Truth Talks are apart of the TruthGroup which also owns the fast growing censor social media platform,


Who is the Real Mass Murderer: Peter Hotez or Steve Kirsch?

Who is the Real Mass Murderer: Peter Hotez or Steve Kirsch?

By Steve Kirsch

I hereby challenge Dr. Peter Hotez to an important debate as to which of us should be held accountable for hundreds of thousands of American deaths.

Executive summary

The WHO and Dr. Peter Hotez recently issued statements accusing anyone with concerns about the COVID-19 vaccines of being mass murderers and called for governments around the world to take action against them.

Dr. Peter Hotez apparently believes one is guilty until proven innocent.

Peter, we need to have a fair hearing on the evidence first.

  • If I lose, I agree to be held accountable for the deaths from COVID for all the people who avoided the vaccine.
  • If I win, you agree to be held accountable for all the deaths caused by the vaccine.

Do you accept my offer? If not, please explain to the American people why we can’t talk about it.

Six Reason Why Peter Hotez Needs To Debate Me Now

A Midwestern Doctor spent the next week completing an eye-opening investigation into Peter Hotez:

Peter and I both agree that misinformation kills. The thing upon which we disagree is who is spreading the misinformation: I think he is, and he thinks I am. The sooner we determine that, the sooner we will save lives.

The best way to make it clear to the American public who is telling the truth is through civil dialog, not censorship.

Reason #1: We need to know if I am responsible for killing thousands of Americans

Hotez has alleged that anti-vaccine activism has killed at least 200,000 Americans from COVID-19.

I believe that the vaccines are too unsafe to be used and that early treatment protocols are both safe and effective.

Hotez does not need to make the government silence all his critics to stop this loss of life. He just needs to persuade the public he’s right. This can be more easily accomplished through public dialog than backdoor censorship portals.

Reason #2: Hotez needs a larger platform to express his ideas

In this 2019 interview, Hotez states that he is not willing to debate “anti-vaxxers” because he does not want to give their ideas a larger platform.

Unfortunately, while Peter Hotez had one of the largest platforms when everyone else was banned, since Elon brought free-speech and open scientific debate back to Twitter, there are now many “dangerous misinformation spreaders” who have similar or much larger followings than he has.

Robert Malone for example has 820K followers and Peter A. McCullough has 710K followers on Twitter.

This suggests that the so-called “misinformation spreaders” are more widely believed than Hotez is. If Hotez wants to reverse that trend, censorship is simply no longer an option. It is time for a dialog.

The censorship of dissenting views has led to distrust in government institutions and record high levels of vaccine hesitancy.

Reason #3: Hotez just became the world’s largest source of vaccine-hesitancy

Over Christmas, the 2019 interview Peter Hotez gave went viral and was seen by millions of people.


Peter Hotez provided one of the most persuasive arguments I have ever seen against vaccination.

If Hotez would like to clarify his position and reverse his promotion of vaccine hesitancy, I will make my platform available. I am sure many others will too.

Reason #4 Peter Hotez believes in scientific branding

Hotez is a longstanding advocate for the scientists engaging the public and has spent years trying to be a public emissary for science.

In a 2018 paper, Hotez lays out his philosophy on scientific branding. In it, he provides numerous reasons for why he must now have a public debate with me on the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines:

In this age of social media and 24-hour news, our scientific voice is rapidly disappearing…This absence of knowledge about our daily activities is partly our fault—as scientists, we’re so focused on our grants and papers and writing (and speaking) for each other that we’re losing touch with the general public….[a] study conducted by the Pew Research Scientist found that only a small minority of scientists blog about their work or use social media to discuss or follow science.

I often wonder how much the rise in recent anti-science trends has occurred in the context of this vacuum in science public engagement.

Branding itself can advance science, the sharing of information, mentoring, and the promotion of science as a public good. For me, the essential elements to cultivate a brand include a self-awareness of who you are, what you wish to project to the public, and, most importantly, what major problem you want to solve and what you want to achieve through your science.

Branding also means personal exposure, which can require courage when that involves going up against anti-science movements [such as a rising anti vaccine movement] that deploy harassment and intimidation tactics on social media. It helps to have a strong sense of self, not to mention a sense of humor and humility.

Reason #5 Hotez has tried to brand himself as a scientific celebrity

Throughout the pandemic, Peter Hotez has been one of the most frequent faces on television promoting the narrative (he was called out for this in the news segment above). If you want to know exactly what Hotez has said:

Since Peter Hotez has tried to brand himself as a public scientific figure defending the vaccine program, the responsibility should fall to him to defend his policies in an open scientific debate. At least that’s the way it is supposed to work.

Reason #6 The Debate Is Already Happening

Other doctors are now willing to publicly debate vaccine safety.  This week I had a debate on vaccine safety with Liza Dunn MD and Eugene Gu MD, two doctors who are willing to publicly defend their support of the COVID vaccines.

Similarly, this inquiry recently took place in the European Parliament:

Even if Hotez tries to avoid the debate, it will still happen and each outspoken scientist who pushed these vaccines on the public will be forced to defend their conduct.

Terms for deciding who is spreading misinformation

I’m sure we can agree on mutually agreeable terms for the debate and the judging.

Let’s make the question to be debated very simple. There are over 15,000 excess deaths in the VAERS system for the COVID vaccine. If it wasn’t the vaccine that caused these deaths, then what did?

If I win, Peter will be held responsible for all the vaccine deaths implied by that number (which by my estimates are over 500,000 American deaths).

If I lose, I agree to be responsible for all of the deaths caused by COVID of people who were persuaded not to take the vaccine.

The email invitation I sent to Peter


I am willing to be held accountable for my actions and statements.

Is Peter Hotez willing to be held accountable for his actions and statements?

Original source:


El Camino Hospital’s Emergency Department Head Laura Cook Died Suddenly in her Sleep

El Camino Hospital’s Emergency Department Head Laura Cook Died Suddenly in her Sleep

By Steve Kirsch

Will there be an autopsy to determine if the vaccine killed her? Unfortunately, I doubt it. The hospital doesn’t have a say in the decision.

Laura Cook, MD | Emergency Medicine | El Camino Health

Laura Cook, age 61, died suddenly.

Executive summary

Laura Cook, age 61, the head of the emergency department at El Camino Hospital died suddenly in her sleep last night.

Unfortunately, I doubt there will be an autopsy. The decision lies with the family and the coroner.

El Camino Hospital beats expectations with $142M profit | News | Mountain View Online |


Mark Adams, the Chief Medical Officer of El Camino Hospital, sent out this internal email yesterday, December 29:

Subject: Sad News


It’s with a heavy heart that I want you to know that Laura Cook, our MV Ed medical director, was found dead this morning at home.  Laura was an outstanding ED doctor, a dedicated medical director, and, most importantly, a truly magnificent human being.  It has been an honor for me to work with her and get to know her over the years.  She has been a consistent supporter of El Camino Health and a tireless advocate for our patients, doctors, and staff.  She will be missed.


I emailed Mark Adams, the CEO of the hospital, and a dozen top executives at the hospital that sudden death is the #1 cause of death for those under 65 who have been vaccinated but it isn’t a factor at all for those who are unvaccinated. I suggested that they should call for an autopsy. I included various studies showing how the vaccine can kill people unexpectedly including the Schwab study.

However, it’s not clear they can do anything about this since she died at home.

A new book on Died Suddenly

Ed Dowd’s book, Cause Unknown, is now available on Amazon. It further points out that what is happening everyday, in front of our eyes, is not normal and the press is ignoring it.
Cause Unknown": The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 & 2022 (Children's Health Defense): Dowd, Ed, de Becker, Gavin, Kennedy Jr., Robert F.: 9781510776395: Books


The autopsy decision lies with the family and the coroner. What do you think they should do:

What really killed Laura Cook?

I predict that there will be no autopsy along the lines of what was done in the Schwab paper.

It’s very sad. The entire world could benefit enormously from an investigation.

Another tragic death and yet another missed opportunity to expose the truth.

Original source:


Are You A “Thought Criminal”?

Are You A “Thought Criminal”?

By Michael

If we are not free to think what we want, we do not have a free society.  It really is that simple.  Unfortunately, there is now an overwhelming consensus among elitists in the western world that radical measures must be instituted to control what people think.  If you insist on being a rebel, there is a very good chance that you will be punished for holding unorthodox views.  You won’t necessarily be put in prison, but our system has countless other ways that it can punish you.  For example, those that insist on embracing unacceptable thoughts will find that their career choices are quite limited, and there are certain positions that they will be prohibited from ever holding under any circumstances.  Not only that, but if your thoughts are offensive enough you may have a financial account suddenly shut down or credit denied for seemingly no reason.  This sort of thing was unheard of a decade ago, but now it is happening all the time.  Of course you can forget about having any sort of a substantial social media presence if your thoughts do not conform to current “societal norms”.  Even the “free speech platforms” are banning and shadowbanning countless accounts every single day.

If any of the things that I have just described have happened to you, that is probably because you are a “thought criminal”.

You are not supposed to contradict the conditioning that you have received from our education system, from the news media, from our politicians and from the corporate entertainment that you are being fed for hours each day.

When you deviate from socially acceptable viewpoints, you are guilty of “thoughtcrime”.  This is how “thoughtcrime” is defined by Wikipedia…

Thoughtcrime is a word coined by George Orwell in his 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. It describes a person’s politically unorthodox thoughts, such as beliefs and doubts that contradict the tenets of Ingsoc (English Socialism), the dominant ideology of Oceania. In the official language of Newspeak, the word crimethink describes the intellectual actions of a person who entertains and holds politically unacceptable thoughts; thus the government of the Party controls the speech, the actions, and the thoughts of the citizens of Oceania.

Sadly, we truly have become an “Orwellian society” at this point.

In fact, a woman in the UK was just arrested for thoughts that she was thinking within her own mind…

The U.K. March for Life director was recently arrested after police found her praying silently outside of an abortion clinic, according to a press release by Alliance Defending Freedom U.K.

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, a charity volunteer and Christian, was approached by police officers outside of BPAS Robert Clinic in Birmingham, England, and asked if she was praying, according to ADF’s press release. Vaughan-Spruce told the officers she “might be praying silently” and was later arrested.

“It’s abhorrently wrong that I was searched, arrested, interrogated by police and charged simply for praying in the privacy of my own mind,” Vaughan-Spruce stated in the release. “Nobody should be criminalized for thinking and for praying, in a public space in the UK.”

Once she was taken in to the station, you would think that those in charge would realize that a huge mistake has just been made.

But instead of releasing her, she was ruthlessly interrogated.

Apparently they were absolutely determined to discover whatever evil thoughts that this vicious thought criminal had been thinking.

And apparently they found something, because now she has been charged on four counts…

She insists that she is not a criminal.

But she doesn’t understand that the world has changed.

Anyone that thinks unauthorized thoughts in now a criminal in this system.

And at this moment there are countless intelligence agents all over the western world that are scouring social media sites for more thought criminals.

Thanks to the release of the Twitter Files, we now know that the FBI has spent an enormous amount of time, effort and energy looking for unauthorized thoughts on our largest social media platforms.

When the FBI found unauthorized thoughts on Twitter, requests were made to ban specific accounts.  This represented a gross violation of our First Amendment rights, and apparently it kept happening over and over again.

The FBI was confronted about this, and this is how they responded…

“The correspondence between the FBI and Twitter show nothing more than examples of our tradition, longstanding and ongoing federal government and private sector engagements, which involve numerous companies over multiple sectors and industries.

As evidenced in the correspondence, the FBI provides critical information to the private sector in an effort to allow them to protect themselves and their customers.

The men and women of the FBI work every day to protect the American public.

It is unfortunate that conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency.”

And it has also come out that the FBI has been paying Twitter and other social media companies millions of dollars for some reason…

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is declining to specify what other social media companies the federal agency gave money to after Fox News confirmed that it paid Twitter nearly $3.5 million.

FBI officials told Fox News that the nearly $3.5 million payment to Twitter was a “reimbursement” for the “reasonable costs and expenses associated with their response to a legal process… For complying with legal requests, and a standard procedure.”

The FBI officials also said that Twitter isn’t the only social media company that is being paid by the federal agency, telling Fox News “We don’t just reimburse Twitter.”

What exactly was that money for?

We deserve to know.

New Twitter CEO Elon Musk recently stated that “almost every conspiracy theory that people had about Twitter turned out to be true.”

Reading that should chill you to the core.

Of course many other big tech companies have also been colluding with the government to suppress free speech, and one recent survey found that the vast majority of Americans want answers…

A recent poll shows that 63 percent of Americans want Congress to investigate “whether the FBI was involved in censoring information on social media sites.”

The Twitter Files disclosures show that not only did Twitter collude with the FBI, it also worked with other government agencies like the CIA and the Pentagon to suppress information.

Musk said in a post on Dec. 27 that “*Every* social media company is engaged in heavy censorship, with significant involvement of and, at times, explicit direction of the government.”

As time rolls along, those that choose not to conform to “societal norms” will be increasingly pushed to the utter fringes of society.

If you continue to choose to be an “independent thinker”, getting a “good job” will be exceedingly difficult.

Just think about it.  Right now, how many of the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies are “independent thinkers” that have unacceptable belief systems?

If you want to rise in the pyramidal structure of our society, you have got to believe what the system tells you to believe.

Of course if all independent thought is eliminated, our society will become the sort of dystopian nightmare that authors such as George Orwell and myself have been warning about for a very long time.

Even though I do not like much of what my fellow Americans have to say, I vigorously defend the right to say those things.

Freedom of thought and freedom of speech are non-negotiable, and our system of government simply will not work without them.

Original source:


Covid-19 Wasn’t Only About an Aerosolized Biowarfare Attack!!

Covid-19 Wasn’t Only About an Aerosolized Biowarfare Attack!!

By Stew Peters

Covid-19 wasn’t only about an aerosolized biowarfare attack.

It wasn’t JUST about getting over 5 BILLION bioweapon injections into brainwashed innocents.

It was also (and mainly) a TEST.

Full totalitarianism is the PLA.

Original source:


The Truth About Andrew Tate

The Truth About Andrew Tate

By Chris Black

So-called influencer and certified woman hater Andrew Tate is so dumb that he doxxed himself in a video responding to Greta Thunberg, showing a pizza box proving he was in Romania.

Tate got arrested for human trafficking and he’s also facing weapons’ charges.

He’s done.

He also literally bragged at some point about being a human trafficker.

He f**ked up

He held two girls hostage

One was Romanian, one was American.

Here’s the deal:

>Be human garbage

>Learn MMA

>Fight poorly but meet people

>Human traffic for some of them

>Establish “Self Help” Guru persona

>Launder money from trafficking through bullshit e-celeb business

>Buy access to several celebrities to pass yourself off as one

>Internet wonders where the fuck you came from

>System sees you for what you are and promotes you while investigating you

>Become popular and brazen with persona as system tightens the noose

>Pop off at the mouth and get shutdown by systems number one mouthpiece

>Romania tasked with taking out the trash

Even if Andrew Tate is innocent of his sex trafficking charges, the nihilism and cruelty of the character he plays on the internet will see that a jury will convict him anyway.

Original source:


20 Dec 2022: DEBUNKING Shanghai Cov-ID Lies

20 Dec 2022: DEBUNKING Shanghai Cov-ID Lies

By Real World News

There have been a few Western media reports claiming China’s COV-ID situation is dire, with fever clinics overflowing and people dying left and right. Let’s go take a look together!

Click Here To Play Video

Original source:


Cyberattacks’ Risks Impossible To Be Covered, The Industry Warns

Cyberattacks’ Risks Impossible To Be Covered, The Industry Warns

The world’s biggest #insurance companies has warned that #cyberattacks will become “uninsurable” as the disruption from hacks continues to grow.

Recent attacks that have disrupted hospitals, shut down pipelines and targeted government departments have all fed concern about this expanding risk among industry executives.

First off, there must be a perception that this is not just data – it is about our civilisation, Mr. Mario Greco, chief executive at insurer #Zurich told in an interview with Financial Times. These people can severely disrupt our lives, he added.

Spiralling cyber losses in recent years have prompted emergency measures by the sector’s underwriters to limit their exposure.

The global insurers said there was a limit to how much the private sector can absorb, in terms of underwriting all the losses coming from cyber attacks.

They called upon governments to “set up private-public schemes to handle systemic cyber risks that can not be quantified.

The firms warned that a model of diffused risk in case of massive, sustained cyberattacks might not suffice.

State Of Affairs

Albo’s Astonishing Call on Aussie States

Albo’s Astonishing Call on Aussie States

By Blake Antrobus

“Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has made an astonishing admission he “wouldn’t mind” scrapping Australia’s individual states if he were writing the constitution today, suggesting larger national and local governments could fill the gap.”

Agenda 2030 aims to restructure the government entirely.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he wouldn’t mind scrapping Australian states – a similar thought shared by former PM Bob Hawke years before – but conceded it was something unlikely to happen.

Albo reveals he ‘wouldn’t mind’ scrapping Australian states

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has admitted he “wouldn’t mind” scrapping Australian states, in a surprising answer at a music festival.

A member of the audience had told Mr Albanese state governments in NSW and Queensland had refused United Nations personnel entry to inspect inpatient wards.

She asked if the federal government would implement laws to intervene.

In his response, Mr Albanese said he couldn’t intervene to overturn every single decision made by levels of lower government.

He said state governments were accountable for their own actions.

“If we were writing the constitution again today, you might not have three tiers of government,” he said.

“But we do and often Canberra is the most distant from people’s real world experience compared to state and local governments.”

Former Labor prime minister Bob Hawke had proposed abolishing states in a series of lectures in the late 1970s.
Former Labor prime minister Bob Hawke had proposed abolishing states in a series of lectures in the late 1970s.

Mr Albanese’s comments appear to follow in the same suit as Labor great Bob Hawke, who previously outlined a wish to abolish the states in a series of lectures in 1979 – 3.5 years before he became Prime Minister.

Mr Hawke had described Australian states as a “dangerous anachronism” that had created difficulty, with different education, health and criminal systems which “hurt Australians every day of every week”.

But he admitted abolishing states would be “almost impossible”.

Mr Albanese on Thursday said he “wouldn’t mind doing it either” but conceded it was a system people had to work with.

“I can also see you would need … some form of regional government that was a little bigger as well,” he said.

Original source:


The PfizerGate Scandal: A Shocking tale of a Global Government Plot to hide the COVID Vaccine’s Immune System Destruction

The PfizerGate Scandal: A Shocking tale of a Global Government Plot to hide the COVID Vaccine’s Immune System Destruction

By The Expose

Are you ready to learn the shocking truth about the Covid-19 vaccines?

Health authorities around the world have been caught red-handed manipulating figures in an attempt to keep the public in the dark about the devastating side effects of the injections.

Don’t believe the lies and propaganda being spread by the mainstream media – keep reading to discover the full extent of this cover-up and the real impact the vaccine is having on people’s health.

Get ready for a bombshell revelation that will shake the foundations of everything you thought you knew about the pandemic.

In November 2021, the Chairman of the South African Medical Association, Dr. Angelique Coetzee, made a “shocking” discovery: the Omicron variant of Covid-19 was causing a mild form of the flu in South Africa.

As a practicing GP during the pandemic, Coetzee had seen plenty of Omicron cases and deduced from her observations that it led to a mild form of illness comparable to the common cold.

But what does “mild” mean in the context of medicine?

Coetzee explained to the German newspaper Die Welt that, according to the World Health Organization’s definition, “mild COVID-19 disease” is characterized by patients who can be treated at home and do not require oxygen or hospitalization.

In contrast, serious illness is defined by acute pulmonary respiratory infections that require oxygen or even artificial respiration.

Coetzee went on to reveal that “European officials” had pressured her to deny this truth, likely because it was not what the “gene-corrupting drug pushers” wanted the public to hear.

Despite the pressure, Coetzee remained steadfast in her belief that Omicron was a mild form of the flu that did not cause hospitalization or require oxygen, and was not an acute respiratory infection like the alleged Delta variant.

“I was told not to publicly state that it was a mild illness. I have been asked to refrain from making such statements and to say that it is a serious illness. I declined,”

Who were the mysterious “European officials” who pressured the Chairman of the South African Medical Association, Dr. Angelique Coetzee, to keep quiet about the Omicron variant’s mild symptoms?

Coetzee did not specify, but she did reveal that she faced criticism from authorities in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands.

South African officials, on the other hand, did not try to pressure her into hiding the truth.

It appears some powerful players were determined to keep the public in the dark about the true nature of the alleged Omicron variant.

What could they be hiding, and why were they so eager to suppress this information?

These are just a few of the questions that beg for answers in this intriguing tale of cover-ups and corruption.

Dr Coetzee explained –

“What I said at one point—because I was just tired of it—was: In South Africa, this is a mild illness, but in Europe, it is a very serious one. That’s what your politicians wanted to hear.”

These things were reported in several news sources on February 10th.

In November 2021, 23% of South Africa’s population was fully vaccinated against Covid-19. This meant that the Omicron variant, which caused a mild form of the flu, only affected the unvaccinated population.

Unlike the Delta variant, Omicron did not cause hospitalization, did not require oxygen, and did not result in acute respiratory infection.

However, these facts were being covered up by European governments, according to Dr. Angelique Coetzee, the Chairman of the South African Medical Association.

During November, South Africa was in the midst of summer, a time when mild flu cases are not typically severe enough to send people to the hospital in large numbers. Yet, in Australia, another Southern Hemisphere country, many people were being hospitalized with Omicron.

The correlation between vaccination and severe flu symptoms during the summer months raises important questions about the safety and effectiveness of the Covid-19 vaccine.

This anomaly can be explained by the fact that these individuals were fully vaccinated, and therefore more susceptible to VAIDS (vaccine-induced immune deficiency syndrome).

The first reported evidence of full-blown VAIDS occurred in New South Wales (NSW) from January 1st to 8th, 2022, among official Government data related to the Omicron variant.

The Australian Cover Up

The Expose published shocking figures on January 28th, 2022 that revealed a staggering case rate ratio of 10.72 to 1 among fully vaccinated individuals versus unvaccinated individuals in New South Wales (NSW) during the first week of January 2022.

In other words, 99.5% of Omicron cases were in the fully vaccinated population, while only 0.5% of cases were in the unvaccinated population.

But as soon as these figures were made public, the State Government began manipulating them in an attempt to cover up the vaccine-generated catastrophe. The government’s efforts to obscure the truth only served to deepen the mystery surrounding the true impact of the Covid-19 vaccine on public health.

In the first week of January 2022, the number of unvaccinated individuals with Omicron in New South Wales (NSW) rose from 2,775 to 3,552, and by the third week, it had reached 72,772.

Meanwhile, the number of fully vaccinated individuals with Omicron increased from 108,056 to 267,381 in the first week, and by the third week, it had reached 438,255. This represented a case ratio of 202.5 to 1 between the fully vaccinated and the unvaccinated.

However, the NSW government began manipulating these figures as soon as they were called into question by The Expose on January 28th.

By February 8th, the case ratio between the fully vaccinated and the unvaccinated had fallen to 0.95 to 1, with more Omicron cases reported in the unvaccinated population. This was despite the fact that 95% of the population of NSW was fully vaccinated.

This blatant fraud by the government of NSW demonstrated that the health of Australians was not as important to them as selling vaccines.

The government’s actions made it no different from a profit-driven drug pusher, willing to sacrifice the well-being of its citizens for financial gain. This was just one example of the Pfizergate vaccine damage cover-up, but it was by no means limited to Australia. The situation in Canada, the land of the moose, is also worth examining.

The Canadian Cover Up

The Canadian government employed a multi-stage cover-up to hide the truth about the impact of the Covid-19 vaccine.

Firstly, it is nearly impossible to obtain past issues of its Epidemiological summaries. While the Australian government makes all of its past reports easily available as links to pdfs, the Canadians make nothing available beyond the current report.

The only way to access past reports is through the Wayback Machine at, but this process is extremely difficult and time-consuming. The Wayback Machine often fails to load pages, loads only part of a page, or mixes up information from different reports, making it a frustrating and tedious task to piece together the data.

If you wish to spend a few millennia wrestling with a really annoying AI please visit –*/

Secondly, the Canadian government provides cumulative figures dating back to the start of vaccination, which makes it hard to see the fine details of the current week’s data amidst all the other weeks’ data since vaccination began in December 2020.

To work around this, we can subtract two cumulative figures ending on dates one week apart.

Thirdly, and most cynically, the government applies the European 2013 age-standardizing mortality formula to case numbers and hospitalizations. This is outright fraud, as case rates are not affected by the age of the patient in the same way that death rates are.

It is like trying to compensate for case rates by looking at how well people cook spaghetti in different age bands – it is completely invalid.

To obtain the unvaccinated case rates per 100k of the unvaccinated population in Canada, we need to first determine the total population of Canada, as well as the population of those aged 12 and over and those aged 5 and over.

Based on data from, the total population of Canada is 38,246,108, with 33,482,789 aged 12 and over and 36,363,537 aged 5 and over.

The Reports used for the analysis can all be viewed here –

Here are the raw cumulative data from the Epidemiological-summary-of-COVID-19-cases produced by the Canadian Government from October 2nd 2021 to January 22nd 2022 –

The following table shows the cases, hospitalizations, and deaths by vaccine status by week in Canada, deduced by subtracting one week’s cumulative figures from the previous week’s cumulative figures.

The rates of cases, hospital visits, and deaths per 100k are then calculated using the population figures in column 2.

The immune/vaccine efficiency percentage is calculated using the normalised case rate ratio formula of Pfizer.

This data excludes the 14-day period from December 4th to 18th, during which the data for December 11th was omitted due to it being prepared around Christmas.

he data from Canada reveals an interesting anomaly: it appears that only the unvaccinated population celebrated Christmas, as the blue line (representing the unvaccinated) dropped to zero during the Christmas week before bouncing back above the purple line (representing the single vaccinated).

This could be due to Jesus protecting the unvaccinated from Omicron over the holiday, or it could be a statistical quirk.

Until Omicron hit in December, the unvaccinated population (blue line) did slightly better than the single-vaccinated population (purple line).

This is because one dose of the vaccine does not cause VAIDS (vaccine-induced autoimmune deficiency syndrome).

The double vaccinated population (red line) did better than all other groups until Omicron when it experienced a dramatic increase in cases – a clear indication of VAIDS.

This graph clearly shows the degradation of the immune system from 60% to 20% in just 10 weeks, followed by a dramatic drop to -98.8% in the Christmas week (likely due to the unvaccinated population celebrating Christmas more than the vaccinated, as seen in the line graph above). The immune system then stabilizes at around -75%.

In January, 2022 the Expose published an article using Canadian government statistics to demonstrate the progression of VAIDS in the double-vaccinated population.

In response, the Canadian government manipulated its figures for the week from January 15th to 22nd in an attempt to disprove the existence of VAIDS. They also deleted the pdf dated January 21st, which was used for the statistics in the original article.

During the pre-Christmas week when Omicron hit Canada, the vaccine’s efficiency, as measured by the normalised case rate ratio between the double vaccinated and the unvaccinated (as used in Pfizer’s Phase III vaccine trial), dropped from +23.8% to -98.8%.

There was a -23.8% Christmas factor included in these figures, which then stabilized at -75%. This happened because the initial, minimal vaccine efficiency against Omicron is quickly obliterated by the 4% reduction in the immune system of the double-vaccinated population each week.

Omicron uncloaked this immune degradation.

However, for the immune system to recover and for the vaccines to suddenly become more effective against Omicron than they were against Delta in one week is highly unlikely and goes against what Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla previously stated about the limited protection offered by the vaccine against Omicron.

The Canadian government is asking us to believe in this absurd scenario, which is an insult to anyone with more than two functioning brain cells. This is the Canadian arm of the Pfizergate cover-up.

The German Cover Up

On December 30, 2021, the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin released statistics showing that in the week from Monday, December 20 to Sunday, December 26, unvaccinated Germans were 8.12 times more likely to catch Omicron than those who had received two doses of the vaccine.

This corresponded to an immune system degradation of 87.7%, and this was covered in The Expose of January 2nd 2022.

This data correlated closely with Australian and Canadian data from January and December, respectively, which also showed significant immune degradation in those who had received two doses of the vaccine.

However, on January 3rd, the institute announced that it had made a mistake and suddenly found 911 additional unvaccinated Germans who had caught Omicron. The institute clearly rigged the figures in order to protect the credibility of Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines.

So once again the same pattern is seen.

A government stats department produces figures proving that the vaccines have become anti-vaccines and are seriously degrading the immune systems of recipients. But rather than hold an enquiry to determine how recipients can best be protected from these toxins, they instead just rig the figures.

The Germans, being one of the more efficient governments in this world, rigged their figures more quickly and more decisively than most of their competitors in Covid cover-ups.

The PHE Cover Up

In July 2021, I wrote to various branches of Public Health England (PHE) and Sajid Javid.


Here are the PHE data for Delta deaths in the week from June14-June21. Vax status on June 17 was…22% 1 jab and 63% 2 jabs and 15% 0 jabs (at least 21 days previously) – 

0 Jabs 38-34 = 4 dead from 3.5m over 50s (15%)
1 Jabs 17-10 = 7 dead from 5.2m over 50s (22%)
2 Jabs 50-26 = 24 dead from 14.9m over 50s (63%)

0 Jabs are 4×63/15×24 = 0.70x more likely to die than 2 Jabs
0 Jabs are 4×22/15×7 = 0.83x more likely to die than 1 Jab
2 Jabs are 24×22/63×7 = 1.20x more likely to die than 1 Jab

So in the week from June14-21, the latest published PHE data, you were better off not being vaccinated. And 1 Jab was better than 2 Jabs.
These data are for death with COVID rather than deaths from COVID. There are 23.6m people over 50 in the UK. 1350 of these die every day of all causes. So during 7 days 9450 would die. This is a rate of 0.4 per 1000. Total cases were 976 (0Jabs), 3865 (1Jab), 3546 (2Jabs). So if we deduct those who would have died anyway we get.

0 Jabs 4 – 0.4 = 3.6 dead from 3.5m over 50s (15%)
1 Jabs 7 – 1.5 = 5.5 dead from 5.2m over 50s (22%)
2 Jabs 24 – 1.4 = 22.6 dead from 14.9m over 50s (63%)

0 Jabs are 3.6×63/15×22.6 = 0.67x more likely to die than 2 Jabs
0 Jabs are 3.6×22/15×5.5 = 0.96x more likely to die than 1 Jab
2 Jabs are 22.6×22/63×5.5 = 1.44x more likely to die than 1 Jab

So the best we have for the week from June14-21 from PHE data is that 1 Jab gives the same protection a 0 Jabs. And 2 Jabs make things worse.
24 delta deaths from 2 Jabs compared to 4 delta deaths from 0 Jabs is a disaster.


Their response was to delay the publication of Technical Bulletin 18 until July 9th and change the frequency of publication to biweekly instead of weekly.

This was a significant deviation from the practice of other countries, which consistently published weekly reports. From then on, PHE figures never again showed that being unvaccinated resulted in a lower death rate than being fully vaccinated.

This cover-up is a key example of the Pfizergate scandal.

The appropriate action would have been to immediately investigate the relative benefits of one dose versus two doses and no doses.

However, all of the data I have seen from various countries since then consistently indicates that one jab is superior to two. The reason for this is that one jab does not produce enough spike proteins to significantly weaken the immune system, while two jabs do.

There is no data indicating that individuals who received one jab will develop VAIDS.

A common feature of all Covid stats cover-ups is that the initial statistics for each new variant are usually accurate, as the politicians have not yet determined their response and the technicians producing the statistics are not yet pressured to manipulate the data.

However, these technicians are aware that their statistics show vaccines to be dangerous, but they do not share this information with politicians. The politicians are either too ignorant, lazy, or disinterested to realize that their own statistics are undermining their vaccine propaganda.

As a result, they continue to push vaccines even as the data shows that they are causing harm, and when independent media (mainly The Expose) exposes these deaths, they simply manipulate the statistics to hide them.

The UKHSA Cover Up

On October 10, 2021, The Expose published an article that claimed that vaccines were causing a form of AIDS. The article went viral and was eventually quoted by Alex Jones through the Reese report and by Brazilian President Bolsonaro. Here is the data which showed the progressive immune system destruction….

On October 15, The Expose published a follow-up piece that confirmed the original article. Then, on October 23 and October 27, The Expose published two more follow-up pieces.

The last table of data from the UKHSA before it was corrupted showed the weekly decline in the immune system performance of doubly vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated people. This data was measured using Pfizer’s vaccine effectiveness formula.

(Unvaxxed case rate – Vaxxed case rate / the Larger of Unvaxxed or Vaxxed case rate)

We are using the normalised absolute ratio of vaxxed to unvaxxed case numbers to determine vaccine efficiency just as Pfizer itself did in the Supplementary Appendix to their Phase III clinical trial results.

  • A vaccine efficacy of +50% meant that doubly vaccinated people were 50% more protected from Covid than unvaccinated people. It meant that the delta case rate in the vaccinated was half the delta case rate in the unvaccinated.
  • A vaccine efficacy of -50% meant that unvaccinated people were 50% more protected from Covid than doubly vaccinated people. It meant that the delta case rate in the vaccinated was double the delta case rate in the unvaccinated.
  • A vaccine efficacy of 0% meant that doubly vaccinated people were 0% more protected from Covid than unvaccinated people. It meant that the delta case rate in the vaccinated was equal to the delta case rate in the unvaccinated. It meant that the vaccines had lost all their effectiveness.

“Everyone over the age of 30 will have lost 100% of their entire immune capability (certainly for Covid and most likely for viruses and certain cancers – following the evidence from Cole Diagnostics in Idaho and Dr Nathan Thompson and Dr Ralph Baric) within 13 weeks,” according to accurate figures from the UKHSA.

These figures showed progressive week-on-week immune system degradation, similar to the Canadian figures that showed degradation in the last 10 weeks before Omicron hit Canada. This was the techies at the UKHSA telling us the truth.

However, after 4 hard-hitting articles in The Expose showed that these vaccines caused a form of AIDS, the politicians intervened.

On November 2nd 2021, the Daily Mail published an article revealing that…

1. UK statistics watchdog scolds PHE’s replacement body for publishing ‘misleading’ figures which anti-vaxxers have seized as proof that Covid jabs don’t work
2. Over the past few weeks, the agency’s data shows infection rates are higher in fully-vaccinated adults compared to the unjabbed.
3. Anti-vaxx commentators and campaigners have seized the data as proof that Covid vaccines don’t work.

The UK’s Statistics Watchdog is The Office of Statistics Regulation (TOSR for short). Yes, Offstats told the UKHSA that their Stats were off.

TOSR director general Ed Humpherson wrote to the UKHSA’s boss Dr Jenny Harries on November 1st 2021 thanking her for the changes she had made and is quoted in the Daily Mail as saying –

‘It remains the case that the surveillance report includes rates per 100,000 which can be used to argue that vaccines are not effective,’

‘I know that this is not the intention of the surveillance report, but the potential for misuse remains.

The government admitted that the purpose of their statistics was not to allow the public to determine for themselves whether the vaccines were effective or not. In fact, their statistics should not even be able to support an argument that vaccines are ineffective.

The Director General candidly admitted that the use of all UKHSA data was exclusively to prove the effectiveness of the vaccines and that any government statistics agency that strayed from this line would be re-adjusted by TOSR.

He defined the UKHSA as a pro-vaccine propaganda outlet, a sales arm of Pfizer Inc., whose mandate was only to provide information for one side of the debate.

No one in the UK could be expected to make an informed choice about whether to take Pfizer’s experimental, gene-corrupting vaccine when it was presented to them by the government as unquestionably effective against Covid.

So here was the UKHSA cover-up ordered by the TSOR. Here was the UKHSA arm of Pfizergate.

The PHS Cover up

Here is Table12 from the latest PHS Weekly Covid Statistical Reports –

The red warning appeared after The Expose used Public Health Scotland (PHS) figures to prove that vaccines increased the chances of being infected with Covid, being hospitalized with Covid, and dying from Covid.

If PHS had cared about the lives of their fellow Scots, they would have halted vaccination pending a full public inquiry.

However, they did not seem to care whether Scots lived or died, as long as they were fully vaccinated. But even that term was a total fraud, as nobody who received the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine was truly “fully vaccinated” at all.

If they were truly fully vaccinated, they would not get infected with Covid, right?

If they were truly fully vaccinated, they would not need booster shots, right?

Fully vaccinated people were simply duped, conned, and on their way to having their genes corrupted and their immune systems compromised. The one thing they were not was truly fully vaccinated.

As for Public Health Scotland, to paraphrase Sir Winston Churchill, they were no longer in the business of public health and no longer represented Scotland. They were in the business of pushing gene-corrupting drugs through fraudulent statistics, and they represented the interests of American pharmaceutical companies, not the interests of Scotland or its people.

The notes underneath Table 12 above referred to Appendix 6 of the report, which stated: “Age-standardized case, hospitalization, and mortality rates are used to allow comparisons of case, hospitalization, and mortality rates between populations that have different age distributions.”

The 2013 European Standard Population is used to standardise rates. For more information – see the ONS methods. Here is the full link –

Notice that it refers to Age Standardised Mortality Rates. Here is some of what it says:

Age-standardised mortality rates: Age-standardised mortality rates (ASMRs) are used to allow for comparisons to be made between populations that may contain different overall population sizes and proportions of people of different ages.

These are clearly age-standardized mortality rates. They are not age-standardized hospitalization rates, and they are not age-standardized case rates. There is no need for age standardization for case rates or hospitalization rates.

And even if there were, these rates would not have been known in 2013 when the mortality rates were calculated, because there were no Covid cases in 2013 and there were no Covid hospitalizations in 2013.

To apply a 2013 European mortality rate to a 2019 Covid case rate is a blatant fraud being committed by PHS and the Canadian government in broad daylight. Even the UKHSA does not treat its taxpayers with such studied intellectual contempt.

Age-standardized mortality rates are a compensation method designed to account for age discrepancies in mortality rates between different statistical groups (such as groups with different vaccine statuses). They are merely corruption when applied to statistical groups who are not dying.

As mentioned above: one cannot apply a mortality compensator to a statistic that does not involve mortality. THAT IS FRAUD, PURE AND SIMPLE.

It would be no less valid to compensate the case rates with how good people in the 5-year age bands are at singing Whitney Houston.

But if one does apply 2013 European age-standardized mortality rates to case rates and hospitalization rates, then since the unvaccinated are slightly younger than the vaccinated, it makes the numbers look better for the vaccinated.

Furthermore, since neither PHS nor the UKHSA nor Canada provide data by vaccine status by age band (despite FOI requests by Professors Fenton and Neil of QMC to do so), they can do what they want with those numbers.

Here is an example of PHS using this fraud to persuade Scots to get vaccinated…

“In the past four weeks from 08 January 2022 to 04 February 2022, the age-standardised rate of hospital admissions per 100,000 was 2.9 to 3.8 times lower in individuals with their third dose or booster dose of vaccine compared to unvaccinated individuals or have received one or two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine”. –  PHS Covid19 Statistical Report Feb9

But the fact that both Canada and PHS apply 2013 European age-standardized mortality rates to non-mortality statistics shows us all we need to know about what is going on here.

It is wholesale fraud and it is happening worldwide. This brings us back to the observations of Dr. Coetzee that Omicron is mild in the unvaccinated (77% of South Africans in November 2021) and does not lead to hospitalization or acute respiratory infection (in the Southern Hemisphere summer).

The reason that European politicians tried to not only silence her but also persuade her to say the opposite of what she had found in her medical practice, was because she was threatening the basis for further vaccinations.

She was actually announcing deliverance from a pandemic, which would be great for the health of Europe.

However, the politicians were not interested in health. Vaccination was the end they sought, not good health. Dr. Coetzee exposed their true motivation.

UKHSA and PHS Interpretation Warnings are Outright Frauds

UKHSA Note1 to Table13: Comparing case rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection. Vaccine effectiveness has been formally estimated from a number of different sources and is summarised on pages 4 to 15 in this report.

PHS Note1 to Table12: Data in this table should not be used as a measure of vaccine effectiveness due to unaccounted for biases and risk factors in different populations. For more information, please see the Interpretation of data and Vaccine effectiveness summary sections above.

On Page 13 of the Supplementary Appendix to Pfizer’s seminal Phase III clinical trial of their BTN162b2 mRNA Covid19 Vaccine, Pfizer defined and calculated the effectiveness of their vaccine as the normalised case rate ratio between the vaxxed and the unvaxxed as follows..

VE against severe occurrence after dose 1 was 1-1/30 = 29/30 = 0.96666 or 96.7%
VE against severe occurrence after dose 1 and before dose 2 was  1-0/6 = 1 = 100%
VE against severe occurrence from <7 days after Dose 2 was  1-0/1 = 1 = 100%
VE against severe occurrence >=7 days after dose 2 was 1-1/23 = 22/23 = 0.9566 or 95.7%

Pfizer defined calculated and claimed Vaccine Efficacies of 96.7% for 1 dose and 95.7% for 2 doses using the very normalised case rate ratio that the UKHSA and PHS instruct readers NOT to use.

The numbers in the table 1, 0, 0, 1 for the vaccinated and 30, 6, 1, 23 for the unvaccinated, were actual case numbers not calculated case ratios. But they were also the respective case rates per 23k people because the numbers in each group were almost identical (23,040 vaxxed and 23,037 unvaxxed) as shown above under BNT162b2 and Placebo.

So Public Health Scotland (PHS) and the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) were instructing their readers not to use the definition that all regulatory agencies relied upon in granting their emergency use authorizations for the vaccines.

They were therefore instructing their readers not to use the correct definition of vaccine efficiency. That was a fraud. PHS went further in this fraud and represented that Pfizer’s formula should not be used on their raw data “due to unaccounted-for biases and risk factors in different populations”.

It is true that any two populations, unless randomly chosen, will have unaccounted-for biases and risk factors influencing infection rates, such as ethnicity, time vaccinated, age, etc.

But no government department has ever compensated for any of these confounding factors except for the factor of age using the irrelevant and inapplicable 2013 European age-standardized mortality rates.

Cases are not deaths.

One cannot successfully compensate for age in Covid case numbers using 2013 European all-cause mortality figures.

All-cause 2013 European death rates do not vary with age in the same manner as 2019 Covid infection rates. Nobody in Europe in 2013 even knew there would be a pandemic in 2019 (although some Americans and some Chinese may have known). PHS was just setting up the less statistically-minded reader for a compensation fraud.

What these UKHSA and PHS warnings should say is that normalized case rate ratios are the correct way to calculate vaccine efficiencies, and all the other figures in this report that do not equate to this correct calculation are inaccurate to the extent of their disparity from it.

The Danish Cover Up

Here are the Danish figures from their Statens Serum Institut: Nov21 to Dec25 –

The ratio of double or triple vaccinated Omicron cases to unvaccinated cases was 37,111 to 3,500, or 10.6 to 1. While the vaccination rates at the midpoint of the 34-day period on December 8 were 76.83% fully vaccinated, 0.14% singly vaccinated, and 23.03% unvaccinated.

So the case rate ratio between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated was 10.6 x 23.03/76.83 = 3.18x.

Therefore, the anti-vaccine efficiency against Omicron in Denmark was (1-3.18)/3.18 = -68.6%.

The Expose published this on January 28, 2022. The response of the Statens Serum Institut in Denmark was to cease publication of their Omikron Status Report nine days later on February 6, 2022.

That was the Danish version of the Pfizergate cover-up.


In Germany, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Scotland, and England, the same pattern of events occurred. A new variant emerged and the techies of the respective government stats departments did their job and got reasonably accurate statistics out for the new variant.

Then, The Expose published an analysis of these virgin statistics, which had not yet been defiled by politicians. That analysis revealed the truth that doubly vaccinated people now had almost fully blown VAIDS (vaccine-induced autoimmune diseases), and therefore the vaccines led to more infections, more hospitalizations, and more deaths than in the unvaccinated.

The politicians were then told about these articles. So all government stats departments must be avid readers of The Expose!

Public Health England (PHE) certainly wasted no time in responding to my email. 24 hours later, I rang them to speak to their chief statistics whizz about their figures. The response from their Public Accountability Office was to ban me from communicating with them for six months.

I paid no attention to their ban, of course, because they are supposed to be the Public Accountability Office, and I am a member of the public to whom they are supposed to be accountable!

So some bright spark then explained to the politicians that their statistics defeated their drug-pushing narrative and destroyed the scientific basis for their snake bite genetic corruption mandates (not perhaps in so many words). The politicians then responded by instructing their statistics departments to commit medical fraud and cover up the death, disability, pain, and suffering that these vaccines cause.

That was the international Pfizergate cover-up.

We know that government statistics people bend the truth to order because Professor Graham Medley, the Head of Covid modelling for SAGE, admitted as much to Fraser Nelson of the Spectator Magazine.

Yes, and as Fraser succinctly declared, government statistics departments indulge not in evidence-based policy making but in policy-based evidence-making.

Pfizergate was the cover-up of a multi-level, five-level fraud. Their gene-corrupting Trojans were a statistical fraud on top of a medical fraud on top of a hospital administration fraud on top of a regulatory body fraud on top of a genetic fraud.

I say to all those caught up in this five-level fraud: There is no wealth without health. Therefore, there is no economic security in corrupted healthcare.

And I say to all those in the mainstream media who were and still are sitting on the fence: This is bigger than Watergate.

So, who’s going to step up to the scoop?

Original source:
COVID 19 deaths and injuries

My Public Healthcare Worker Survey Results: Myocarditis Rates Up >10X Post-Vax

My Public Healthcare Worker Survey Results: Myocarditis Rates Up >10X Post-Vax

By Steve Kirsch

They told us that the rates of myocarditis from the vax are less than COVID. So explain to me why healthcare providers are seeing >10X cases than pre-COVID and pre-vax?

Executive Summary

My survey of healthcare offices showed a huge increase in myocarditis (and other serious side effects) post-vaccine.

I’d like the mainstream media to do the same survey and show us that the opposite occurred.


Last month, I ran a survey of healthcare workers on myocarditis rates pre-COVID, during COVID (but before vax), and post-vax for those under 25.

Survey results

Here is the result.

Here are the aggregate totals in cases seen per month in those under age 25:

Pre-COVID: 5 (only one reporter saw 5 cases per month; rest 0)
Post-vax: 81

In other words, rates went up by >10X from both pre-COVID rates as well as during COVID (but before vax rollout) based on this survey only.

Comments from the respondents

Here are the raw results and I suggest you read the comments. Here’s one:

I had never seen a case of myocarditis or pericarditis in my prior 5 years of nursing before the vaccine rolled out. This was on a medical surgical unit, we also have telemetry and we’ll take step down overflow.

In addition to that, the rate of other cardiac conditions in those under 30 has absolutely skyrocketed as well. New onset arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation in very young patients, I’ve seen as young as 19, heart attacks and strokes in sub 30 patients, and quite a few cases of blood clots in very young people that did not also have covid at the time or recently prior to hospital admission.

I now work in an ICU, what I’m seeing now is probably even more startling. The number of cardiovascular events occurring in those under 60 is shocking (of course, obviously these are the types of patients we see in an icu, but what is startling is the relative low age, and the volume in which we see them)

Another wrote this:

Steve, I am in nursing education after practicing for 30 years. In my practice, I never saw myocarditis in a child or young adult. Since the V, I have seen and heard faculty and students experiencing cardiac failure. Sudden loss of 2 faculty to cardiac arrest during the workday, students experiencing cardiac issues (under age 30), the children of students having cardiac problems, the spouses of faculty having cardiac problems (myocarditis specifically). It’s an every day occurrence in a medium size community college.

Here is the data graphically

Just 32 offices responded to the survey and reported myocarditis rates.

Even though the survey was small, the responses were consistent.

Most offices saw no myocarditis cases until the vax came out. After that, it just ONE office had no myocarditis cases (they had none in the other categories as well):

Pre-COVID, 31 offices reported 0 myocarditis
This is post-COVID, pre-vax. Note that all but four offices still had 0 cases.
Post-vax, there was only one office which reported 0 myocarditis rates (there is a bug in the Airtable charting as you can see from the raw data). All the rest reported non-zero rates. The chance of that happening by luck is less than 1 in 2 billion.

I dare you: fact check me or do your own survey in full public view just like mine

I have contact info on all of my responses so any “fact checker” can verify the entries are legit.

Dr. Eugene Gu said on Twitter Spaces COVID debate yesterday that for every study, there is one that shows the opposite. OK, can someone please show me the public survey done of doctors offices that refutes this survey and shows that the rates went down?

“It’s just small numbers” excuse

The so-called scientists will attack this survey as too small to be meaningful or biased.

Regarding bias, the survey was open to the public. And people weren’t reporting their PERSONAL results, they were reporting results from their OFFICE.

As far as meaningful, when you have 32 offices responding, and all but one reports an increase in rate, the chance of that happening by pure luck is 1 in 2 billion. Do you think I got lucky?

Furthermore, there was a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal (the Thailand study) which followed 301 teens longitudinally in a prospective study and found that nearly 30% of those teens experienced cardiac injury:

So my results shouldn’t be any surprise at all.

And where is the study of kids pre- vs. post-COVID following the same kids longitudinally like this study showing higher rates of cardiac damage from COVID? Well, there isn’t one.

By the way…

Aseem Malhotra told me none of the cardiologists in the UK are getting any more shots.

And a former UCSF nurse told me the same about the doctors and nurses at UCSF.

Can you guess why?


It’s a shame that nobody in the medical community has enough intellectual curiosity to run a survey similar to the one I did. It took me only a few minutes to run the survey. It paints a troubling picture.

What the survey shows is four-fold:

  1. Nobody in the mainstream medical community is interested in questioning what they are told. Intellectual curiosity is dead w.r.t. the government narrative. They all repeat what they are told, viz. that myocarditis caused by the vaccines is less than that from COVID. They never second-guess what the government says. This isn’t science. This is blind obedience. The medical community should be ashamed of itself. The medical journal editors should be calling out the medical community on this as well. But they aren’t. They are complicit too. There is no questioning the narrative even when all these medical offices are seeing data first-hand that is opposite the narrative. This is not science. Science is about questioning the data. Why are only UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad and a few others questioning the narrative and speaking out?
  2. The rates of myocarditis skyrocketed after the vaccines rolled out.
  3. There wasn’t even a single office reporting LOWER rates after the vaccines rolled out! Nearly 100% of the respondents reported higher rates.
  4. If you think my survey is invalid, why not do your own survey. Don’t you want to know the truth?

I welcome ANYONE to prove me wrong with their own PUBLIC survey like this.

I predict that NOBODY will even try.

And that, my friends, tells you everything you need to know, doesn’t it?

Original source:

"All In" Starter Package

The Fast Start

Level 2️⃣

Level 1️⃣

Level 4️⃣ (5000 USD)

Level 3️⃣ (1500 USD)