The COVID Shots Are Killing People

The video above features Dr. Peter McCullough, a cardiologist, internist and epidemiologist, and editor of two peer-review gazettes, who has been on the media and medical frontlines fighting for early COVID treatment. McCullough has also been outspoken about the potential dangers of the COVID shots, and the lack of necessity for them. Curiously, business that are currently announcing the shots do not have the authority to dictate how medication is practiced.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, for example, has no power to tell doctors what to do or how to treat cases. The National Association of Health are a government research organization and cannot tell doctors how to treat patients.

Ditto for the U.S. Midsts for Disease Control and Prevention, which is an epidemiologic analysis organization. It is the task of practising doctors to identify appropriate and effective treatment protocols, which is precisely what McCullough has is being done since the beginnings of this pandemic.

In August 2020, McCullough’s landmark paper “Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection” was published online in the American Journal of Medicine. 1

A follow-up paper, “Multifaceted Highly Targeted Sequential Multidrug Treatment of Early Ambulatory High-Risk SARS-CoV-2 Infection( COVID-1 9) ” was published in Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine in December 2020.2 It became the basis for a dwelling care guide.

COVID Shots Are Hazardous and Ineffective

When it comes to the COVID insertions, McCullough cites experiment establishing those at increased risk of dying from COVID-1 9 are also at increased risk of dying from the COVID shot. Additionally, the shots are causing severe nature shatter in younger people whose risk of dying from COVID is inconsequential.

He points out the safety signal is very clear, with 19,249 deaths having been reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System as of November 19, 2021.3

The signal is also consistent both both internally and externally. A number of side effects are reported in high numbers, and very close to the time of injection, that validate the suspicion that the shots are at fault. The U.S. data are too consistent with data from other countries, such as the Yellow Card system in the U.K.

Despite that , not a single safety recall has been conducted to weed out risk factors and the like. “We’re almost a year into the program and there’s been no attempt at risk mitigation, ” McCullough says. At the same time, there have been gross attempts to coerce Americans into participate in the shots — everything from free brew or a free lap dance, to million-dollar gambles and paid scholarships to state universities.

Such inducements are an indisputable violation of research morals that strictly forbid any and all kinds of coercion of human subjects. As supposed and predicted , no sooner had bribery stopped directing than government officials started talking about vaccine mandates.

President Biden infamously stated that his composure with “vaccine hesitancy” was “wearing thin.” The insinuation was that if people didn’t get the shot, they’d face serious backlashes, and we’re now identifying those repercussions play out day by day, as beings are being shot and kicked out of school for refusing the jab.

Meanwhile, they haven’t even influenced which inoculation is the most effective, which is remarkable. If government truly wanted to end the pandemic with a vaccine, wouldn’t they calculate which shot succeeds the best and promote the use of that? But no, they tell us any shot will do.

“The fact that there’s no safe report, they’re not telling you if you’re taking the best vaccine, the fact that it’s kind of in a perverted action linked to your ability to work and go to school, that we’re violating the Nuremberg Code, transgressing the declaration of Helsinki — it’s time not supplementing up. It’s not looking good for those who are promoting the vaccine, ” McCullough says.

Add to all that the now-clear finding that the shots furnish only limited terms of protecting a very short period of time — six months at best. Harmonizing to McCullough, there are more than 20 studies depicting efficacy drops to good-for-nothing at the six-month mark. They’ve likewise had very limited effectiveness against the Delta variant, which has been the predominant sprain for several months.

Why Booster Treadmill Is Such a Health Hazard

I’ve often stated that, in all likelihood, your risk of side effects will be increased with each additional shot. McCullough quotes research showing your body will develop the toxic SARS-CoV-2 spike protein for 15 months.

If your figure is still producing the spike protein — which is what’s causing the blood clots and cardiovascular impairment — and you take an additional shot every six months, there will come a age when your form simply cannot tolerate the damage being caused by all the spike protein being produced.

Also consider this: While you simply get at most six months’ worth of protection against any dedicated shot, each insertion will cause damage for 15 months. If we continue with boosters, eventually, it’s going to be impossible to ever clear out the spike protein.

While the spike protein is the part of the virus picked as the antigen, the part that initiations an immune response, it’s also members of the virus that causes the worst disease. The spike protein is responsible for COVID-1 9-related heart and vascular troubles, and it has the same effect when is provided by your own cells.

It compels blood clots, myocarditis and pericarditis, strokes, heart attacks and neurological injure, precisely to reputation a few. As noted by McCullough, the spike protein of this virus was genetically engineered to be more dangerous to humen than any previous coronavirus, and that is what the COVID shots are programming your cadres to produce. “They’re really grossly hazardous for human beings, ” McCullough says.

Myocarditis Will Likely Be Widespread

He goes on to discuss research from 2017,4 which pictured myocarditis in children and youth occurs at a rate of four occasions per million per year. Assuming there are 60 million American children, the background rate for myocarditis would be 240 cases a year. How many cases of myocarditis have been reported to VAERS following COVID injection so far? 14,428 as of November 19, 2021.5

“Doctors have never seen so many cases of myocarditis, ” McCullough says, quoting research showing that among children between the ages of 12 and 17, 87% are hospitalized after receiving the shot. “That’s how risky it is, ” he says. “It is frequent, and it is severe.”

Yet the FDA claims myocarditis after the COVID shot is “rare and mild.” We’re now too coming reports of fatal cases of myocarditis in adults in their 30 s and 40 s. “Myocarditis right now looks like an unqualified calamity, ” McCullough says, both for younger people and adults.

Children aged 12 to 17 are five times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID jab-induced myocarditis than they are to be hospitalized for COVID infection.

Sadly, children too collect no is conducive to the shots, so it’s all danger and no benefit for them. McCullough points out there has been no recorded institution eruptions and no child-to-teacher transmission. He estimates 80% of clas aged children are already immune, which would explain this.

Meanwhile, investigate was indicated in the interview found that children aged 12 to 17 are five times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID jab-induced myocarditis than “they il be” hospitalized for COVID infection. These data bar the claim that COVID-induced heart difficulties are a far greater problem than “vaccine”-induced heart damage.

And let’s not forget, if you take a COVID shot, you have a 100% chance of being exposed to whatever risk is associated with that shot. On the other hand, if you wane the insertion, it’s not 100% risk you’ll get COVID-1 9, let alone die from it. You have a less than 1% possibility of being exposed to SARS-CoV-2 and coming sick.

So, it’s 100% deterministic that taking the shot exposes you to the risks of the shot, and less than 1% deterministic that you’ll get COVID if you don’t take the shot.

COVID-1 9 Unrelated to Vaccination Rates

As noted by McCullough , rates of COVID are higher now in the highest injected orbits than they were before the inoculation rollout. That extremely tells us they aren’t working and not worth the risk.

He quotes research6 published September 30, 2021, in the European Journal of Epidemiology, which experienced no relationship between COVID-1 9 cases and levels of vaccination in 68 countries throughout the world and 2,947 provinces in the U.S. If anything, areas with high-pitched vaccination proportions had slightly higher incidences of COVID-1 9. According to the authors: 7

“[ T] he trend line advocates a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population amply injected have higher COVID-1 9 suits per one million people. ”

Iceland and Portugal, for example, where more than 75% of their populations are amply inoculated, had more COVID-1 9 clients per 1 million people than Vietnam and South Africa, where merely about 10% of local populations are fully injected. 8 Data from U.S. provinces demo the same thing. New COVID-1 9 instances per 100,000 people were “largely same, ” regardless of percentages per of a state’s population that was fully vaccinated.

“There … appears to be no significant signaling of COVID-1 9 suits decreasing with higher percentages of population perfectly injected, ” the authors wrote. 9 Notably, out of the five U.S. counties with the highest vaccination charges — wandering from 84.3% to 99.9% fully vaccinated — four of them were on the U.S. Core for Disease Control and Prevention’s “high transmission” list. Meanwhile, 26.3% of the 57 provinces with “low transmission” have vaccination rates below 20%.

The study even been taken into consideration a one-month lag time that could be used to follow among the perfectly vaccinated, since it’s said that it makes two weeks after the final quantity for “full immunity” to occur. Still, “no discernable association between COVID-1 9 cases and levels of amply vaccinated” was observed. 10

Hospitalization paces for severe COVID infection have been previously develop, from 0.01% in January 2021 to 9% in May 2021, and the COVID death rate rose from zero percent to 15.1% in that same timeframe. 11 In short-lived, everything is getting worse , not better, the more beings get these shots.

Allowing natural exemption to build is really the only rational route forward. But then again, the COVID punches aren’t about protecting public health. They’re about ushering in a socio-economic control system via inoculation passports, which is something McCullough doesn’t discuss in this interview. Nothing stirs ability if you look at it from a medical perspective. It simply utters appreciation if you see it for what it is, which is a control system.

Natural Immunity Is’ Infinitely Better’ Than Vaccine Immunity

According to McCullough, “natural immunity is infinitely better than inoculation exemption, ” and studies have abide that out time and again. The reasonablenes natural immunity is superior to vaccine-induced immunity is because viruses contain five different proteins.

The COVID shot persuades antibodies against just one of those proteins, the spike protein, and no T cell immunity. When you’re infected with the whole virus, you develop antibodies against all areas of the virus, plus retention T cells.

This also implies natural immunity proposals better protection against variances, as it recognizes several regions of the virus. If there are significant alternations to the spike protein, as with the Delta variant, vaccine-induced immunity can be sidestepped. Not so with natural exemption, as the other proteins are still recognizable and attacked.

Here’s a sampling of scholarly publishings that have investigated natural exemption as it pertains to SARS-CoV-2 infection. There are various more in addition to these: 12

Science Immunology October 202013 found that “RBD-targeted antibodies are excellent markers of previous and recent illnes, that differential isotype estimations can help distinguish between recent and older infections, and that IgG responses persevere over the first few months after infection and are highly correlated with neutralizing antibodies.”

The BMJ January 202114 concluded that “Of 11, 000 health care workers who had proved evidence of infection during the first movement of the pandemic in the U.K. between March and April 2020 , nothing had symptomatic reinfection in the second wave of the virus between October and November 2020. ”

Science February 202115 reported that “Substantial immune memory is generated after COVID-1 9, involving all four major types of immune memory[ antibodies, remembering B cadres, remembering CD8+ T cells, and memory CD4+ T cells ].

About 95% of subjects retained immune memory at~ 6 months after infection. Circulating antibody titers “re not” predictive of T cell memory. Thus, simple serological measures for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies do not reflect the richness and durability of immune recall to SARS-CoV-2. ”

A 2,800 -person study found no symptomatic reinfections over a~ 118 -day window, and a 1,246 -person study studied no symptomatic reinfections over 6 months.

A February 2021 study positioned on the prepublication server medRxiv1 6 concluded that “Natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy~ 95% for at least 7 months.”

An April 2021 study posted on medRxiv1 7 reported “the overall estimated degree of protection against prior SARS-CoV-2 illnes for documented infection is 94.8%; hospitalization 94.1%; and severe illness 96* 4 %. Our ensues question the need to vaccinate previously-infected individuals.”

Another April 2021 study positioned on the preprint server BioRxiv1 8 concluded that “following a typical case of mild COVID-1 9, SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cells not only persist but continuously differentiate in a coordinated fashion well into convalescence, into a position characteristic of long-lived, self-renewing memory.”

A May 2020 report in the magazine Immunity1 9 confirmed that SARS-CoV-2-specific neutralizing antibodies are detected in COVID-1 9 convalescent subjects, as well as cellular immune responses. Here, they found that neutralizing antibody titers do correlate with the number of virus-specific T cells.

A May 2021 Nature article2 0 concluded SARS-CoV-2 infection encourages long-lived bone marrow plasma cadres, which are a crucial source of protective antibodies. Even after mild infection, anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies were detectable beyond 11 months’ post-infection.

A May 2021 study in E Clinical Medicine2 1 experienced “antibody detection is possible for almost a year post-natural infection of COVID-1 9. ” According to the authors, “Based on current prove, we hypothesize that antibodies to both S and N-proteins after natural infection may persevere for longer than previously known, thereby providing evidence of sustainability that may influence post-pandemic planning.”

Cure-Hub data2 2 confirm that while COVID shots can make higher antibody tiers than natural infection, this does not mean vaccine-induced immunity is more protective. Importantly, natural immunity awards much wider protection as your person recognizes all five proteins of the virus and not just one. With the COVID shot, your torso simply recognizes one of these proteins, the spike protein.

A June 2021 Nature article2 3 points out that “Wang et al. show that, between six and 12 months after infection, the accumulation of neutralizing antibodies remain unchanged. That the acute immune reaction widens even beyond six months is suggested by the authors’ analysis of SARS-CoV-2-specific recall B cadres in the blood of the convalescent someones over the course of the year.

These memory B cells continuously enhance the reactivity of their SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies through a process known as somatic hypermutation. The good story is that the evidence thus far predicts that infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces long-term immunity in most individuals.”

Reinfection Is Very Rare

McCullough anxieties there is also no need to worry about reinfection if you’ve once had COVID formerly. The reality is, while breakthrough disputes continue among those who have gotten one or more COVID-1 9 injections, it’s extremely rare to get COVID-1 9 after you’ve recovered from the infection.

How rare? Researchers from Ireland imparted a systematic review including 615,777 people who had recovered from COVID-1 9, with a maximum span of follow-up of more than 10 months. 24

“Reinfection was an uncommon event, ” they memo, “with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time.” The absolute reinfection frequency ranged from 0% to 1.1%, while the median reinfection rate was just 0.27%. 25,26, 27

Another study exposed similarly reassuring ensues. It followed 43,044 SARS-CoV-2 antibody-positive people for up to 35 weeks, and only 0.7% were reinfected. When genome sequencing was applied to estimate population-level risk of reinfection, the risk was estimated at 0.1%. 28

There was no indication of waning immunity over seven months of follow-up, unlike with the COVID-1 9 infusion, which led the researchers to conclude that “Reinfection is rare. Natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy> 90% for at least seven months.”2 9

“It’s a one-and-done, ” McCullough says. If you’ve had it once, you won’t get it again. He likewise admonishes against employing PCR testing after you’ve had confirmed COVID-1 9 formerly, as any precede positive evaluations are just going to be false positives.

Early Treatment Option

In closing, should you get COVID-1 9, know there are several very effective early management alternatives, and early therapy is key, both for the prevention of severe infection and preventing “long-haul COVID.” Here are a few suggestions 😛 TAGEND

* Oral-nasal decontamination — The virus, extremely the Delta variant, mimics rapidly in the nasal cavity and mouth disease for three to five days before spreading to the rest of the body, so you want to strike where it’s most likely to be found right from the start.

Research3 0 has demonstrated that irrigating your nasal movings with 2.5 milliliters of ten% povidone-iodine( an antimicrobial) and standard saline, twice a daytime, is an effective remedy.

Another option that was slightly less effective was using a mixture of saline with half a teaspoon of bicarbonate of soda( an alkalizer ). You can also gargle with these to kill viruses in your opening and throat. When done routinely, it can be a very effective preventive approach. You got to find printable treatment guides on

* Nebulized peroxide — A similar strategy is to use nebulized hydrogen peroxide, diluted with saline to a 0.1% mixture. Both hydrogen peroxide and saline3 1,32 have antiviral effects.

In a May 10, 2021, Orthomolecular Medicine press release, 33 Dr. Thomas E. Levy — board-certified in internal medicine and cardiology — discussed the use of this medicine for COVID-1 9 exclusively. Levy has in fact written an entire book on peroxide nebulization called “Rapid Virus Recovery, ” which you can download for free from MedFox Publishing.

* Vitamin D optimization — Research has been demonstrated having a vitamin D stage above 50 ng/ mL delivers the risk of COVID mortality down to near-zero. 34

* Other key nutraceuticals — Vitamin C, zinc, quercetin and NAC all have scientific backing.

* Key medicines — For acute infection, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine or monoclonal antibodies can be used. While monoclonal antibodies and hydroxychloroquine must be used earlier today in the disease process, ivermectin has been shown to be effective in all stages of the infection.

Doxycycline or azithromycin are typically included as well, to address any secondary bacterial illnes, as well as inhaled budesonide( a steroid ). Oral steroids are used on and after the fifth epoch for pulmonary weakness and aspirin or NAC can be added to reduce the risk of coagulating. In the interview, McCullough discusses the use of each of these, and other, drugs.

One drug I disagree with is full-strength aspirin. I belief a potentially better, at least safer, alternative would be to use the enzymes lumbrokinase and serrapeptase, as they help break down and thwart blood clots naturally.


Read more:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *