Could This Be the Most Startling News of the Pandemic Yet?

Any claim to “most startling” is itself striking.

It’s the pandemic; no need to specify it further. It’s far from over. For two years, it has been the dominant news item globally; it’s likely to dominate the news wires for some time to come.

Hence any claim to “most startling” is itself striking. We have not been short of astonishing claims and counterclaims related to the pandemic.

Here’s a dozen battlefields where the conflicts have been most intense:

1. The origin of the virus. The Establishment brushes aside claims it came from a lab, it squashes any opinion, even a scientific one, which forwards that thesis. Yet even the Biden Administration’s investigation concluded that the “lab leak theory [is] as credible as [the] natural origins explanation.”
2. Merely to entertain the possibility that this was a bioweapon released deliberately as part of a more elaborate plan places the proponent in a tinfoil hat. But the U.S. did most likely fund a lab in Wuhan, China that was geared toward a gain of function, i.e., enhancing a virus, ironically with the purported aim to prevent a pandemic. If it was a well-intentioned program gone horribly wrong, what’s shocking now is the complete lack of public enquiry.
3. The death count is in considerable dispute—there are those who have died from COVID, and there are those who died with And there are those allocated as COVID deaths when they merely showed symptoms of a respiratory illness at death and were never even confirmed as having died with COVID.

Those controversies began early in the pandemic. Then came the vaccines, and the opinion wars exploded on social media. At least nine other battlefronts opened up:

4. How safe are the vaccines? The detractors allege long-term injuries and deaths well in excess of the Establishment’s admissions.
5. How efficacious are the vaccines in preventing (i) infection (ii) hospitalization, and (iii) death?
6. How long does the vaccine efficacy last? Even the Establishment admits that efficacy against infection wanes after a few months, but not against hospitalization and death. Their answer: Take boosters, i.e., the same vaccine, or the same type (instructions to make spike protein) yet again. Israel, the poster child of the pro-vax lobby, is onto its fourth jab for many, but “cases” continue to multiply.
7. Can treatments, especially cheap and safe ones, work well as prophylactics as well as curatives? Depends on which source you trust—see here and here.
8. Are treatments claimed to be safe and efficacious being dismissed, subdued, suppressed, and even attacked? Manifestly they are.
9. Should governments have a right to pressure organizations to force their employees to get vaccinated, making the vaccines compulsory in all but name? But they have, in several jurisdictions across the world. Italy has made it a legal requirement for all over 50.
10. PCR tests are the global gold standard for testing whether one is infected with the virus. The detractors claim they can be manipulated. The Establishment claims otherwise.
11. SARS-CoV-1 survivors had immunity from the disease for 12-15 years after it came and went in 2003. Data from Israel suggested such “natural” immunity is stronger by some 13 times than double-dose vaccinations, but most governments still insist that the naturally immune must get vaccinated six months after being cleared of the disease. Indeed, there may well be people who unknowingly have had some variant of COVID, and that population could be in multiples of those identified as “cases.” But antibody testing, which would reveal this, is not well funded, and repeatedly scoffed at. Indeed, the tests carried out even over a year ago suggested that asymptomatic transmission and recovery may be many multiples of existing estimates. While case numbers, deaths, incessant urging to get double vaccinated and a third booster, morning press briefings by the “authorities” that are repeatedly broadcast is the order of the day, antibody testing is simply not in the news.
12. Blaming the unvaccinated for causing new strains hits a raw nerve. Some scientists claim the opposite—that leaky vaccines cause pathogens to evolve. This was accepted wisdom in peer-reviewed literature (“Marek’s Chickens”) in 2015. A “leaky” vaccine is one which has some benefits but does not completely prevent infection and transmission. It makes logical sense that pathogens would evolve in a leaky vaccine environment, against the vaccine. And voilà—even the authorities admit that the latest strain, Omicron, is penetrating the double vax barrier much more easily than previous strains did.

So there are at least a dozen major unresolved controversies. We may never have a resolution of any of these.

But “vaccine safety,” our battlefield number 4, got an unexpected and inadvertent boost from a strange finding.

But “vaccine safety,” our battlefield number 4, got an unexpected and inadvertent boost from a strange finding. It has slipped by, with hardly an uproar. But here’s why it’s so crucial:

Vaccine proponents admit to some serious injuries. Astra Zeneca has caused death, and blood clots which may have led to heart attacks or strokes. The coroner concluded that BBC presenter Lisa Shaw “died due to complications of an AstraZeneca Covid vaccination.” In Shaw’s case, it was a brain hemorrhage, clearly a sign that the vaccine crossed the blood-brain barrier.

Pfizer and Moderna jabs are not “off the hook,” even in peer-reviewed literature, for a range of seriously adverse outcomes (rare deaths, and rare events of pericarditis, myocarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and admit to a possibility of causing shingles; all very rare).

But micro blood clots are not easily measured, and not rare, say the detractors—they further allege such clots can cause exercise intolerance or permanently reduced exercise capacity if present in the lungs or coronary arteries; and further that spike protein presence in the ovaries can change menstrual cycles and hasten menopause.

In June 2021, it was Steven Kirsch, appearing on a three-hour plus Dark Horse podcast with Bret Weinstein and Robert Malone, who claimed (see 2:18 to 2:48) that the vaccine manufacturers’ own data showed a distribution of spike protein all over the body and in various critical organs.

But did we need to play Russian roulette at all?

The vaccine proponents countered—Kirsch was using the data collected from rats, not humans.

But for many of us, the anecdotal data was scary. The serious (some lifelong) injuries seemed way higher than what was admitted. The Russian roulette odds seemed closer to one-in-a-hundred, not one-in-a-million.

But did we need to play Russian roulette at all?

Aspiration before Vaccination

See minute 1 to 4 in this video for what aspiration before vaccination is. It’s a way of preventing the vaccine components entering the bloodstream directly when the recommend route is via muscle tissue. Aspiration used to be standard practice in medicine globally.

In August 2021, researchers associated with medical institutes in Hong Kong published this result: “Intravenous injection of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine can induce acute myopericarditis in mouse mode.” Myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, is one of the serious (but treatable, not lifelong) side effects of the mRNA vaccines.

The paper admits that “the effect of accidental intravenous injection of this vaccine [in humans] on the heart is unknown.” But the rats were administered the vaccine either intravenously (the IV group) or intramuscularly (the IM group). Only some rats in the IV group developed myopericarditis. The researchers conclude that the “study provided in-vivo evidence that inadvertent intravenous injection of COVID-19 mRNA-vaccines may induce myopericarditis.”

And the risk is not limited to mRNA vaccines. Anecdotal evidence suggests that every case of major vaccine-related injury came about when the victim did not specifically ask for aspiration. Neurological damage, blood clots, a career ruined…see here, here, and here. Do you think they are all lying? I don’t.

Now even the mainstream media (BBC) is now admitting to it, that the issue of serious injuries is related to vaccine components getting directly into the bloodstream (see minute 15 to 19 here). See also a June 2021 peer-reviewed paper here. See also Voice of Healthcare (July 2021).

Most vaccination centers refuse to aspirate, but you will find trusted physicians who stand by the practice.

Most vaccination centers refuse to aspirate (see minute 21 to 28 here), but you will find trusted physicians who stand by the practice. I asked around. Every privately-practicing medical specialist over the age of 60 (“old school”) that I spoke to was “shocked” that the aspiration practice of giving IM injections was not being used in mass vaccination centers.

But haven’t we been taking the vaccine in the deltoid? And isn’t it true that there are no major blood vessels there? Yes and yes, but inadvertently, minor blood vessels may be pierced. And then the vaccines, in this case, instructions to make spike protein, directly enter the bloodstream and they spread. What’s supposed to happen? The spike protein should be made in the deltoid. The antibodies should follow as a consequence, and the antibodies should then travel through the bloodstream. Everywhere.

Precisely to avoid the risk of vaccine components directly entering the bloodstream a technique known as aspiration was standard practice in medicine before it was discontinued as “standard” practice. Why?

“It takes an extra five seconds” See 22:10 and 22:30 here. Five seconds? Yes, that’s all it takes. The nurse or physician draws the needle back after insertion, and, if no blood is drawn back, we are safe, and the needle can now be reinserted, this time with the plunger containing the vaccine pressed. If blood is drawn, we start all over again. Oh, fifteen seconds for the one-in-a-thousand occurrence!

Five seconds to spare us lifelong injuries? “Yes, but when it comes to mass vaccinations,” say the opponents of aspiration, “five seconds per patient is a lot.”

Me? I would rather go to a physician who costs me the extra five seconds. I did precisely that.

“Oh, and the needle may move and can cause tissue damage,” say the opponents.

But the arm can be stabilized quite easily with the free hand.

“But small children move around.”

Why are we giving vaccines to an incredibly low-risk group?

“Oh, but the pain is more.”

Seriously? Why can’t the patient decide? Won’t we all have five extra seconds of needle insertion pain instead of a risk of lifelong reduction in lung capacity? A stroke? A heart attack?

The opponents shift their assault. ”Due to the paucity of data, it has not been proven that aspiration has significantly reduced injuries.”

Of course not, when you don’t aspirate, you have no idea how many times a blood vessel has been pierced. As the opponents assert, “It’s highly unlikely.” Which means, not 0.00%. One-in-a-hundred, or one-in-a-thousand times, or rarer still, they hit a blood vessel and risk serious vaccine-related injuries. See minute 15 to 18 here. As to the real-world frequency of hitting a blood vessel, see the various anecdotal experiences described here (from minute 10:40 to 19). They are far worse than one-in-a-thousand.

“But the rats were given, in bodyweight equivalent terms, 500 times the human dose. That’s a highly toxic dose. So we can’t extrapolate from the rat study.”

But remember, none of the IM group rats got injured. Only the IV group did.

“Oh, and vaccine injuries differ by cohort (age and gender).” They do.

“So it can’t be only due to lack of aspiration.” True, but the vaccine components interact with hormones, which differ by age and gender. And the higher concentration levels in the bloodstream, coupled with the interaction, could be producing the injuries.

So if you decide to take the vaccine, or a booster if you had your two shots (not of whiskey), insist on going to a physician who will use aspiration before vaccination. Just because the first two jabs did not give you long-lasting injuries does not mean that the third won’t. There is no need whatsoever to take a one-in-a-thousand chance when you do not have to.

Opponents of aspiration will even tell you the risk-reward odds, and how medicine is all risk and reward, their point being that even without aspiration, vaccination is worth the risk. On a grand scale, it may well be. But the risk-reward trade-off talk normally associated with vaccines is irrelevant.

If you believe the booster gives you a reward, boosting your waning immunity against COVID, then you get the same reward while removing a major source of risk by aspirating.

As if we must take the risk because “aspiration is no longer a standard practice.” Denmark has made it standard practice again—(see minute 3 to 6 here). Apparently so has South Africa. And Taiwan.

“But the practice started when injections were given in the gluteal muscle, not the deltoid where there are no major blood vessels.”

But there are minor ones, and now we have vaccine components that are very advanced, including instructions to the body to make toxic substances that mimic components of a dangerous virus. See minute 8 to 10 here.

“But the vaccine components enter the bloodstream eventually anyway.” Yes, but not as fast, and nowhere near in the same proportions as when you hit a blood vessel directly.

Hence all vaccine manufacturers have themselves recommended that the vaccine be given intra muscularly. It is startling that the raging battle over vaccine safety may be drilled down to the State’s criminal negligence, not an inherent defect in the new style of vaccines. Unless you are ideologically anti-vax rather than empirically cautious with mRNA.

As to inherent defects and depopulation theories, as yet the all-cause mortality rates have not gone up even in places with fully-vaccinated rates over 90%. But time will tell if many of us have been slow-poisoned.

Will Omicron Wear the Crown?

On Nov 24, 2021, a new variation was first reported by officials in South Africa to the WHO. Variation B.1.1.529, which had more than 30 mutations in its genes, was labelled “Omicron.” The first known and confirmed infection with Omicron was from a sample taken on Nov 9, 2021. Eight weeks later, as of January 3, 2022, it had already been detected in 110 countries. It’s the variant that’s currently driving record highs in several countries. Omicron’s mutations enable it to largely evade vaccine-induced immunity.

Ominous?

Pathogens evolve to become less dangerous to their hosts.

Not exactly. Lab studies suggest Omicron should be far less dangerous, staying in the airways and not getting into the lungs. It’s not startling. Pathogens evolve to become less dangerous to their hosts (see minute 32 to 33 here). SARS-CoV-1 killed itself by killing over 50% of its older (above 65) hosts in China. A parasite needs you alive. Many coronaviruses have evolved to cause the common cold.

Omicron is spreading way faster than Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta. But it seems a lot milder. Perhaps one or two variants away from the common cold viruses, but seemingly more infectious, perhaps because we have all had the common cold and each of us have strong levels of immunity against its forms. Early studies on Omicron report an 80% less chance of hospitalization.

In South Africa, where Omicron has been there the longest, death and hospitalization rates have dropped markedly. But the news gets better. Omicron survivors (aren’t they all? The 24/7 news media are not reporting death by variant) get T-cell and beta-cell immunity (see minute 6 to 9 here) which is long-lasting immunity. The research is even telling us there’s cross-variant immunity. South Africa’s cases are going down as everyone else’s are going up.

Both the pro- and the anti-vax lobbies will want the credit for the less potent mutation, Omicron, which delivers cross-variant immunity upon recovery.

The tables may turn on controversy 12. Both the pro- and the anti-vax lobbies will want the credit for the less potent mutation, Omicron, which delivers cross-variant immunity upon recovery.

So how do we get herd immunity? Probably not through vaccinations and endless boosters, but through the bulk of the population recovering from a milder, highly infectious version.

That doesn’t mean you should avoid a booster if you are convinced it may reduce your chances of hospitalization and death. Just make sure you get aspiration with the vaccination if you go for it.

But the virus may be evolving faster than the vaccines can. So keep (or start) taking Vitamin C and D, zinc, quercetin and bromelain supplements. And store NAC tablets for the rainy day. Progressively milder mutations are not biologically guaranteed, but likely. Omicron is evolutionarily fitter than Delta and will outlast it. Delta was milder than Alpha even though the press didn’t say so—fear sells the news.

At the current spread rate, most of us are going to get Omicron in 2022. Most of us will beat it without long-term damage, and with natural, cross-variant immunity enhanced.

Good luck.

Related Posts:

1. The Case for a “Natural-Law” Humanism
2. Who Will Shift the Overton Windows?
3. Freedom of Association Trumps Academic Freedom

   

About the Author: Vinay Kolhatkar

Vinay Kolhatkar is a freelance journalist, novelist, screenwriter, and finance professional. He is the Chief Editor of The Savvy Street. Vinay has authored a TV pilot screenplay Undercover: The Story of Jamila, and two literary thrillers A Sharia London and The Frankenstein Candidate.. He is also the co-author of Media Wars: The Battle to Shape Our Minds. More about Vinay is at the Founder page.