now browsing by category

Vaccinations are supposed to prevent disease, but instead they increase allergies, reduce immunity, destroy our brains, give us bad hearts by filling us with toxins. Before any vaccination, ask for one without Mercury, Aluminium, Formaldehyde, Polysorbate 80, Yeast, Egg, Viruses, etc. Vaccines without these ingredients do not exist. And yes, vaccinations DO cause AUTISM.


How Drug Industry Is Countering Diminishing Vaccine Uptake

Reproduced from original article:

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola    Fact Checked

June 26, 2020

what is vaccine uptake


  • As lockdowns have kept people at home and out of medical facilities, infant vaccination rates have dropped. This may be why they’ve started promoting baseless claims suggesting common childhood vaccinations might prevent COVID-19 deaths
  • Despite lack of proof, media claims the TB vaccine, measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and oral polio vaccines might protect against COVID-19
  • A Singaporean study finds common colds caused by frequently encountered betacoronaviruses might make you more resistant to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and that the resulting immunity might last as long as 17 years
  • If you’ve beat a common cold caused by a OC43 or HKU1 betacoronavirus in the past, you may have a 50/50 chance of having defensive T-cells that can recognize and help defend against SARS-CoV-2
  • Other studies have also discovered that many appear to have prior resistance to SARS-CoV-2. One study found 70% of patients who had recovered from mild cases of COVID-19, as well as 40% to 60% of people who had not been exposed to the virus, had resistance to SARS-CoV-2 on the T-cell level

As lockdowns have kept people at home and out of medical facilities, infant vaccination rates have dropped. As you might expect, this is bad news for the drug industry, which is likely why they’ve started promoting baseless claims that childhood vaccinations might prevent COVID-19 deaths.

Baseless Claims Seek to Bolster Vaccine Uptake

There’s absolutely no evidence for this, yet, in March 2020, they started pushing the TB vaccine, claiming it might “steel the immune system” against SARS-CoV-2. As reported by Science:1

“Researchers in four countries will soon start a clinical trial of an unorthodox approach to the new coronavirus. They will test whether a century-old vaccine against tuberculosis (TB), a bacterial disease, can rev up the human immune system in a broad way, allowing it to better fight the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 and, perhaps, prevent infection with it altogether.”

In April 2020, the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine was touted as a “major breakthrough” against COVID-19. The British Express reported:2

“Researchers at the University of Cambridge said the injection could prevent severe symptoms in people who have had it because the rubella virus has a similar structure to the coronavirus …

When they compared the rubella virus and the coronavirus the researchers found that they were 29 percent identical … The researchers have no evidence that the MMR vaccine works on COVID-19 patients but they assured ‘a study is warranted.’”

In June 2020, it was the polio vaccine’s turn in the spotlight. According to The Hill,3 tuberculosis and polio vaccines are being examined “for possible protection against COVID-19.”

Jeffrey D. Cirillo, a professor of microbial pathogenesis and immunology at Texas A&M Health Science Center, went so far as to state, “This is the only vaccine in the world that can be given to combat COVID-19 right now.”

Based on what? Based on vaccination rates in countries such as Pakistan, “where most of the population is vaccinated for tuberculosis and death rates for COVID-19 have been extremely low.” That’s it.

Meanwhile, discussions and evidence showing the benefits of vitamin C and vitamin D — as well as many other therapies — are banned and censored. This, despite significant scientific evidence actually backing their use and showing the biology by which these nutrients and therapies can prevent and/or treat this particular infection. Talk about travesty.

The oral polio vaccine, by the way, is now the primary cause of polio paralysis in the world, not wild polio.4,5 This is an inconvenient fact that is completely ignored by most mainstream media.

Common Cold May Provide Long-Term Immunity Against COVID-19

In related news, June 12, 2020, the Daily Mail,6 Science Times7 and others8 reported findings from a Singaporean study9 led by professor Antonio Bertoletti, an immunologist with the Duke-NUS Medical School, showing common colds caused by the betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1 might make you more resistant to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and that the resulting immunity might last as long as 17 years.

In addition to the common cold, OC43 and HKU1 — two of the most commonly encountered betacoronaviruses10 — are also known to cause bronchitis, acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and pneumonia in all age groups.11 As reported by the Daily Mail:12

“They share many genetic features with the coronaviruses Covid-19, MERS and SARS, all of which passed from animals to humans. Coronaviruses are thought to account for up to 30 percent of all colds but it is not known specifically how many are caused by the betacoronavirus types. 

Now scientists have found evidence that some immunity may be present for many years due to the body’s ‘memory’ T-cells from attacks by previous viruses with a similar genetic make-up — even among people who have had no known exposure to Covid-19 or SARS …

Blood was taken from 24 patients who had recovered from Covid-19, 23 who had become ill from SARS and 18 who had never been exposed to either SARS or Covid-19 …

Half of patients in the group with no exposure to either Covid-19 or SARS possessed T-cells which showed immune response to the animal betacoronaviruses, Covid-19 and SARS. This suggested patients’ immunity developed after exposure to common colds caused by betacoronavirus or possibly from other as yet unknown pathogens.”

In other words, if you’ve beat a common cold caused by a OC43 or HKU1 betacoronavirus in the past, you may have a 50/50 chance of having defensive T-cells that can recognize and help defend against SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19. According to the researchers:13

“These findings demonstrate that virus-specific memory T-cells induced by betacoronavirus infection are long-lasting, which supports the notion that Covid-19 patients would develop long-term T-cell immunity. Our findings also raise the intriguing possibility that infection with related viruses can also protect from or modify the pathology caused by SARS-Cov-2.”


Click here to learn Dr. Mercola's top tips to combat coronavirus

Other Studies Show Similar Results

Other studies have also discovered that many appear to have prior resistance to SARS-CoV-2. For example, a study14 published May 14, 2020, in the journal Cell, found 70% of samples obtained by the La Jolla Institute for Immunology from patients who had recovered from mild cases of COVID-19, as well as 40% to 60% of people who had not been exposed to the virus, had resistance to SARS-CoV-2 on the T-cell level.

According to the authors, this suggests there’s “cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘common cold’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2.” Like Bertoletti’s study above, the Cell study found that exposure to coronaviruses responsible for the common cold appear to allow your immune system to recognize and fight off SARS-CoV-2 as well.

May 14, 2020, Science magazine reported15 these Cell findings, drawing parallels to another earlier paper16 by German investigators that had come to a similar conclusion.

That German paper,17 the preprint of which was posted April 22, 2020, on Medrxiv, found helper T cells that targeted the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in 15 of 18 patients hospitalized with COVID-19. As reported by Science:18

“The teams also asked whether people who haven’t been infected with SARS-CoV-2 also produce cells that combat it. Thiel and colleagues19 analyzed blood from 68 uninfected people and found that 34% hosted helper T cells that recognized SARS-CoV-2.

The La Jolla team20 detected this crossreactivity in about half of stored blood samples collected between 2015 and 2018, well before the current pandemic began …

The results suggest ‘one reason that a large chunk of the population may be able to deal with the virus is that we may have some small residual immunity from our exposure to common cold viruses,’ says viral immunologist Steven Varga of the University of Iowa. However, neither of the studies attempted to establish that people with crossreactivity don’t become as ill from COVID-19.

Before these studies, researchers didn’t know whether T cells played a role in eliminating SARS-CoV-2, or even whether they could provoke a dangerous immune system overreaction. ‘These papers are really helpful because they start to define the T cell component of the immune response,’ [Columbia University virologist Angela] Rasmussen says.” 

Statistician Believes Majority Are Resistant to COVID-19

These studies add support to the latest COVID-19 mortality models suggesting widespread resistance and prior immunity. Freddie Sayers, executive editor of UnHerd, recently interviewed professor Karl Friston, a statistician whose expertise is mathematical modeling, who believes prior immunity across the global population might be as high as 80%. Sayers reports:21

“[Friston] invented the now standard ‘statistical parametric mapping’ technique for understanding brain imaging — and for the past months he has been applying his particular method of Bayesian analysis, which he calls ‘dynamic causal modelling,’ to the available Covid-19 data …

His models suggest that the stark difference between outcomes in the UK and Germany, for example, is not primarily an effect of different government actions (such as … earlier lockdowns), but is better explained by intrinsic differences between the populations that make the ‘susceptible population’ in Germany … much smaller than in the UK …

Even within the UK, the numbers point to the same thing: that the ‘effective susceptible population’ was never 100%, and was at most 50% and probably more like only 20% of the population.”

These statistics really throw the idea of social distancing being an unavoidable part of the post-COVID-19 “new normal” into question. What’s more, once sensible behaviors such as staying home when sick are entered into Friston’s model, the effect of lockdown efforts vanish altogether, so global lockdowns were likely completely unnecessary in the first place.

Nobel-Prize Winning Scientist Debunks Growth Projections

Michael Levitt,22 a professor of structural biology at the Stanford School of Medicine who received the Nobel Prize in 2013 for his development of multiscale models for complex chemical systems, has also presented strong evidence that supports Friston’s model.

According to Levitt, statistical data reveals a mathematical pattern that has stayed consistent regardless of the government interventions implemented. While early models predicted an exponential explosion of COVID-19 deaths, those predictions never materialized. As reported by Sayers in the video above:

“After around a two-week exponential growth of cases (and, subsequently, deaths) some kind of break kicks in, and growth starts slowing down. The curve quickly becomes ‘sub-exponential.’ This may seem like a technical distinction, but its implications are profound.

The ‘unmitigated’ scenarios modelled by (among others) Imperial College, and which tilted governments across the world into drastic action, relied on a presumption of continued exponential growth …

But Professor Levitt’s point is that that hasn’t actually happened anywhere, even in countries that have been relatively lax in their responses.”

Levitt believes prior immunity plays a significant role in why we simply don’t see an exponential growth pattern of COVID-19 deaths, and that certainly seems to make sense. A majority of people simply aren’t (and weren’t) susceptible to the disease in the first place.

He tells Sayers the indiscriminate lockdowns implemented around the world were “a huge mistake.” A more rational approach would have been to protect and isolate the elderly, who are by far the most vulnerable and make up the bulk of COVID-19 deaths around the world.

Hopefully, these data will not be swept under the rug if or when a second wave of COVID-19 emerges this fall. Making that mistake once is bad enough. Let us not repeat it.

Last but not least, to bolster your immune system and lower your risk of COVID-19 infection in the future, be sure to follow the instructions given in “Your Vitamin D Level Must Reach 60 ng/mL Before the Second Wave.”

One of the Most Powerful Videos I’ve Ever Seen

The following video from Barbara Loe Fisher is one of the most powerful videos that I have ever seen. I am hopeful that watching this video will inspire you to take up the cause and join the fight for vaccine freedom and independence.

There is a cultural war and collusion between many industries and federal regulatory agencies that results in a suppression of the truth about vital important health issues. If this suppression continues we will gradually and progressively erode our private individual rights that our ancestors fought so hard to achieve. Please take a few minutes to watch this video.

Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions

With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it’s critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educate the leaders in your community.

Think Globally, Act Locally

National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.

It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal at gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your smartphone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up to date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and will get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community.

Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call-to-action items you need at your fingertips. So, please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.


Share Your Story With the Media and People You Know

If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don’t share information and experiences with one another, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is presenting only one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you: You have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the “other side” of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination.

The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than “statistically acceptable collateral damage” of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn’t be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the website of the nonprofit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at

  • Vaccine Requirements and Exemptions by State — Vaccine laws vary from one U.S. state to another. By knowing the specific policies where you live, you’ll learn how you can get exemptions and better protect your right to make informed vaccine choices.
  • NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims — View descriptions and photos of children and adults who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
  • If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions — Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
  • Vaccine Freedom Wall — View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers and school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.
  • Vaccine Failure Wall — View or post descriptions about vaccines that have failed to work and protect the vaccinated from disease.

Connect With Your Doctor or Find a New One Who Will Listen and Care

If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don’t want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor.

Harassment, intimidation and refusal of medical care are becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination. However, there is hope.

At least 15% of young doctors recently polled admit that they’re starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents.

It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day, or continuing to provide medical care for those families who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So, take the time to locate a doctor who treats you with compassion and respect, and who is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

Subscribe to the Mercola Newsletter to Get Timely Vaccine News and Updates

Google has been censoring vaccine information providers, which means finding reliable information about this topic can be a real challenge.

To help you keep updated on vaccine issues and exemptions, I invite you to subscribe to my FREE health newsletter. You will receive the latest health news from straight to your inbox, with no threats to your security and privacy.

You will also get free access to more than 100,000 health articles and a totally FREE subscription to my Natural Health newsletter. You can unsubscribe at any time and I guarantee the privacy of your email.

– Sources and References

Warp Speed COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Big Pharma Crooks Rich

Reproduced from original article:

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola    Fact Checked

June 23, 2020

moderna vaccine coronavirus


  • Two Moderna executives cashed in $25 million when stock prices rose immediately following the announcement that its COVID-19 phase 1 trial showed promising results
  • Stock dropped within days, as critics pointed out the results were likely misrepresented and actually quite alarming
  • Twenty percent of Moderna’s phase 1 volunteers suffered severe systemic side effects. With a reaction rate of 20%, vaccinating the global population would gravely injure at least 1.5 billion individuals, and likely more, since only exceptionally healthy volunteers were included
  • The most hazardous hurdle for Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine lies ahead. Past attempts at creating coronavirus vaccines have failed, as both animal and human subjects would develop robust antibody responses but then become gravely ill when exposed to the wild virus. In some animal studies, all the animals died upon exposure to the wild virus
  • Coronaviruses have been shown to produce two different types of antibodies: neutralizing antibodies that fight the infection, and binding antibodies that cannot prevent viral infection. Binding antibodies can instead trigger “paradoxical immune enhancement,” causing severe illness and/or death when exposed to the wild virus

According to the Albany Herald,1 two prominent spokesmen for the pro-vaccine movement are now expressing concerns about the messaging used when promoting Operation Warp Speed — the name given to the White House effort to manufacture and launch a COVID-19 vaccine (as well as other potential therapeutics) at a record-setting pace.

The two long-time pro-vaccine advocates, Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine and professor of pediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine, and Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and professor of pediatrics at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, fear communication about the accelerated vaccine program may fuel safety concerns that could dampen vaccine uptake. Albany Herald writes:2

“The approach itself is not unreasonable, said Dr. Peter Hotez … But the way it’s being communicated is scaring people, he told CNN. ‘The way the message is coming out of Operation Warp Speed creates a lot of chaos and confusion. And it is enabling the anti-vaccine movement,’ Hotez said …

‘The way they are messaging it is a little frightening because they make a point of saying how quickly it is being done,’ said Dr. Paul Offit … ‘It makes people think there are steps being skipped.'”

Well, the fact of the matter is that steps are being skipped, and there can be serious ramifications when doing so. Simply changing the narrative will not change that.

Big Pharma Executives Rake in Millions

Hotez also criticized drug company executives for being too obvious in their greed. As reported by Albany Herald:3

“… vaccine makers send out news releases trumpeting incremental successes. Last month, Moderna, the US biotech company heavily promoted by the White House and the National Institutes of Health, announced promising early results, sending its share price up 30%. At the same time, two top executives sold $30 million worth of shares.

Lorence Kim, Moderna’s chief financial officer, exercised 241,000 options for $3 million, filings show. He then immediately sold them for $19.8 million, creating a profit of $16.8 million.

The next day, Tal Zaks, Moderna’s chief medical officer, spent $1.5 million to exercise options. He immediately sold the shares for $9.77 million, triggering a profit of $8.2 million. It was all legal, but looked bad, Hotez said. ‘They are shooting themselves in the foot,’ he said.”

Indeed, the message sent by Zaks’ and Kim’s share sales is a terrible one that is not likely to garner public confidence in their product. According to Moderna, the sales were done under automated trading plans called 10b5-1, which means neither needed to take any action for the sales to occur.

But that hardly matters. What people see is Moderna leadership getting rich quick off vaccines that are being rushed through and skipping crucial safety checks. There’s no evidence whatsoever right now that the company’s novel vaccine will actually work, let alone be safe.

According to director of research services at Equilar, Andrew Gordon, the only way the trades would be deemed illegal would be if Zaks or Kim created or modified their 10b5-1 plans “while in possession of material insider information.”4

Whatever the truth of that may be, what appears clear is the pair raked in nearly $25 million in the days between Moderna’s press release5 announcing its phase 1 trial a success and vaccine safety experts pointing out just how troublesome the results actually were. Even Hotez said he’s “not convinced that this is really a positive result.”6 As reported by Fort Russ News:7

“The two executives pocketed almost $25 million in profits in a day’s work before experts cast doubt on the vaccine’s success and sent shares tumbling. FRN reported on the false reports, citing an article written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that the Moderna vaccine results were a failure.

Fake fact checkers working for social media firms tagged FRN’s report as ‘false information’, insisting instead that the Moderna tests had been a success. Investors in biotech and pharma, and the virologists they depend on, apparently agreed with FRN’s assessment.”


Click here to learn Dr. Mercola's top tips to combat coronavirus

Moderna’s Phase 1 Trial Announcement

Moderna’s phase 1 trial for its mRNA-1273 vaccine, which is being led by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and championed by NIAID chief Dr. Anthony Fauci, involved 45 healthy adults between the ages of 18 and 55. According to the company’s May 18 press release:8

“Immunogenicity data are currently available for the 25 µg and 100 µg dose level … after two doses (day 43) and at the 250 µg level … after one dose (day 29) … All participants ages 18-55 (n=15 per cohort) across all three dose levels seroconverted by day 15 after a single dose.

At day 43, two weeks following the second dose, at the 25 µg dose level (n=15), levels of binding antibodies were at the levels seen in convalescent sera (blood samples from people who have recovered from COVID-19) tested in the same assay.

At day 43, at the 100 µg dose level (n=10), levels of binding antibodies significantly exceeded the levels seen in convalescent sera. Samples are not yet available for remaining participants.

At this time, neutralizing antibody data are available only for the first four participants in each of the 25 µg and 100 µg dose level cohorts. Consistent with the binding antibody data, mRNA-1273 vaccination elicited neutralizing antibodies in all eight of these participants … The levels of neutralizing antibodies at day 43 were at or above levels generally seen in convalescent sera.”

1 in 5 Subjects Suffered Serious Systemic Events

However, two days later, May 20, 2020, vaccine safety advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. warned “the clinical trial results … could not be much worse.” He writes:9

“Fauci was so confident of his shot’s safety that he waved ferret and primate studies (Moderna suspiciously reported no health data from its mouse studies). That appears to have been a mistake. Three of the 15 human guinea pigs in the high dose cohort (250 mcg) suffered a ‘serious adverse event’ within 43 days of receiving Moderna’s jab.

Moderna did not release its clinical trial study or raw data, but its press release, which was freighted with inconsistencies, acknowledged that three volunteers developed Grade 3 systemic events defined by the FDA as ‘Preventing daily activity and requiring medical intervention.’

Moderna allowed only exceptionally healthy volunteers to participate in the study. A vaccine with those reaction rates could cause grave injuries in 1.5 billion humans if administered to ‘every person on earth.’ That is the threshold that Gates has established for ending the global lockdown.

Moderna did not explain why it reported positive antibody tests for only eight participants. These outcomes are particularly disappointing because the most hazardous hurdle for the inoculation is still ahead; challenging participants with wild COVID infection.

Past attempts at developing COVID vaccines have always faltered at this stage as both humans and animals achieved robust antibody response then sickened and died when exposed to the wild virus.”

A May 26, 2020, article10 in STAT news tells the harrowing story of Ian Haydon, one of the study participants who suffered severe side effects requiring hospitalization. While Haydon says he still has confidence in the vaccine, it’s important to recognize that he is a healthy 29-year-old.

He recovered from the side effects, which included a raging fever, fainting, nausea, muscle pain and generally feeling “as sick as he’d ever felt.” But just imagine what such side effects might do to an elderly person, an infant, young child or someone who is metabolically compromised or has an underlying condition such as a heart problem. For them, the reactions could be far worse.

Oxford Safety Trial Is Not Using Inert Placebo

A question worth asking here is, if there are no biologically plausible mechanisms for vaccine reactions, why do they always occur in trials? Importantly, as noted in The Daily Mail,11 which reported the launch of Oxford University’s vaccine trial for a vaccine known as ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, the COVID-19 vaccine is not being compared to a true placebo (an inert substance such as saline), as is the gold standard for drug safety research.

Instead, it’s being compared to a meningitis vaccine. As discussed in “Dangerous Placebos Used in Medical Trials,” using an active substance such as another vaccine can hide any number of side effects. This is just one way in which vaccine makers “cheat” in their safety studies to minimize the appearance of adverse effects.

All Previous Coronavirus Vaccines Have Failed

What Kennedy refers to in his May 20 article about Moderna’s phase 1 trial results is coronavirus vaccines’ well-recognized tendency to cause paradoxical immune enhancement. He explained this in my interview with him, featured in “Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Explains Well-Known Hazards of Coronavirus Vaccines.” A short clip of that interview is included above.

Coronavirus vaccine development began after three SARS epidemics had broken out, starting in early 2002. Chinese, Americans and Europeans all started working on a coronavirus vaccine and around 2012 — after 10 years of development — there were about 30 promising candidates.

As explained by Kennedy, the four best vaccine candidates were then given to ferrets, which are the closest analogue to human lung infections. Kennedy explained what happened next:

“The ferrets had an extraordinarily good antibody response, and that is the metric by which FDA licenses vaccines … Then something terrible happened. Those ferrets were then exposed to the wild virus, and they all died. [They developed] inflammation in all their organs, their lungs stopped functioning and they died.

The same thing had happened in the 1960s when they tried to develop an RSV vaccine, which is an upper respiratory illness very similar to coronavirus.

At the time, they did not test it on animals. They went right to human testing. They tested it on I think about 35 children, and the same thing happened. The children developed a champion antibody response — robust, durable.

It looked perfect, [but when] the children were exposed to the wild virus, they all became sick. Two of them died. They abandoned the vaccine. It was a big embarrassment to FDA and NIH.”

Coronavirus Vaccines Are Known to Present Unique Hazards

The problem, it turns out, is that coronaviruses produce not just one but two different types of antibodies — neutralizing antibodies12 that fight the infection, and binding antibodies13 that cannot prevent viral infection.

Incapable of preventing viral infection, binding antibodies can instead trigger a “paradoxical immune response,” or “paradoxical immune enhancement.” What that means is that everything looks good until you get the disease, and then it makes the disease much, much worse. As noted by Kennedy:

“Coronavirus vaccines can be very dangerous, and that’s why even our enemies, people who hate you and me — Peter Hotez, Paul Offit, Ian Lipkin — are all saying, ‘You got to be really, really careful with this vaccine.'”

Many of the COVID-19 vaccines currently in the running — including Moderna’s vaccine — are using mRNA to instruct your cells to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, the glycoprotein that attaches to the ACE2 receptor of the cell. This is the first stage of the two-stage process viruses use to gain entry into cells.

The idea is that by creating the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, your immune system will commence production of antibodies, without making you sick in the process. You may have noticed Moderna’s press release specifies “binding antibodies” and “neutralizing antibodies.” It’s important to remember the difference between those two when you read these trial results.

Again, the binding antibodies are the ones suspected of triggering paradoxical immune enhancement, and according to Moderna, it was the binding antibodies that were “seen at levels seen in blood samples from people who have recovered from COVID-19.” At the time of that press release, data from 25 of 45 participants showed this “positive” binding antibody result.

Meanwhile, neutralizing antibody data were only available for eight of 45 participants, and the neutralizing antibodies are likely to be the most important, considering they are the ones that actually fight infection. Considering the problems caused by binding antibodies in previous coronavirus vaccine trials, these results are hardly comforting.

Lessons from the Lockdown—Why Are So Many Fewer Children Dying?

JUNE 18, 2020

© 18th June 2020 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc.
Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense.
Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Reproduced from original article:

By Amy Becker and CHD Guest Writer Mark Blaxill, Originally Published as a White Paper from Health Choice

Covid19 is a serious public health issue, but the breathless reporting among the media of positive tests and an ever‐rising death toll does little to instruct us about the true nature of the virus and the unprecedented steps taken to prevent its impact. As in many complex and pervasive health phenomena, there are many ways to measure health effects, but in our view the proper measure of impact is not a narrow or intermediate metric, but rather total health outcomes. In the case of a pandemic virus affecting large populations and where the immediate concern is sharp increases in deaths, the best measure of outcomes is not a selective measure of deaths somehow attributed to the disease but instead is deaths from all causes. For perspective, these deaths must be compared to historical death rates from all causes in prior years (Percent of Expected Deaths). As we will show, a balanced view of the broader American Covid19 experience demonstrates both the scale and variability of its negative outcomes in older American, especially the elderly, but also some unexpected positives. Surprisingly,

U.S. mortality rates have declined among young people during the lockdown, especially among infants. These trends have gone largely unnoticed and remain unexplained.

Death rates from all causes vary widely and somewhat predictably. The most pronounced variation occurs by age cohort (most deaths occur in the elderly) and by time of year and to a lesser extent by geography. All‐cause deaths are cyclical, commonly rising in the winter months and “flu season” and then falling to lower levels as warmer weather arrives. To the extent that death rates vary by region, this is mostly a result of differences in the age mix of residents. In the case of Covid19, death rates are not yet known to be cyclical but they do vary significantly by age and geography.

In the analysis that follows we have examined the evidence on total death rates by geography (mostly by state), by age group and by week (and flu season). We have extracted eight main lessons. Some of these are part of the ongoing conversation around Covid19; others are unexpected or at least have not been widely circulated. Why this discrepancy? Since the infectious disease establishment has controlled the “pandemic” narrative, the variance between this evidence and conventional wisdom is largely driven by longstanding bias and error patterns among the experts in that community.

Overall U.S. trend

The Covid19 impact on all‐ cause deaths has been sharp and clear. Tens of thousands more Americans than expected died in a brief period. [1]

Before mid‐March, overall U.S. deaths were trending at a level no different from recent years at between 55‐ 60,000 per week. Beginning in the week ending on March 28, all‐cause deaths began rising sharply, peaking in the week ending April 11 at around 75,000, or 137% of Expected Deaths for the week. Immediately thereafter, all-caused deaths began dropping sharply.

Within five weeks, all‐cause deaths were back to their typical range. By the week ending May 16, the measurable pandemic death impact had ended even though Covid19‐related deaths most certainly had not. [2]


Attributing a Cause of Death (COD) to COVID‐19 is not always clear‐cut, due to significant overlap among COVID‐19, Pneumonia, Influenza, and presumably other primary CODs. [2]

That said, the spike in deaths officially attributed to COVID‐ 19 occurred in tandem with the spike in all‐cause deaths, leaving little doubt that Covid19 was the main contributor to the excess of expected deaths between March 22 and May 9.


At least in this 8‐week period, the Covid19 pandemic was considerably worse than a typical flu season. To the extent that all‐cause deaths fell back to expected levels during May, the excess mortality attributable to the pandemic has passed. [1]



Increases in all‐cause death rates during the pandemic have been extremely localized, varying widely by state/jurisdiction. For the 3 ½ month period surrounding the pandemic, starting on February 1 through May 16 (the most recent period with 100% reporting), total deaths in the US came in at 105% of expectations. [2]


Many states actually saw lower than expected deaths during the period. To be sure, an excess death rate of 5% for the entire U.S. is considerable but also far short of the apocalyptic narrative the pandemic has received.

Greater‐than‐expected death rates were heavily concentrated in the Northeastern corridor. New York City and its surrounding area, including New Jersey, New York State (although possibly not upstate New York), Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland and the District of Columbia have so far comprised 6 of top 8 jurisdictions with excess all‐cause deaths. New York City was hit especially hard. In a typical spring, New York City could expect 700‐800 all‐cause deaths per week. From mid‐ March to mid‐May, that number spiked sharply, by ten times that amount, reaching over 7500 deaths in the peak week ending April 11. [1]


Other Northeastern states saw sharp increases in expected deaths but nowhere near New York City’s rate. [2] The timing of the peaks has varied, Massachusetts came soonest, followed by Maryland, New York City New York State and New Jersey. Nevertheless, the entire region saw declines in expected deaths starting in May.


Many states saw no or only a modest increase in expected deaths, including some of the largest states such as California, Florida and Texas. [2] This suggests there may have been specific factors that influenced the experience in New York City that were not shared elsewhere.


Variation by policy environment

To the extent that policies have varied across the states, it is not clear that the imposition and/or presence of stringent lock‐down policies had much to do with the variation in excess deaths. Less stringent lockdown policies were not associated with higher death rates. In fact, the 5 states that chose not to impose a lockdown are among the roughly 20 jurisdictions with no excess deaths at all. [2]


Several states with the most aggressive lockdowns, including California, Maine, Minnesota and Pennsylvania showed almost no excess deaths effect. Despite huge population centers, California looked nothing like New York City and State. Maine, a mostly rural state, imposed among the more draconian policies with essentially no reason. Minnesota followed a far more aggressive lockdown policy than its neighboring states of Iowa, South Dakota, North Dakota and Wisconsin. Yet it’s Covid19 deaths were among the most concentrated in the country: roughly 80% of Minnesota’s Covid19 deaths occurred among the infirm elderly who were residents of long‐term care facilities. [2]


Did aggressive lockdowns stave off the worst‐case scenario, preventing vulnerable states from becoming disaster areas like New York City? No controlled experiment will give us that answer. Pennsylvania makes the best case for that argument, with an early excess death pattern that resembled its neighbors in the Northeastern corridor but saw that rate drop precipitously by early April. But Pennsylvania is also an unusual geographic unit, with its largest city, Philadelphia, lying on the coast and separated from the western part of the state and its second largest city, Pittsburgh, by the Appalachian Mountains. This anomaly makes it difficult to draw clear conclusions from Pennsylvania’s Covid19 curve.

Age effect: elderly

One universally accepted fact of the Covid19 pandemic is that the death risk is highest among the elderly. The all‐cause death numbers show this effect clearly, with a stark increase in deaths among those 65 years and older beginning in late March, peaking in early April and then turning sharply downward in May, so that by month end the excess death rate has almost disappeared. [1] Tens of thousands of excess deaths in this age group have driven a large portion of overall US excess deaths.


Adults between 18‐64 years of age show a similar pattern in excess deaths as the elderly, although the overall death toll has been less. [1]


With a dataset that provides more detailed age groupings, the impact is even more clear: the older the age cohort, the more total deaths increased during the pandemic. [3] The largest number of deaths as well as increases in deaths occur in those aged 85 years old and older, followed by those aged 75‐84, next by the age group from 65-74. The sole remaining group showing an increase in deaths during the pandemic was the group aged 55‐64, with a modest increase in deaths during April. For all age cohorts with ages under 55, the impact of the pandemic is undetectable.


Most observers believe they understand this age effect and discount it. That older people die more frequently is no excuse not to protect them from the pandemic. But as we have deployed lockdowns as a blunt instrument to protect the elderly from a tragic and premature loss of life‐years, we have missed a completely unintended and beneficial benefit of the lockdowns: an unexplained collapse in excess deaths among the young, especially children and infants.

Age effect: children

Deaths among children under 18 years of age are relatively rare and show patterns that are different from their seniors. The pronounced cyclical effect in all‐cause deaths one sees among adults is entirely absent in children. And whereas weekly deaths among adults dominate the overall US death toll—around 13,000 deaths per week in 18‐64‐year‐olds and 35‐40,000 deaths per week among those 65 and older—weekly deaths among children are scattered across the states and typically fall around 700. Well over half of that occurs in infants under 1 year of age.

But the pandemic experience has brought on a surprising effect on this expected death rate among children. Starting in early March, expected deaths began a sharp decline, from an expected level of around 700 deaths per week to well under 500 by mid‐April and throughout May. [1]

As untimely deaths spiked among the elderly in Manhattan nursing homes and in similar settings all over the country, something mysterious was saving the lives of children. As springtime in America came along with massive disruptions in family life amid near universal lockdowns, roughly 30% fewer children died.


Was this a protective effect of school closures? Were teenagers getting themselves into risky situations at a lower rate? No. There was very little effect among school age children or adolescents. [3]

Virtually the entire change came from infants. Somehow, the changing pattern of American life during the lockdowns has been saving the lives of hundreds of infants, over 200 per week.


Deaths in infants and children occur at a higher rate in minority groups. [4] So the reduction in childhood deaths during the lockdowns has meant that the lives of black and Hispanic infants and children have been saved at a higher rate.


Net effect in life‐years

Every untimely death is tragic. But if one considers life‐years lost, the premature death of an infant carries more weight than the premature death of someone whose life expectancy is 5 years or less. And whereas the median age at death of, say, a Minnesotan dying of Covid19 is 83, the typical life expectancy of that senior citizen absent Covid19 might be just 2‐3 more years. By comparison, when an infant in lockdown avoids a death, the potential impact in life years saved can rise to 80 years or more. [5]

When one measures the net effect of life years either lost or gained during the pandemic and associated lockdowns, the net result across age groups is unexpectedly mixed. Not surprisingly, excess deaths are highest in the oldest seniors where life expectancy is the lowest. Combining the excess deaths with life expectancy by age group (with an adjustment for the quality of those life‐years) shows the toll of the pandemic: about 540,000 life‐years lost among those 65 and older. [3, 5, 6] By comparison, the reduction in expected deaths is highest in infants, where the life expectancy benefits are the greatest. Compared to expectations, the lives of over 200 infants per week were saved during the month of May. Combining the number of lives saved in infants and children aged 1‐4, demonstrates a smaller but comparably large and beneficial effect: roughly 145,000 life‐years saved among children under 5. Noting the surprising effect of the lockdown on infants and children under 5 does nothing to negate the tragic effect of the pandemic on the elderly. It does, however, raise a question: why are so many fewer children dying?


When infants die, the cause is frequently some form of congenital condition or birth defect. Sadly, accidents and homicides are frequent causes as well. There are however, frequent cases in which previously healthy infants die unexpectedly. These deaths are usually classified as “Sudden Infant Death Syndrome” or SIDS. According to the CDC, SIDS deaths are one of the two largest causes of death among infants aged 1 month to 1 year. [7]

We have no specific data on the trend in SIDS deaths during the pandemic. We have, however, heard anecdotal reports from emergency room (ER) doctors suggesting some have observed a decline in SIDS. One doctor who says he might see 3 cases of SIDS in a typical week has seen zero cases since the pandemic and associated lockdowns began.

What has changed during this period that might have such an effect? Are infant deaths not being recorded? Are parents taking better care of their families while working remotely and their children are not going to school? There are many possible hypotheses about the infant death decline.

One very clear change that has received publicity is that public health officials are bemoaning the sharp decline in infant vaccinations as parents are not taking their infants into pediatric offices for their regular well‐baby checks. In the May 15 issue of the CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), a group of authors from the CDC and Kaiser Permanente reported a sharp decline in provider orders for vaccines as well as a decline in pediatric vaccine doses administered. [8] These declines began in early march, around the time infant deaths began declining.


This effect may not be confined to the U.S. The World Health Organization issued a press release on May 22 noting that, “Since March 2020, routine childhood immunization services have been disrupted on a global scale that may be unprecedented since the inception of expanded programs on immunization (EPI) in the 1970s.” [9] Are fewer children dying because their parents are skipping their routine childhood vaccines? If lives are being saved during the pandemic, this is a question that urgently needs answering.

*     *     *

Covid19 is unique among recent pandemics in that the mortality toll is measurable, real and convincing. It is also nearly certain to be transitory, but that won’t stop the propaganda juggernaut from rolling forward. However, as the saying goes, “the best laid plans of mice and men often go awry.” What no one would have predicted in advance of Covid19 is that the extreme lockdown response has produced a natural experiment that actually calls into question the very actions—widespread, mandated vaccines for all‐‐that the infectious disease and public health community have been pushing for years. We should mourn the deaths of the elderly Manhattan nursing home residents but also take heed of the hundreds of avoided infant deaths. Only with that kind of balance will we draw the proper lessons from the pandemic and the lockdowns that have followed in its wake.


1. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics Mortality Surveillance System. [Online] [Cited: June 6, 2020.]

2. —. Provisional Death Counts for Coronavirus Disease (COVID‐19). [Online] [Cited: June 6, 2020.]

3. —. Provisional COVID‐19 Death Counts by Sex, Age, and Week. [Online] [Cited: June 6, 2020.]‐COVID‐19‐Death‐Counts‐by‐Sex‐Age‐and‐W/vsak‐wrfu.

4. —. Deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) by race and Hispanic origin group and age, by state. [Online] [Cited: June 6, 2020.]‐involving‐coronavirus‐disease‐2019‐COVID‐19/ks3g‐spdg.

5. Social Security Administration. Actuarial Life Table. [Online] [Cited: June 7, 2020.]

6. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Weekly counts of deaths by jurisdiction and age group. [Online] [Cited: June 7, 2020.]‐counts‐of‐deaths‐by‐jurisdiction‐and‐age‐gr/y5bj‐9g5w.

7. —. NCHS Data Brief, Number 355. [Online] January 2020. [Cited: May 16, 2020.]‐508.pdf#4.

8. Santoli, Jeanne M et al. Effects of the COVID‐19 Pandemic on Routine Pediatric Vaccine Ordering and Administration — United States, 2020. [Online] May 15, 2020.

9. World Health Organization. At least 80 million children under one at risk of diseases such as diphtheria, measles and polio as COVID‐19 disrupts routine vaccination efforts, warn Gavi, WHO and UNICEF. [Online] [Cited: May 23, 2020.]‐room/detail/22‐05‐2020‐at‐least‐80‐million‐children‐under‐one‐at‐risk‐of‐diseases‐such‐as‐diphtheria‐measles‐and‐polio‐as‐covid‐19‐disrupts‐routine‐vaccination‐efforts‐warn‐gavi‐who‐and‐unicef.


The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention note the following regarding underreporting in most recent weeks. To ensure that the signals we are reporting are not the result of these reporting lags, we have deliberately excluded the most recent four weeks of available data (the charts are week ending May 16, 2020, pulled June 6). Because CDC also re‐states historical data every time they refresh their datasets, we also refreshed all reported data for two prior years with every weekly dataset update.

Provisional counts are weighted to account for potential underreporting in the most recent weeks. However, data for the most recent week(s) are still likely to be incomplete. Only about 60% of deaths are reported within 10 days of the date of death, and there is considerable variation by jurisdiction and age. The completeness of provisional data varies by cause of death and by age group. However, the weights applied do not account for this variability. Therefore, the predicted numbers of deaths may be too low for some age groups and causes of death. For example, provisional data on deaths among younger age groups is typically less complete than among older age groups. Predicted counts may therefore be too low among the younger age groups. More detail about the methods, weighting, data, and limitations can be found in the Technical Notes.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

Deconstructing Bill Gates’ Agenda

Reproduced from original article:

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola    Fact Checked

June 13, 2020


  • Gates has used his staggering wealth to buy control, and he’s done it under the cloak of “charity.” A significant piece of that control is the control over population growth. Gates’ family also has a long history of supporting eugenics
  • According to Gates, the global population could be lowered by 10% to 15% if we “do a really great job on new vaccines, health care [and] reproductive health services.” His theory is that as health improves, families opt to have fewer children
  • In 2017, Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance — founded by the Gates Foundation in partnership with the WHO, the World Bank and vaccine manufacturers — decided to provide every child with a digital biometric identity to ensure 100% vaccine coverage
  • Gates has also invested in the development and implementation of biometric identification programs tied in with digital currencies
  • Ultimately, the plan is to connect everything together — our identity, finances, medical data, vaccine records and more — at which point we will be 100% enslaved

In “How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health,” I featured Parts 1 and 2 of investigative journalist James Corbett’s report on this unelected global health czar.

Part 1 reviewed how Gates ended up in a position to monopolize global health, despite his lack of health or medical education. In Part 2, he laid out Gates’ plan to vaccinate the global population against COVID-19 (although there’s no reason to imagine the plan would remain limited to a single vaccine).

Here, in Parts 3 and 4, which you’ll find in the playlist above, Corbett dives into the motives, ideology and connections of Gates that appear to have shaped and are driving his post-COVID-19 plans for the world — plans that include an unprecedented campaign to control the global population in its totality, from cradle to grave.

Population Control Is a Chief Aim

As noted by Corbett, Gates has used his staggering wealth to buy control, and he’s done it under the cloak of “charity.” A significant piece of that control is the control over population growth.

Indeed, a meeting1 in May 2009 between Sir Paul Nurse, then-president of Rockefeller University, Warren Buffet, David Rockefeller Jr., George Soros, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey, revolved around how these billionaires could use their wealth to curb population growth — without the input or interference of government agencies.

According to an article2 in The Sunday Times, they met at the request of Gates to discuss “joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.” The article continues:

“Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the summit was unprecedented. ‘We only learnt about it afterwards, by accident. Normally these people are happy to talk good causes, but this is different — maybe because they don’t want to be seen as a global cabal,’ he said … Taking their cue from Gates they agreed that overpopulation was a priority …

Another guest said there was ‘nothing as crude as a vote’ but a consensus emerged that they would back a strategy in which population growth would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat … ‘They need to be independent of government agencies, which are unable to head off the disaster we all see looming.’”

According to Gates, the global population could be lowered by 10% to 15% if we “do a really great job on new vaccines, health care [and] reproductive health services.” His theory is that “as health improves, families choose to have less children … As you improve health, within a half generation the population growth rate goes down.”

Vaccines to Reduce Fertility

Alas, as Corbett notes,3 “the idea of using vaccines as sterilization agents — even without the public’s knowledge or consent — is not conspiracy lore, but documentable fact.”

He points out an excerpt from the Rockefeller Foundation’s 1968 annual report4 and five-year review, which under the heading “Problems of Population,” states that “very little work is in progress on immunological methods, such as vaccines, to reduce fertility, and much more research is required if a solution is to be found here.”

To address the problem, the Rockefeller Foundation vowed to solicit and fund “established and beginning investigators to turn their attention to aspects of research in reproductive biology that have implications for human fertility and its control.”

In 1972, the Rockefeller-funded Population Council joined forces with the World Health Organization, creating the Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation, and in 1995, the task force reported they had developed a prototype of an anti-hCG vaccine that would prevent women from carrying a baby to term.

In the early 1990s, “a series of scandals over WHO-led vaccination programs in the Third World led to allegations that tetanus vaccines in places like the Philippines5 and Kenya6 were being laced with hCG in order to implement population control by stealth,” Corbett says. The subsequent controversy chilled campaigns promoting population control via vaccines.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation revived the concept during its 2012 Summit on Family Planning in London, when it was announced the foundation will fund research, development and deployment of “injectable contraceptives,” aimed at the developing world.

“But the Gates were not content to stop there,” Corbett says. “In 2014 it was announced that Microchips Biotech, Inc., a company in Lexington, Massachusetts, had developed a new form of birth control: ‘a wireless implant that can be turned on and off with a remote control and that is designed to last up to 16 years.’

According to MIT Technology Review, the idea originated when Bill Gates visited Robert Langer’s MIT lab in 2012 and asked him if it would be possible to create an implantable birth control device that could be turned on or off remotely.

Langer referred Gates to the controlled release microchip technology he had invented and licensed to MicroCHIPS Biotechnology, and the Gates Foundation granted $20 million to the firm to develop the implants.

Reducing population growth has, by Gates’ own admission, been a core mission of the Gates Foundation since its inception. But in order to really understand what Gates means by ‘population control,’ we have to look beyond the concept of controlling population size. At its most fundamental level, the ‘population control’ that Gates speaks of is not birth control, but control of the population itself.”


Click here to learn Dr. Mercola's top tips to combat coronavirus

Controlling the Population Through Technology

Part 3 continues by reviewing the work of Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, which was founded by the Gates Foundation in partnership with the WHO, the World Bank and various vaccine manufacturers.

In 2017, Gavi decided to provide every child with a digital biometric identity, which would simultaneously store the child’s vaccination records. Without such a system, a 100% immunization rate simply cannot be reached, Gavi CEO Seth Berkley stated.

Shortly thereafter, Gavi became a founding member of the ID2020 Alliance, alongside Microsoft and the Rockefeller Foundation. In 2019, Gates again collaborated with Langer to develop a novel vaccine delivery method using fluorescent microdot tags — essentially creating an invisible “tattoo” — that can then be read with a modified smartphone.

“It should be no surprise, then, that Big Pharma vaccine manufacturers — in their scramble to produce the coronavirus vaccine that, Gates assures us, is necessary to ‘go back to normal’ — have turned to a novel vaccine delivery method: a dissolvable microneedle array patch,” Corbett says.

“As in so many other aspects of the unfolding crisis, Gates’ unscientific pronouncement that we will need digital certificates to prove our immunity in the ‘new normal’ of the post-coronavirus world is now being implemented by a number of governments.”

Corbett also reviews the rapid development and implementation of biometric identification programs tied in with digital currencies. Undoubtedly, the plan is to connect everything together — your identification, personal finances, medical and vaccination records. Most likely, it will also be embedded on your body, for your own “convenience,” so you cannot lose it. Never mind the fact that everything that can be hacked at some point has been or will be.

“The ID control grid is an essential part of the digitization of the economy,” Corbett says. “And although this is being sold as an opportunity for ‘financial inclusion’ of the world’s poorest in the banking system provided by the likes of Gates and his banking and business associates, it is in fact a system for financial exclusion.

Exclusion of any person or transaction that does not have the approval of the government or the payment providers …

The different parts of this population control grid fit together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. The vaccination drive ties into the biometric identity drive which ties into the cashless society drive.

In Gates’ vision, everyone will receive the government-mandated vaccinations, and everyone will have their biometric details recorded in nationally administered, globally integrated digital IDs.

These digital identities will be tied to all of our actions and transactions, and, if and when they are deemed illegal, they will simply be shut off by the government — or even the payment providers themselves.”

Indeed, if you think online censorship is bad, consider a world in which your online activity is tied to your biometric chip with all your finances and personal data. What easier way to silence people than to block access to their own money? I’m sure there are many other ways in which such a system could be used to control any and all individuals.

“Only the most willfully obtuse could claim to be unable to see the nightmarish implications for this type of all-seeing, all-pervasive society, where every transaction and every movement of every citizen is monitored, analyzed, and databased in real-time by the government.

And Bill Gates is one of those willfully obtuse people,” Corbett says. “This Gates-driven agenda is not about money. It is about control. Control over every aspect of our daily lives, from where we go, to who we meet, to what we buy and what we do.”

Gates Family History

What drives a man who is rich beyond imagination to spend his life devising schemes to control the human population? Corbett asks. Surely, something other than money must be driving Gates’ insatiable lust for control. To answer that question, Corbett surveys Gates’ family history.

Both his great-grandfather, J.W. Maxwell, and his grandfather, Willard Maxwell, were bankers. Gates’ grandmother, Adele, was a prominent civic leader. His mother, Mary Maxwell Gates, served as director of several companies, including First Interstate Bancorp and KIRO-TV of Seattle. She was also a regent at the University of Washington, and served on the board of the United Way of America.

Gates’ father, William H. Gates, Sr., was a prominent lawyer who co-founded a powerful law and lobbying firm. He also served on several corporate and organizational boards, and headed up Planned Parenthood. As noted by Corbett:7

“From his mother’s banking family he inherited a ‘nose for the dollar,’ as one childhood friend’s father called it. From his hard-driving legal-minded father, he learned the value of legalizing business arrangements … A ‘nose for the dollar’ and a knowledge of how to use the legal system to get what you want were not the only things to emerge from Bill Gates’ childhood, however.

His parents also encouraged discussion about the family’s charity work and the causes they held close to their heart. As Gates revealed to Bill Moyers in 2003, those causes included ‘the population issue’ which sparked a lifelong interest in ‘reproductive health’ …

The topic is particularly controversial, because ‘population control’ and ‘reproductive health’ have been used for half a century as a euphemism for eugenics, the discredited pseudoscience that holds that certain families are fit to be leaders of society by virtue of their superior genes …

As transparent as it seems to us today that this ideology was a self-serving self-justification for the ruling class, it was quickly taken up as the great social crusade of the early 20th century …

A common eugenicist argument was that the scarce resources of society should not be used to support the lower classes, as that only encouraged more of their kind. Instead, life-saving medical care and intervention should be rationed so that those resources can be best put to use elsewhere.

So-called negative eugenicists even took things further, with some, like famed playwright George Bernard Shaw, calling for people to be called before a state-appointed board to justify their existence or be put to death.”

Gates Drives the Modern Eugenics Agenda

As noted by Corbett, eugenics was shunned following the second World War thanks to the atrocious acts of the Nazi’s, yet support for it didn’t die out. Instead, the concept of eugenics simply changed into discussions about population control and reproductive health.

“It is worth questioning why this man, who openly muses about death panels and the trade-offs of providing health care to the elderly, is to be taken completely at face value in his attempts to slow population growth in the third world or to handle a coronavirus health crisis that primarily affects the elderly.

That the Gates agenda is being driven by a eugenicist ideology is suggested by multiple lines of evidence, both historical and current,” Corbett says.8

Like the Maxwell/Gates family, the Rockefeller family has also been funding and promoting eugenics around the world. They even funded the Eugenics Record Office, a department of the Carnegie Institution of Washington Station for Experimental Evolution at Cold Spring Harbor New York.9

As explained on the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory website,10 the Eugenics Record Office “was devoted to the collection and analysis of American family genetics and traits history records.” The studies “collected information such as inborn physical, mental and temperamental properties to enable the family to trace the segregation and recombination of inborn or heritable qualities.”

William Welch, the founding director of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, sat on the Eugenics Record Office board of directors, and the Rockefellers sponsored eugenics researchers at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes in Germany, including Ernst Rüdin, who drafted Nazi Germany’s forced sterilization law.

When the American Eugenics Society closed its doors, its long-time director, Frederick Osborne, became the president of the Population Council — another Rockefeller-funded organization. In his 2009 book, “Showing Up for Life,” Gates Sr. expresses his admiration for the Rockefellers’ decades’ long commitment to and involvement in public health, including their support of vaccination programs.

Epstein’s Controlled Breeding Program

“But the most salacious hints of a deeper agenda are not to be found in the Gates’ public associations, but in the associations that they have tried to hide from the public,” Corbett says. One curious and highly suspicious connection is Gates’ apparent involvement with the now-infamous sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

While Gates has denied knowing Epstein, media reports claim they met on multiple occasions, and were in discussions about co-creating a charitable fund with seed money from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and JPMorgan Chase. Corbett notes:

“According to The Times, Gates emailed his colleagues about Epstein in 2011: ‘His lifestyle is very different and kind of intriguing although it would not work for me.’

Epstein’s will even named Boris Nikolic — a Harvard-trained immunologist who served as the chief scientific advisor to both Microsoft and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and who appears in the sole publicly known photo of Epstein and Gates’ 2011 meeting at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion — as the backup executor of Epstein’s estate.

It is not difficult to see why Gates would try to distance himself from his relationship with a child sex trafficker … But, as it turns out, the attempt to suppress the Gates-Epstein story may have been an attempt to suppress the revelation of an altogether different shared interest …

The already scarcely believable Jeffrey Epstein story took another bizarre turn in August of 2019, when it was reported that Epstein ‘Hoped to Seed the Human Race With His DNA.’11

As The New York Times explained, Epstein’s plan to impregnate 20 women at a time at his New Mexico ranch in order to ‘seed the human race with his DNA’ — plan he told to a number of the ‘scientific luminaries’ he kept in his orbit — put a modern gloss on a very old idea.”

One of those scientific “luminaries” was George Church, a Harvard geneticist who received funding for various projects from Epstein’s foundation, and who brought forth a proposal for a “genetics dating app.” Epstein and Gates both funded a startup company seeking to use gene editing to eliminate diseases.

It’s Time to See the Global Agenda for What It Is

“We cannot expect an answer about Bill Gates true motives to come from Gates himself. By this point the question of Bill Gates’ intentions has been buried under the combined weight of hundreds of millions of dollars of paid PR spin,” Corbett says.

“Now we must confront the question of why this man is motivated to build such a web of control — control over our public health agencies. Control over our identities. Control over our transactions. And even control over our bodies …

We must confront the possibility that this quest for control comes not from a selfless spirit of generosity that never seemed to exist before he became a multi-billionaire, but from the same drive for money, the same desire for domination and the same sense of superiority that motivated him on his way up the corporate ladder.

But if the answer to the question “Who is Bill Gates” is “Bill Gates is a eugenicist,” that tells us some important things about the world that we are living in … If Bill Gates is a eugenicist, driven by a belief in the superiority of himself and his fellow wealthy elitists, then what we are facing is not one man, or even one family, but an ideology.

This is not a trivial point. One man, whatever his wealth, can be stopped easily enough. But even if Bill Gates were to be thrown in jail tomorrow, the agenda that has already been set in motion would continue without missing a beat.

An entire infrastructure of researchers, labs, corporations, governmental agencies and public health bodies exists … driven by the belief of all those millions of people working for these various entities that they are truly working in the best interest of the people.

No, an ideology cannot be stopped by stopping one man. It can only be stopped when enough people learn the truth about this agenda and the world of total, pervasive control that is coming into view. If you have watched all four parts of this exploration on Bill Gates, then you are now one of the most informed people on the planet about the true nature of this agenda …

If you have made it this far, it is incumbent on you to help inoculate those around you against the corrupt ideology of Bill Gates and all those who seek to control the population of the world. You must help to spread this information so that others have a chance to see the bigger picture and decide for themselves whether they are willing to roll up their sleeves and accept what is coming, or not.”

Newborns To Be Separated From Parents for COVID-19 Testing

Reproduced from original article:

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola  Fact Checked
newborns and coronavirus


  • In an April 30, 2020, GatesNotes post, Bill Gates states he suspects “the COVID-19 vaccine will become part of the routine newborn immunization schedule”
  • The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is recommending newborns be tested for COVID-19 twice within the first 48 hours, and separated from mothers with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection
  • Only three pediatric deaths from alleged COVID-19 illness have been reported in the U.S. as of April 2, 2020
  • Early separation has been proven to cause emotional and neurobiological problems well into adulthood
  • Phase 1 human trials have begun for a few different COVID-19 vaccines. In the Moderna trial, one of the subjects developed a fever “of more than 103 degrees” Fahrenheit, fainted, and reported feeling “more sick than he ever has before” after his second dose

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the biggest funder of vaccines in the entire world and, according to Gates, its COVID-19 vaccination effort “dwarfs anything we’ve ever worked on before.”1 Indeed, Gates push for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination — and investment in those vaccines — is historically unprecedented.

In an April 30, 2020, GatesNotes post,2,3 Gates even states he “suspect[s] the COVID-19 vaccine will become part of the routine newborn immunization schedule.” In other words, a novel vaccine that alters your DNA and RNA — turning your body into an antigen-producing factory — will be given to newborns, if Gates has his way.

What could possibly go wrong? If history tells us anything, we know that just about anything could or will go wrong if the CDC mandates the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine on the newborn vaccine schedule.

Considering the vast majority of COVID-19 deaths occur in the elderly, why would babies, who are the absolutely lowest at-risk age group, need mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 in the first place? There’s absolutely no evidence to suggest vaccinating babies would prevent them from spreading the virus if infected, or develop lifelong immunity.

Newborns To Be Tested and Separated From Infected Mothers

In related, beyond ludicrous news,4 the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is now recommending5 newborns be tested for COVID-19 — not just once, but twice — and separated from mothers with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. As reported by CBSN Pittsburgh May 26, 2020:6

“’The recommendation is the baby be tested sometime around 24 hours after birth. And if the test is negative, they’re recommending a second test at 48 hours,’ says Dr. Paul Weinbaum, an obstetrician at the Allegheny Health Network. And these babies must be kept apart.

‘The baby should not only be separated from other babies but perhaps separated from the mother if that’s feasible,’ he said … If the baby’s tests are negative, the separation is over. But what happens if a baby tests positive? ‘They don’t recommend keeping these babies in the hospital,’ says Dr. Weinbaum.”

Early Separation Can Have Lasting Psychological Effects

If you ask me, separating newborns from their mothers due to SARS-CoV-2 infection (especially if it’s only “suspected”) appears not only unnecessary at best but foolhardy and cruel at worst — especially in light of the fact that only three pediatric deaths from alleged COVID-19 illness have been reported7 in the U.S., and the fact that such separation has been proven to cause emotional and neurobiological problems well into adulthood. As stated in a 2018 article in Psychological Science:8

“The attachment bond between a mother and her child is first formed in the womb, where fetuses have been found to develop preferential responses to maternal scents and sounds that persist after birth …

These rapid early-learning processes continue during the newborn stage of development, in which children begin to recognize their mothers’ faces and voices.

From this point on, early maternal separation can result in a series of traumatic emotional reactions during which the child engages in an anxious period of calling and active search behavior followed by a period of declining behavioral responsiveness.

In a study of infant rats, [Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychology director Myron] Hofer found that this behavior was largely a response to the loss of warmth a child receives through bodily contact, nutrients, and other physiological interactions with its mother …

The research suggests that withdrawing maternal support early in a child’s life can have a number of physiological and behavioral consequences that may contribute to a complex, changing pattern of vulnerability over the life span …”

Such findings are not entirely new. According to a 2011 study9 published in Biological Psychiatry, evidence shows “separating infants from their mother is stressful to the baby.” As reported by Science Daily:10

“Researchers measured heart rate variability in 2-day-old sleeping babies for one hour each during skin-to-skin contact with mother and alone in a cot next to mother’s bed. Neonatal autonomic activity was 176% higher and quiet sleep 86% lower during maternal separation compared to skin-to-skin contact.

Dr. John Krystal, Editor of Biological Psychiatry, commented on the study’s findings: ‘This paper highlights the profound impact of maternal separation on the infant. We knew that this was stressful, but the current study suggests that this is major physiologic stressor for the infant.’”

While that 2011 study claimed to be one of the first providing evidence that separation causes undue stress, other studies have been published since then, showing the same thing.

Examples include another 2011 study,11 which found “mother-child separation of a week or longer within the first two years of life was related to higher levels of child negativity (at age 3) and aggression (at ages 3 and 5),” and that “the effects of separation on children’s aggressive behavior are early and persistent.”

Similarly, a 2012 study that looked at “physical and emotional closeness between the preterm infant and parent in the neonatal intensive care unit” found physical and emotional closeness are “crucial to the physical, emotional and social well-being of both the infant and the parent,” and that such closeness is an important part of healthy infant brain development.


Click here to learn Dr. Mercola's top tips to combat coronavirus

COVID-19 Vaccine Likely To Be Riskier Than Most

The COVID-19 vaccine is the most fast-tracked vaccine ever created in history, and some companies are skipping previously required safety testing steps, such as animal testing.12,13

Phase 1 human trials have already begun for a few different COVID-19 vaccines within weeks of the infection hitting the U.S. In the Moderna trial of an experimental coronavirus vaccine,14 one of the subjects developed a fever “of more than 103 degrees” Fahrenheit, fainted, and reported feeling “more sick than he ever has before” after his second dose.15

Moderna and several other competitor vaccine manufacturers are using messenger RNA (mRNA) technology to make their vaccines rather than live or attenuated (inactivated) viruses grown in animal cells.16 (The GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi COVID-19 vaccines, on the other hand, will be produced in insect cells with the dangerous squalene oil adjuvant.17) As explained by The New York Times:18

“… messenger RNA … carries the instructions for cells to make proteins. By injecting a specially designed messenger RNA into the body, the vaccine could potentially tell cells how to make the spike protein of the coronavirus without actually making a person sick.

Because the virus typically uses this protein as a key to unlock and take over lung cells, the vaccine could train a healthy immune system to produce antibodies to fight off an infection … But no vaccine made with this technology for other viruses has ever reached the global market.”

So, not only are we dealing with a novel virus, the mechanics of which are still under debate (some experts are now saying it appears to be a genetically engineered virus that attacks the blood19 more so than the lungs, for example), they’re also fast-tracking experimental RNA-based vaccines that have never been licensed or used in humans before.

As explained in “Fast-Tracked COVID-19 Vaccine — What Could Go Wrong?” previous attempts to create coronavirus vaccines have failed due to coronaviruses triggering production of two different types of antibodies: one that fights disease, and one that triggers paradoxical immune enhancement that often results in very serious disease and/or death when the patient is exposed to the wild virus.

Based on the historical failures to defend against coronaviruses with a vaccine, this could become one of the biggest public health disasters in the history of the world. And, not one of those involved would face any repercussions. Instead, they will all profit from it.

COVID-19 Vaccine Will Alter Your RNA and DNA

I recently interviewed Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the nonprofit National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), about these fast-tracked vaccines and the simultaneous push to make them mandatory for travel, if not for work and social life in general.

As noted by Fisher, the mRNA vaccines being developed against COVID-19 will alter your RNA and DNA, which is of tremendous concern. As mentioned, the idea behind them is to turn your body into an antigen-manufacturing plant, and if your immune system is hypersensitive, it could overreact, causing severe problems. Considering how many people have autoimmune diseases and allergies, these vaccines could have devastating effects for many.

“When you try to stimulate strong inflammatory responses in the body … what is this going to do to people who don’t resolve inflammation in the body and become chronically inflamed and chronically ill and disabled?” Fisher said.

“This is what vaccines do. They stimulate inflammation in the body. They have to in order to provoke an antibody response, but this is atypical. When you’re trying to do this in the body, this is not a normal way that the body mounts an inflammatory response to a microbe.

They’ve turned everything upside down and we are just accepting it. Why are we not thinking critically? Why do people think that they shouldn’t really do the research and look at the science and look at what’s being done before they take a pharmaceutical product or a vaccine? This is what I don’t understand. We’ve totally given up our critical thinking ability …

I think … you need to get educated, you need to get the accurate facts. and, we do our research. We reference all of our information because we want you to have accurate information, and you need to share that information with your family, friends, community leaders and legislators, because the only way that we’re going to be able to change government is by electing people who are going to reflect our values and beliefs.”

Does the State Own Your Baby?

As reported in “Children Taken From Parents Who Refuse Vitamin K Shots,” an increasing number of parents question the routine practice of injecting their newborns with vitamin K1, and some hospitals have started harassing and even removing newborns from their parents, calling parents’ refusal of the shot “medical neglect.”20

While vitamin K1 is necessary for newborns, the painful (and potentially toxic) injection is not. You can safely and noninvasively normalize your baby’s vitamin K1 level with oral drops.

In his 1999 paper, “Babies Don’t Feel Pain: A Century of Denial in Medicine,” David B. Chamberlain, Ph.D., a psychologist and co-founder of the Association of Pre-and Perinatal Psychology and Health, wrote:21

“The earlier an infant is subjected to pain, the greater the potential for harm … We must alert the medical community to the psychological hazards of early pain and call for the removal of all man-made pain surrounding birth.”

A 2004 study22 found that very early pain or stress experiences have long-lasting adverse consequences for newborns, including changes in the central nervous system and changes in responsiveness of the neuroendocrine and immune systems at maturity. Similar findings were also published in 2008.23

In 2019, several Illinois families who experienced harassment and investigation by the Division of Children and Families Services over refusal of the vitamin K shot have filed a class action lawsuit against local hospitals (Silver Cross Hospital, Advocate Christ Medical Center and the University of Chicago Medical Center), the American Academy of Pediatrics, DCFS and several pediatricians.24

The fact that doctors, nurses, DCFS workers and state health officials are trying to circumvent parents’ rights to make medical decisions for their children is disturbing in the extreme.

Chances are, the fight over who really has control over your children is likely to heat up once again if or when a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available and is added to the federally recommended childhood vaccination schedule, which is being turned into state law in most states. Before the time comes when a COVID-19 vaccine is mandated not only for all children but for all adults, too, I hope you all join us in the fight for freedom of choice.

To prepare, I urge you to sign up for the National Vaccine Information Center’s online Advocacy Portal, a tool you can use to communicate with your elected representatives. This free service monitors vaccine-related state legislation throughout the U.S. and alerts you when proposed bills are moving in your state.

NVIC also provides you with fact-based talking points you can share with your legislators to educate them about the need to protect the legal right to make voluntary decisions about vaccination for yourself and your children.

“Gag order” given to doctor over his advice to help improve immunity

Reproduced from original article:

doctor-censored(NaturalHealth365) Wear a mask. Get a COVID-19 vaccine. Spray down your entire house with powerful disinfectants. Assume everyone you meet in public is infected with SARS-CoV-2.  It seems like our natural immunity to dis-ease is no match against this current pandemic.

These tips to slow the spread from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) aren’t necessarily “intended” to inspire fear and paranoia, but it’s not hard to see how this is exactly what’s happening as a result.

So, one doctor tried to offer an “alternative” and got in trouble for it.

Of course, what we hear a lot less about from the mainstream media is arguably the most important thing you can do to keep yourself and your family healthy: strengthen your immune system.  Yet for some reason, doctors who promote natural ways to boost immune health are being censored by the government.

Is this simply a no-holds-barred attempt to protect Big Pharma’s profitable COVID-19 drugs and vaccines coming down the pipeline?

“The Crackdown” is here: Medical doctor attempting to share natural health benefits of immune boosting compounds silenced by government health agency

David Brownstein, MD is a popular holistic medicine practitioner who has been freely sharing information with his community about his success with natural remedies that can support immune health during COVID-19. These remedies include many that our NaturalHealth365 readers know about, but we’re not allowed to say, according to the Federal Trade Commission – including the use of a nebulizer.

Do NOT ignore the health dangers linked to toxic indoor air.  These chemicals – the ‘off-gassing’ of paints, mattresses, carpets and other home/office building materials – increase your risk of headaches, dementia, heart disease and cancer.

Get the BEST indoor air purification system – at the LOWEST price, exclusively for NaturalHealth365 readers.  I, personally use this system in my home AND office.  Click HERE to order now – before the sale ends.

Sadly, censorship isn’t anything new, especially during a worldwide pandemic when those in power are likely tempted to take even more control. And on May 15, Dr. Brownstein was told by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to stay quiet. Backed by politicians such as Senator Chuck Schumer, the FTC sent a letter to Dr. Brownstein containing this warning:

“It is unlawful under the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C Sec. 41 et seq. to advertise that a product or service can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made. For COVID-19, no such study is currently known to exist for the products or services identified above. Thus, any Coronavirus-related prevention or treatment claims regarding such products or services are not supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. You must immediately cease making all such claims.”

Meanwhile, research is continuing to clarify the link between deficiencies in many vitamins and severe COVID-19 infections, with doctors and hospitals around the world trialing vitamin supplementation for many of their sickest patients.

Yet for some reason, a licensed doctor who is sharing his patients’ success stories with similar remedies is in the “wrong?” (what is this world coming to?!)

While we agree that no one should ever make a claim that they can “cure or prevent” COVID-19 without legitimate evidence, we think it’s wrong to deny people the right to explore alternative options that can boost their immune health. After all, relying on just cleaning supplies and medications to clean up the COVID-19 mess is just going to lead to a lot of unintended consequences.

Cleaning craze: Parents should be aware of the unexpected risks linked to excessive use of disinfectants

Popular home cleaning brand Lysol probably doesn’t mind the recent worldwide obsession with disinfecting everything. The company has enjoyed through-the-roof demand, although they have been tripped up by some supply chain problems. But just how far is too far when it comes to spraying all the surfaces inside your home?

Nobody is suggesting not to practice good hygiene and cleanliness – such basic life skills are necessary whether there’s a global pandemic or not. But health experts have long been wary of worrisome parents and caregivers trying to turn their homes into close approximations of sterile environments.

For example, depriving children of exposure to normal everyday microorganisms may lead to unintended health consequences, according to a 2014 study published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.  The study found that children who are raised in overly clean homes appear more likely to have health problems like asthma and allergies.

The evidence-based theory, also known as the hygiene hypothesis (alternative: the microbe deprivation hypothesis), says that some amount of exposure to bacteria and other organisms actually primes a developing child’s immune system and helps it become stronger. This doesn’t negate the need for cleanliness – but it should remind parents that dousing their home in disinfectants is not only unnecessary but potentially harmful, as well.

The takeaway is clear: In addition to reinforcing good hygiene habits within your family, remember to look for natural ways to stay healthier, including holistic methods to boost your immune system.  For much more detail: check out the Immune Defense Summit, hosted by Jonathan Landsman.

Click here to sign a petition expressing your disapproval of this form of censorship (USA only).

Sources for this article include:

Don’t Relinquish Civil Liberties for False Sense of Security

Reproduced from original article:

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola      Fact Checked
Sorry, video not available on this site. To view video, please go to original article above.

Visit the Mercola Video Library


  • We need to start developing personal relationships with the legislators and officials we elect, including our county sheriff, who can intervene on our behalf to protect us from tyranny
  • Sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal, an online communications tool that monitors vaccine-related state legislation and alerts residents when proposed bills are moving in their state
  • H.R. 6666, the COVID-19 Testing, Reaching and Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act, sets the stage for multiple violations of our constitutional rights, including the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth and Ninth amendments
  • Based on the historical failures of past coronavirus vaccines, a fast-tracked COVID-19 vaccine could become one of the biggest public health disasters in history. And, no one involved is accountable or will face any repercussions. Instead, they will all profit
  • Only healthy people are enrolled in COVID-19 vaccine trials, yet only 4 in 10 Americans are actually free of chronic disease. What’s more, 87.8% of Americans are metabolically inflexible, which impairs their immune function so, in reality, 9 in 10 Americans are unhealthy to some degree

Barbara Loe Fisher is the co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), which is the oldest and largest consumer-led nonprofit organization in the U.S. providing accurate and objective information to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and help people make informed health choices.

As noted by Fisher, the rapid movement by governments and the pharmaceutical industry toward mandatory vaccinations against COVID-19 and the proposed tracking and tracing of all individuals under the guise of public health is a culmination of everything we have been talking about for decades.

“Back in 1993, I started to predict that the day would come when Americans would not be able to participate in society without showing proof they’ve been vaccinated with whatever the government says they have to be vaccinated with,” Fisher says.

Utilitarianism Demands Sacrifice ‘for the Greater Good’

Legal proponents such as Alan Dershowitz, who has represented the notorious sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and other prominent individuals, is now using a 1905 Supreme Court ruling to justify government officials literally detaining Americans and forcibly vaccinating them if they do not agree to get vaccinated voluntarily. Fisher explains:

“Dershowitz … was quite reckless in the language he used. He basically said that the Supreme Court in 1905 (Jacobson v. Massachusetts), [gives] the right of state governments to come in and forcibly inject you with a vaccine. That’s not really what Jacobson v. Massachusetts said …

In that case, it was smallpox, because that was the only vaccine they had in 1905, but you have to read the Supreme Court decision very carefully to understand everything that the justices said.

They basically concluded — and I think wrongly so, because utilitarianism … is based on a mathematical equation that some can be inconvenienced or sacrificed for the greater good of a majority of people — that people [who] opposed smallpox vaccination could be required to be vaccinated during epidemics.

Even religious objections could be overridden. But there’s also language in that decision that says that the court is not to be interpreted as meaning that if an individual was at risk for being harmed by the vaccination, they were not meant to [have concluded] that “cruel and inhuman to the last degree” would be the standard that would be used.

I think Dershowitz overstated the opinion, although it is a utilitarian opinion. It gives authority to the states to mandate vaccines because anything that is not defined in the Constitution as a federal activity is reserved for the states.

Public health laws, by and large in this country, are written by the states, and the federal authority is requiring vaccination for people crossing territorial borders of the United States [and the federal government] could mandate vaccines for interstate travel, crossing state borders. But most public health laws that legislatures make are for the residents of the states, which is why we have a patchwork of [vaccine] laws in this country …

I’m very worried that some attorney is going to try to challenge the Jacobson [ruling] in the 21st century. I think that, probably, in any court right now, you’re going to get that ruling upheld and you’re going to get it strengthened. I would advise against [challenging] that one in the Supreme Court.”


Click here to learn Dr. Mercola's top tips to combat coronavirus

Enforcement Will Become a Hot Issue

If the worst-case scenario occurs and your state decides to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine, or any other vaccine, the practical question will be how they’re going to enforce it. They’ll most probably rely on local police and/or the county sheriff.

Thankfully, county sheriffs are elected by the people and are directly accountable to the citizens in their county, the state Constitution, and the U.S. Constitution, and have the legal authority to deny what they consider to be an unlawful governmental order.

For this reason, I believe it is important to know who your county sheriff is. Get to know and develop a relationship with them. Educate them about why it is important to defend the human right to make informed, voluntary decisions about medical risk taking, including vaccine risk-taking.

It is important to remember that, although the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Jacobson v. Massachusetts affirmed the constitutional authority of elected representatives in state legislatures to pass public health laws requiring vaccination, state legislators also have the constitutional authority to choose NOT to mandate vaccines and/or to include flexible medical, religious and conscientious belief exemptions in state public health laws.

This is why, in 2010, the National Vaccine Information Center created the NVIC Advocacy Portal, an online communications tool that monitors vaccine-related state legislation and alerts residents when proposed bills are moving in their state. They also provide fact-based talking points you can share when contacting your legislators.

The bottom line is that we need, as a nation, to start developing personal relationships with the elected legislators and officials, including our county sheriff. They need to know we will not accept tyranny in America.

“Let’s hope that what has happened this year is a lesson to the people that [they must] elect legislators who are going to reflect their values and beliefs — traditional values and beliefs that have been respected in this country for 245 years. If we don’t elect good people, we’re not going to have good laws,” Fisher says.

“The millennials and the Gen Xers have got to start running for office if they want to have a future where they’re going to be able to enjoy freedom of speech and conscience, freedom of religion and the right to assembly.

All of these things [are] protected in the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights. We have to elect people at the state and federal level who are not going to sell out, who are not going to sacrifice their integrity for money.

We know the pharmaceutical industry is the biggest lobby on Capitol Hill … we’ve got to build a firewall between government and industry that has been completely broken down in the last 40 years.”

H.R. 6666 Violates Several Constitutional Amendments

For example, H.R.6666, the COVID-19 Testing, Reaching and Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act, introduced in the House of Representatives May 1, 2020, has 64 co-sponsors1 (all Democrats; one Republican has withdrawn his name) and that bill would give $100 billion to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to hire people to go door-to-door to test the population for COVID-19 for fiscal year 2020, with more funds to follow, as needed, in subsequent fiscal years.

If you test positive, they’ll trace all your contacts and demand that you quarantine in your home or in a mobile unit. Children could be taken into child services if parents are quarantined.

“This is a violation of a number of amendments in the Constitution that protect our right to life and liberty, that protect our right to be free in our homes, and not be taken out of our homes and put somewhere the government wants to put us,” Fisher says.

“If we do not start to become aware of these laws that are being passed by legislators on Capitol Hill and [in] our state legislatures, we are going to be a captive people who don’t have civil liberties anymore …

We’re seeing this erosion of civil liberties because, unless you take liberty from the people — and they’re doing it in the name of safety — you cannot do the kinds of things that we’ve been talking about [such as restricting work, education, travel and social engagement unless you are vaccinated and implementing biometric tracking of the population] …

Having sat here for almost 40 years watching this vaccine empire unfold, I know that Bill Gates … has changed everything. He was a big proponent of public-private partnerships because he’s a businessman … He is a big believer in vaccinating the world and Gavi [the Gates-funded Vaccine Alliance] … is all about pharma.

All these companies are involved in vaccinating the world, and COVID-19 vaccines are being fast-tracked to licensure with additional funding from governments like the U.S. government — half a billion dollars to one company and half a billion dollars to another.

Moderna is an NIAID-supported vaccine. A lot of money has been given to these companies to fast-track these COVID-19 vaccines using technology that’s never been licensed before — DNA, messenger RNA [and] nanoparticle [vaccines].”

Operation Warp Speed

The fast-tracking of a COVID-19 vaccine to licensure and subsequent widespread use has been termed Operation Warp Speed. What we must remember here is that vaccine manufacturers are not liable for any damage their vaccines do. Since 2011, drug companies making and selling vaccines are even shielded from design defect lawsuits, which means they have absolutely no incentive for making vaccines less harmful.

The 2006 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act also indemnifies all drug companies making vaccines used during a public health emergency or a pandemic. So, vaccine companies, as well as any person who administers, mandates or enforces vaccine mandates, does not face any liability whatsoever if a new coronavirus vaccine turns out to be a catastrophe.

What’s more, when a COVID-19 vaccine does come out, there likely will be little or no information about its side effects, particularly long-term side effects. Moderna, which is a top contender in the race to be the first to get a licensed COVID-19 vaccine on the market, began human trials of its experimental mRNA vaccine in March 2020.

According to a May 18, 2020, press release,2 “After two doses, all participants evaluated to date across the 25 microgram and 100 mcg dose cohorts seroconverted with binding antibody levels at or above levels seen in convalescent sera.” The vaccine also “elicited neutralizing antibody titer levels in all eight initial participants …”

The words are important here, as high-binding antibodies are associated with paradoxical immune enhancement.

As explained in “Fast-Tracked COVID-19 Vaccine — What Could Go Wrong?” previous attempts to create coronavirus vaccines have failed due to coronaviruses triggering production of two different types of antibodies: one that fights disease, and one that triggers paradoxical immune enhancement that often results in very serious disease and/or death when the vaccinated person is exposed to the wild coronavirus.

Based on the historical coronavirus vaccine failures, this could become one of the biggest public health disasters in history. And, no one involved will be accountable or face any repercussions. Instead, they will all profit.

It’s also important to realize that only healthy people are enrolled in these human trials, yet only 4 in 10 Americans are actually free of chronic disease.3 What’s more, according to recent NHANES data,4 87.8% of Americans are metabolically inflexible, which impairs their immune function.

The NHANES data is over 4 years old and our metabolic health has only declined since 2016, so the number is likely higher than 90%, or 9 in 10 Americans are unhealthy to some degree.

On top of that, vitamin D deficiency is rampant, yet public health authorities are not stressing the importance of optimizing your vitamin D levels to reduce your risk of infection. If you do nothing else, make sure you raise your vitamin D level above 40 nanograms per milliliter, at bare minimum, and ideally 60 ng/mL, before this fall, when another predicted “second” wave of COVID-19 may hit.

COVID-19 Vaccine Delivery

Now, aside from using entirely novel manufacturing methods like messenger RNA (mRNA), DNA and nanoparticle genetic engineering technology, some of the COVID-19 vaccines being fast tracked to licensure also will be using novel vaccine delivery methods.

One new type of vaccine delivery, which the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has funded and promoted, uses a microneedle array rather than conventional injection. The microneedles are equipped with fluorescent quantum dot tags. The resulting invisible mark can then be read by a smartphone equipped with a special sensor.

“This is definitely something that Bill Gates has been pushing,” Fisher says. “He has been pushing not only that everybody in the world has to get all these vaccines, but also that governments need to be able to track [people’s vaccination status].

Certainly, this type of administration of a vaccine is a double bubble because not only do you get the vaccine in the person, but you also are able to track them … They’re determined to somehow implant, or in some way have our bodies carry our vaccination records …

They’re going for it all right now … the American people are going to have to really take a look and figure out, do they want to give up their civil liberties for an illusion of safety? It’s really an illusion of safety.”

COVID-19 Vaccine Will Alter Your RNA and DNA

As noted by Fisher, the mRNA vaccines being developed against COVID-19 will alter your RNA and DNA, which is of tremendous concern. The idea behind them is to turn your body into a protein manufacturing plant, and if your immune system is hypersensitive, it could overreact, causing severe problems. Considering how many people have autoimmune diseases and allergies, these vaccines could have devastating effects for many.

“When you try to stimulate strong inflammatory responses in the body through the use of genetic manipulation, squalene oil-based adjuvants and nanoparticle technology — one vaccine is even using electricity to try to hyperstimulate an immune response — what is this going to do to people who don’t resolve inflammation in the body and become chronically inflamed and chronically ill and disabled?

This is what vaccines do. They stimulate inflammation in the body. They have to in order to provoke an antibody response, but this is atypical. When you’re trying to do this in the body, this is not a normal way that the body mounts an inflammatory response to a microbe.

They’ve turned everything upside down and we are just accepting it. Why are we not thinking critically? Why do people think that they shouldn’t really do the research and look at the science and look at what’s being done before they take a pharmaceutical product or a vaccine? This is what I don’t understand. We’ve totally given up our critical thinking ability and said the experts are going to do it for us …

I think that what people need to do — and I’ve been advocating this for 40 years — is you need to get educated, you need to get the accurate facts. and, we do our research.

We reference all of our information because we want you to have accurate information, and you need to share that information with your family, friends, community leaders and legislators because the only way that we’re going to be able to change government is by electing people who are going to reflect our values and beliefs — people who understand that we have a right, a human right, to make voluntary decisions about medical interventions — any medical procedure that can injure or kill us or our children.

It’s basic. It’s not hard. We’re governed by the laws that are made by the people we elect, and those people also appoint judges at the state and federal level. It all depends upon who we elect. At the end of the day, if … people are going to tyrannize us [and] violate our human rights, then we have to make a decision.

Everyone has to make a decision. The police, the sheriffs, every American is going to have to decide: Am I going to be somebody who is going to violate the civil rights and the human rights of my fellow citizens, or am I going to be somebody who follows my conscience and who understands the cultural values and beliefs that have guided this country for more than two centuries? …

I am praying that most Americans understand that we have got to fight for our freedom and for our civil liberties. It’s what has kept this country free for two centuries.”

Be Prepared to Protect State Authority

Fisher is particularly concerned about the precedent set in Virginia in 2019, when the state legislature, which is now dominated by one political party, decided to eliminate the ability of duly elected legislators to decide which vaccines are mandated for children to attend school.

The legislature voted to immediately codify into Virginia law the CDC’s recommended childhood vaccine schedule. In the future, every new vaccine the CDC recommends for children (such as a COVID-19 vaccine) will be automatically mandated in Virginia for school attendance without public hearings and input from citizens and without a vote by legislators.

“This is very dangerous,” she says. “Why? Because Jacobson v. Massachusetts affirmed the authority of the state legislatures to make vaccine laws. What Virginia has done is they’ve handed over that power. They’ve given away that power to the CDC and made the CDC a de facto law-making body for the state of Virginia.

Now they are going to try to do this in every state, so that basically there will be no more hearings on proposed vaccine additions … This is extremely dangerous. I urge everyone to sign up for our free [NVIC Advocacy] Portal because it’s a public service we provide, and we want you to be informed.

We give fact-based talking points you can use with your legislators. This issue is going to become more and more important because of the power grab that has occurred in the last few months over this pandemic. Please be prepared. Please stand up for your right to make voluntary vaccine decisions.”

sign up nvic advocacy portal

Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination in October 2020

October 16 through 18, 2020, NVIC will sponsor the Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination. The theme is “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st century.” The conference will bring together well-known speakers from around the world presenting information on vaccine science, policy, law, ethics and civil liberties and will feature formal presentations, panel discussions and live chat rooms.

NVIC has held four previous hotel-based conferences in the Washington, D.C., area but, this time around, the conference will be held online due to the unpredictability of government regulations related to COVID-19, including travel and social distancing restrictions that may still be in play in October.

So, mark your calendars and check for more information that will be posted soon about the conference.

In the meantime, be sure to sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal. It’s free, and you will stay informed about proposed vaccine-related legislation happening in your state that could further restrict or eliminate your legal right to make voluntary vaccine decisions for yourself and your children.

One in Every 16 Irish Boys has Autism: Crisis Worse than COVID-19 and Nobody Cares

© 28th May 2020 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc.
Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense.
Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Reproduced from original article:

MAY 28, 2020
By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman, Children’s Health Defense

According to National Health data released last week, autism incidence among Irish children is now at 4.3%, an 82% rise in five years. One in 16 boys is affected. US rates trail Ireland’s slightly only because CDC lies to minimize the crisis.

In 2016, Judith Pinborough-Zimmerman, CDC’s Utah Principal Investigator for the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network (ADDM) filed a federal whistleblower lawsuit after reporting research fraud and intentional data manipulation by the CDC. The CDC routinely uses multiple strategies to hide the Autism Pandemic. “The autism explosion is an acute embarrassment to the CDC as they have totally failed to address environmental factors involved in causality.”

The autism crisis dwarfs COVID-19. Bill Gates’ Institute for Health Metrics predicts 81,766 deaths from COVID. The average age of death is 75. In contrast, autism attacks infants presaging a lifetime of nightmarish agony. Half will never go on a date, write a poem, hit a baseball, join the military, pay taxes, cast a vote, run for office, speak, or use a toilet. Their cost of care is over 1/4 trillion U.S. dollars annually and rising.

… children receiving the Hep B vaccine in their first 30 days had an 1135% increased risk for an autism diagnosis.

EPA scientists say the epidemic began in 1989, the year the CDC dramatically expanded the childhood vaccine schedule, multiplying infant exposures to neurotoxins like mercury and aluminum. CDC’s massive 1999 study of the VSD—America’s largest medical database—showed that children receiving the Hep B vaccine in their first 30 days had an 1135% increased risk for an autism diagnosis. CDC and Pharma knew at that moment that vaccines were causing the epidemic.

They hid the VSD study, closed the database to independent scientists and commissioned a sketchy cabal of tobacco scientists, grifters, felons and Pharma biostitutes to gin up dozens of fraudulent vaccine studies purporting to “prove that vaccines don’t cause autism.” They blocked studies of all vaccines given to children under six months. Tony Fauci played a key role in the cover up. Fauci distributes $5 billion annually in research grants and assured that studies of autism’s environmental causes never get funded. When in 2008 NIH’s Autism Coordinating Committee voted $16 million to study the links between autism and vaccines, Tom Insel killed those studies. Fauci and Insel have committed some of the most consequential criminal conspiracies in history. Children’s Health Defense will bring these criminals to justice.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

Crimes against humanity: Italian member of Parliament demands arrest of Bill Gates

Reproduced from original article:

bill-gates(NaturalHealth365) Billionaire Bill Gates – who stepped down from the Microsoft board right before the coronavirus pandemic hit – has been heavily involved in vaccine research for decades. Given his paper trail and his foundation’s activities, the man looks like a champion of mandatory vaccination programs.

So, it’s no surprise that many worry he and his collaborators will be pushing for a mass COVID-19 vaccine soon – despite any potential coronavirus vaccine almost assuredly being under-tested and rushed through production.

Now, in recently released footage, one international official is calling for legal action against Gates, citing allegations of “crimes against humanity.”  Will we see Bill Gates arrested in the coming months?

Italian lawmaker cries foul and wants Bill Gates arrested

“[17th century English philosopher Thomas Hobbes]  said that absolute power does not come from an imposition from above but by the choice of individuals who feel more protected renouncing their own freedom and granting it to a third party.”

So begins Sara Cunial, a Member of Parliament for Rome, during a recent speech she made to her colleagues in Italy. She goes on to declare Bill Gates a “vaccine criminal” before urging the Italian president to have Bill Gates arrested and brought before the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity.

You watch the video below, provided with English captions:

Do NOT ignore the health dangers linked to toxic indoor air.  These chemicals – the ‘off-gassing’ of paints, mattresses, carpets and other home/office building materials – increase your risk of headaches, dementia, heart disease and cancer.

Get the BEST indoor air purification system – at the LOWEST price, exclusively for NaturalHealth365 readers.  I, personally use this system in my home AND office.  Click HERE to order now – before the sale ends.

What crimes could she be talking about?  Consider these examples:In 2012, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation offered a multi-million dollar bribe to Nigeria to initiate compulsory vaccines. Gates promised every Nigerian state a half a million dollars each if they passed “a rigorous set of criteria based on outcomes in their polio program and routine immunization services” (per the foundation’s boastful website). This was after he had gone on record stating that immunizations could help reduce the world’s population.

In 2014, the Gates-funded World Health Organization (WHO) was accused of giving millions of African women “tetanus” vaccines that contained a sterilizing compound known as human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). Evidence from as far back as the 1970s shows that WHO researchers had been investigating how to concoct a “birth control vaccine” containing conjugated tetanus toxoid (TT) and hCG.

Gates also famously spearheaded India’s National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI), which mandated massive overlapping immunization schedules to children under the age of five. This vaccine campaign was believed to be the root of an epidemic of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) that affected nearly 500,000 Indian children between 2000 and 2017.

The WHO soon thereafter admitted that more children were being injured by the polio vaccine than by the polio virus itself.

To give just one more example, Bill Gates funded a phase 3 trial of Big Pharma powerhouse Glaxo Smith Kline’s experimental malaria vaccine in 2010.  151 African children who were involved in the trial died, due to causes including pneumonia and meningitis. Adverse events were also reported, including seizures, fever, and severe muscle inflammation (myositis).

Gates stepped down from Microsoft in March 2020 – right as the pandemic was ramping up, and mere months after the now-infamous “Event 201,” a coronavirus pandemic simulation held at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and in collaboration with World the Economic Forum.

It would seem that the current global crisis is something Gates has been actively preparing for.

Disturbing trends: Major international company among first to hint that employees may be required to get COVID-19 vaccine

Between Gates’s involvement in worldwide vaccination scandals and the pharmaceutical companies’ stronghold on policymakers and the media, people are deeply concerned. To many, Bill Gates appears to be keeping the world under his thumb under the guise of globalized “advancements” in technology, medicine, and other industries.

Curbing population growth, collecting human guinea pigs, creating Big-Brother style monitoring, controlling public behavior through “vaccine passports,” ensuring financial gain – no matter what Bill Gates’ true intentions are surrounding mandatory vaccination schedules, it’s not hard to imagine the ethical dilemma of compelling citizens to get a COVID-19 vaccine.

Where is the outcry?  Is the threat to bodily autonomy really being normalized?

It seems so. On May 21, international company and household name Mastercard suggested that employees would only be permitted back to corporate offices once a COVID-19 vaccine is available, according to Reuters. We reluctantly wait to see what businesses will follow suit.

Sources for this article include:

Another Gates Vaccine Bites the Dust—Sick Monkeys Everywhere!

© 26th May 2020 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc.
Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense.
Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Reproduced from original article:

MAY 26, 2020

By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman, Children’s Health Defense

One day after revelations that the Gates/Fauci Moderna vaccine caused severe illnesses in 20% of high-dose recipients, Bill Gates got devastating news about his other “warp-speed” COVAX bet. The Oxford Vaccine Group (OVG) spike-protein vaccine was on an even faster track than Moderna. In May, Melinda Gates predicted it would be jab-ready by years’ end. Oxford and UK officials promised 30 million doses by September.

On April 24, OVG scientists announced that a small macaque study proved the vaccine effective. OVG quickly recruited 510 healthy volunteers for human trialsPre-publication data released on May 13th reveals the vaccine is less promising than the OVG team implied.

All vaccinated macaques sickened after exposure to COVID-19. Edinburgh University’s Eleanor Riley told Forbes the vaccine provided “insufficient” antibodies to prevent infection and viral shedding. Vaccinated monkeys spread the disease as readily as unvaccinated.

Pollard used his power and deceitful puffery about the monkey trial to bulldoze his COVID vaccine into human trials. He shunned inert placebo tests and restricted safety studies to three weeks to hide long-term injuries.

Andrew Pollard strikes again

The OVG is politically wired. Lead developer Andrew Pollard juggles scandalous conflicts that allow him to licenseregister, and mandate his own untested vaccines to the masses. Pollard is Senior Advisor to Britain’s MRHA Panel which licenses vaccines, chairs Britain’s JVCI committee that mandates them, and advises the European Medicine Agency (EMA). He takes payments from virtually all the big vaccine makers.  In 2014, Pollard developed GlaxoSmithKline’s notorious Bexsero meningitis vaccine, and then mandated it to children despite significant safety signals for Kawasaki Disease and the rarity of meningococcal B infections. The package insert says Bexsero may cause Kawasaki disease in as many as one out of every 1000 children based on reports in the clinical trials.

Pollard used his power and deceitful puffery about the monkey trial to bulldoze his COVID vaccine into human trials. He shunned inert placebo tests and restricted safety studies to three weeks to hide long-term injuries.

Forbes reported on May 21 that the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) has given $1 billion to Astra Zeneca in partnership with Oxford for a rushed rollout of the vaccine in September.

In an update on May 22, the Oxford researchers revealed that “1,000 immunisations have been completed” and that next study will enroll “up to 10,260 adults and children and will involve a number of partner institutions across the country.”

Pollard is steaming ahead with his ineffective vaccine. But a vaccine that hides symptoms and allows transmission is worse than no vaccine at all.


Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.