that COVID-19 vaccines may be too risky for use in the frail elderly, the very group these vaccines are designed to protect”. It is the stimulation of “the production of spike protein, which has adverse pathophysiological properties that is of great concern,” with data now showing that, “vaccine side effects are three times as common in those who have previously been infected with coronavirus, for example. None of the vaccines have undergone clinical testing for more than a few months, which is simply too short for establishing safety and efficacy.”

These doctors are calling for the counting and evaluation of all deaths that occur within four weeks of having a vaccination, and comparing this cohort to those who have not been vaccinated. They remind the EMA that the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe’s Resolution 2361 mandates, “that member states must ensure all COVID-19 vaccines are supported by high quality trials that are sound and conducted in an ethical manner. EMA officials, and other regulatory bodies in EU countries, are bound by these criteria. They should be made aware that they may be violating Resolution 2361 by applying medical products still in phase 3 studies.”

What are these “vaccines: and how do they work?

Our DNA has four nitrogenous nucleic acid bases that combine in varying combinations. To code for the creation of specific proteins that our bodies need, mRNA or messenger RNA is the go-between for the instructional codes that tell the ribosomes in our cells how to link different amino acids together to form a specific needed protein by the body. These mRNA “vaccines” inject a novel genetically modified synthetic messenger RNA sequence Into the body’s cells, which instructs them to create a foreign microbial protein or antigen.

The Moderna and Pfizer vaccines “deliver mRNA in a lipid envelope which stimulates cells to make spike protein resulting in the same immune response,” and the Johnson & Johnson vaccine injects “a modified version of the adenovirus into your cells which delivers important information in the form of a gene. This results in our cells making a small fragment of the SARS-CoV-2 virus called the spike protein, which triggers an immune response. Viral vector vaccines do not alter your DNA in any way,” as described by Stamford Health.

Is the mRNA vaccine actually a vaccine?

In a webinar, Focus on Fauci, Dr David Martin explains that mRNA vaccines do not fulfil the legal definition of vaccines, which stops debate – at the level of whether one is for or against vaccines – rather than opening up a debate around this as a treatment. “It’s a chemical patent pathogen device that is designed to unleash a chemical pathogen producing effect in the cell. By their own admission this is not a vaccine. This would entail comparing it to other treatments.”

Pfizer vaccines mRNA found to be unstable, according to leaked documents

In a British Medical Journal (BMJ) article on 10 March 2021, Serena Tinari reports that classified documents relating to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) review of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were leaked in December 2020 and sent to various academics and journalists, showing that “regulators had major concerns over unexpectedly low quantities of intact mRNA in batches of the vaccine developed for commercial production. […] Among the many files leaked […] a high ranking EMA official outlined a raft of issues. In short, commercial manufacturing was not producing vaccines to the specifications expected, and regulators were unsure of the implications. EMA responded by filing two ‘major objections’ with Pfizer, along with a host of other questions it wanted addressed. The email identified ‘a significant difference in % RNA integrity/truncated species’ between the clinical batches and proposed commercial batches—from around 78% to 55%. The root cause was unknown and the impact of this loss of RNA integrity on safety and efficacy of the vaccine was ‘yet to be defined,’ the email said.” Despite these issues, on 21 December, the EMA authorised this vaccine, even though the “vaccine potency” could be impacted if the “mRNA molecule is not intact.” Tinari also notes that “no ‘specific regulatory guidance for mRNA based vaccines’ exist and the BMJ were unable to obtain the current standards.

The BMJ asked Pfizer, Moderna, and CureVac, as well as several regulators, what percentage mRNA integrity they consider acceptable for vaccines against COVID-19. None offered any specifics.”