And as if to say “thanks for calling that out Bigredfish”, see this new article. Read down especially towards the bottom (with citations)
The excerpts I post below aren’t even 1/2 of the incredibly well documented and cited article. Highly recommend for anyone who wants to be up to date on where things stand.
The CDC data is at best tainted and more likely manipulated. (Or that Dr is taking his own liberties)
Why Is There A COVID Vaccine Mandate For Students?
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
A
Cleveland Clinic study of the bivalent vaccines involving 51,011 participants found the risk of getting COVID-19 increased “with the number of vaccine doses previously received”—much to the authors’ surprise.
They were stumped as to why “those who chose not to follow the CDC’s recommendations on remaining updated with COVID-19 vaccination” had a lower risk of catching COVID than “those who received a larger number of prior vaccine doses.”
So if the vaccines don’t keep you from getting COVID, maybe they at least protect you from hospitalization?
That doesn’t wash, either, because according to data from the
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET),
hospitalization rates for 18–64-year-olds have increased 11 percent since the vaccine rollout. Worse, kids under 18 have suffered a shocking 74 percent spike in hospitalizations.
An
observational study conducted at Germany’s University Hospital Wuerzburg found:
“The rate of adverse reactions for the second booster dose was significantly higher among participants receiving the bivalent 84.6% (95% CI 70.3%–92.8%; 33/39) compared to the monovalent 51.4% (95% CI 35.9–66.6%; 19/37) vaccine (p=0.0028). Also, there was a trend towards an increased rate of inability to work and intake of PRN medication following bivalent vaccination.”
A new paper published in Science titled Class Switch Towards Non-Inflammatory, Spike-Specific IgG4 Antibodies after Repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination even has Eric Topol concerned: (<<<< Same Guy as quoted on the Tweet 2 posts up about how the Jab is effective)
If you don’t know what that means,
Dr. Syed Haider spells it out in
this tweet. He explains that the shots “train your immune system to ignore the allergen by repeated exposure,” the end result being that “Your immune system is shifted to see the virus as a harmless allergen” and the “virus runs amok.”
Viral immunologist and computational virologist
Dr. Jessica Rose breaks down the
serious implications—including
cancer,
fatal fibrosis, and organ destruction—of these findings.
Well, then does the vaccine at least prevent people from dying of COVID?
Nope. According to the
Washington Post, “Vaccinated people now make up a majority of COVID deaths.”
At Senator Ron Johnson’s December 7, 2022,
roundtable discussion on COVID-19 Vaccines, former number-one–ranked Wall Street insurance analyst
Josh Stirling reported that, according to UK government data:
“The people in the UK who took the vaccine have a 26% higher mortality rate. The people who are under the age of 50 who took the vaccine now have a 49% higher mortality rate.”
Obtained by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to KBV (the association representing physicians who receive insurance in Germany), “
the most important dataset of the pandemic” shows fatalities starting to spike in 2021.
Data analyst
Tom Lausen assessed the
ICD-10 disease codes in this dataset, and the findings are startling. His presentation includes the following chart documenting fatalities per quarter from 2016 to 2022:
This parallels the skyrocketing fatality rates seen in
VAERS:
The vaccinated are more likely to contract, become hospitalized from, and die of COVID. If the vaccine fails on all of those counts, does it at least prevent its transmission to other students and community members?
The obvious answer is no since we already know it doesn’t prevent you from getting COVID, but
this CDC study drives the point home, showing that during a COVID outbreak in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, “three quarters (346; 74%) of cases occurred in fully vaccinated persons.”
Maybe Stanford can tell us why they feel the mandate is necessary.
Their booster requirement reads:
“
Why does Stanford have a student booster shot requirement? Our booster requirement is intended to support sustained immunity against COVID-19 and is consistent with the advice of county and federal public health leaders. Booster shots
enhance immunity, providing additional protection to individuals and reducing the possibility of being hospitalized for COVID. In addition, booster shots prevent infection in many individuals, thereby slowing the spread of the virus. A heavily boosted campus community reduces the possibility of widespread disruptions that could impact the student experience, especially in terms of in-person classes and activities and congregate housing.”
The claim that “booster shots enhance immunity” links to a January 2022
New York Times article. It seems Stanford has failed to keep up with the science because the very source they cite as authoritative is
now reporting, “The newer variants, called BQ.1 and BQ.1.1, are spreading quickly, and boosters seem to do little to prevent infections with these viruses.”
Speaking of not keeping up, that same article says the new bivalent boosters target “the original version of the coronavirus and the Omicron variants circulating earlier this year, BA.4 and BA.5.”
It then goes on to quote Head of Beth Israel Deaconess’s Center for Virology & Vaccine Research Dan Barouch, who says, “It’s not likely that any of the vaccines or boosters, no matter how many you get, will provide substantial and sustained protection against acquisition of infection.”
In other words, Stanford’s rationale for requiring the boosters is obsolete according to the authority they cite in their justification.
If Stanford is genuinely concerned about “reduc[ing] the possibility of widespread disruptions that could impact the student experience,” then it should not only stop mandating the vaccine but advise against it.
Some nations have suspended or recommended against COVID shots for younger populations due to the considerable risks of
adverse events such as
pulmonary embolism and
myocarditis—from
Denmark (under 50) to
Norway (under 45) to
Australia (under 50) to the
United Kingdom (seasonal boosters for under 50).
The
Danish Health Authority explains why people under 50 are “not to be re-vaccinated”:
“People aged under 50 are generally not at particularly higher risk of becoming severely ill from covid-19. In addition, younger people aged under 50 are well protected against becoming severely ill from covid-19, as a very large number of them have already been vaccinated and have previously been infected with covid-19, and there is consequently good immunity among this part of the population.”
Here’s what a
Norwegian physician and health official had to say:
“Especially the youngest should consider potential side effects against the benefits of taking this dose.”
—Ingrid Bjerring, Chief Doctor at Lier Municipality
“We did not find sufficient evidence to recommend that this part of the population [younger age bracket] should take a new dose now.… Each vaccine comes with the risk for side effects. Is it then responsible to offer this, when we know that the individual health benefit of a booster likely is low?”
—Are Stuwitz Berg, Department Director at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health
A
new Nordic cohort study of 8.9 million participants supports these concerns, finding a nearly nine-fold increase in myocarditis among males aged 12–39 within 28 days of receiving the Moderna COVID-19 booster over those who stopped after two doses.
This mirrors
my own findings that myocarditis rates are up 10 times among the vaccinated according to a public healthcare worker survey.
Coauthored by MIT professor and risk management expert Retsef Levi, the
Nature article
Increased Emergency Cardiovascular Events Among Under-40 Population in Israel During Vaccine Rollout and Third COVID-19 Wave reveals a 25 percent increase in cardiac emergency calls for 16–39-year-olds from January to May 2021 as compared with the previous two years.
The paper cites a study by Israel’s Ministry of Health that “assesses the risk of myocarditis after receiving the 2nd vaccine dose to be between 1 in 3000 to 1 in 6000 in men of age 16–24 and 1 in 120,000 in men under 30.”
A
Thai study published in
Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease found cardiovascular manifestations in 29.24 percent of the adolescent cohort—including myopericarditis and tachycardia.
Even Dr. Leana Wen, formerly an
aggressive promoter of the COVID vaccine, admitted in a
recent Washington Post op-ed:
“[W]e need to be upfront that nearly every intervention has some risk, and the coronavirus vaccine is no different. The most significant risk is myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, which is most common in young men. The CDC cites a rate of 39 myocarditis cases per 1 million second doses given in males 18 to 24. Some studies found a much higher rate; a large Canadian database reported that among men ages 18 to 29 who received the second dose of the Moderna vaccine, the rate of myocarditis was 22 for every 100,000 doses.”
All over the world, prominent
physicians, scientists, politicians, and
professors are asking
pointed questions about
illogical mandates; the
safety and efficacy of the vaccines; and the
dangers posed by the mRNA technology, spike protein, and lipid nanoparticles—including in
the UK,
Japan,
Australia,
Europe, and
the US.
Formerly pro-vaxx cardiologists such as
Dr. Aseem Malhotra,
Dr. Dean Patterson, and
Dr. Ross Walker are all saying the COVID vaccines should be immediately stopped due to the significant increase in
cardiac diseases,
adverse events, and
excess mortality observed since their rollout, noting that, “
until proven otherwise, these vaccines are not safe.”
——
According to British Medical Journal Senior Editor
Dr. Peter Doshi, Pfizer’s and Moderna’s
own trial data found 1 in 800 vaccinated people experienced serious adverse events:
And this is the same Pfizer data the FDA tried to keep hidden from the public for 75 years.
Nothing to see here … except
1,223 deaths, 158,000 adverse events, and 1,291 side effects reported in the first 90 days according to the
5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports—and those numbers are likely
underreported by a factor of at least 10 (my conservative calculations show an underreporting factor (URF) of
41 for VAERS)
Let’s recap.
Abundant evidence proves the vaccines
FAIL to:
- stop transmission
- prevent contraction of COVID
- lower hospitalization rates
- reduce mortality
By the same token, this evidence shows the vaccines are
ASSOCIATED with:
- heightened transmission levels
- greater chances of catching COVID
- increased hospitalization rates
- higher excess mortality
- disproportionate injuries to women
LOTS More Here:
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
www.wnd.com
rumble.com
www.sciencedirect.com
www.theepochtimes.com
