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

COVID 19 deaths and injuries

They are Coming After Our Kids

They are Coming After Our Kids

An Emergency Appeal for VSRF

We are writing to you with an urgent appeal from our hearts to yours. The fight against the deadly COVID-19 jabs has never been more urgent. You may be aware of the Nobel Prize in Medicine being awarded to the developers of the mRNA “vaccine” but it gets worse.

Today, MedPage, one of the most influential medical publications, blatantly launched a campaign to inject the mRNA experimental drug into the arms of every pregnant woman in America. It is not hyperbole to say that where they have not succeeded with adults, children, and infants- they are now coming after babies and their mothers.

In these challenging times, our community at VSRF is facing a daunting reality. We are a passionate team of 8 individuals who volunteer much of their time. We work with and support a community of over 50,000 caring souls, all dedicated to making a difference. Yet, despite our unwavering commitment, we still find ourselves at a financial crossroads.

We have been producing VSRF Live shows, bringing you insightful discussions with trailblazers like Constitutional Attorney Jeff Childers, Epoch Times’ Jan Jekielek & Cindy Drukier, Yale University’s Dr. Harvey Risch, MD, actor/comedian/activist Rob Schneider, and former Pfizer Executive Mike Yeadon, PhD. These shows are essential in spreading awareness and truth. However, the costs of our operations, production, and promotions have far surpassed the funding we’ve received.

Moreover, we urgently need your help to provide care and resources to our growing community of vaccine-injured individuals. It’s a vision we are deeply passionate about, but we lack the necessary funding to bring it to life.

Here is how you can make a significant impact:

  • Support our VSRF Live Shows: Your contribution will enable us to continue hosting informative events that shed light on critical topics surrounding COVID-19.
  • Empower Nurse Angela and Our Team: Please help Nurse Angela and our team provide care and resources for our ever-growing vaccine injured communities. We would love to get behind an effort like that but we don’t have the funding.

Please consider making a donation today. As a 501(c)3 organization, your donations are tax deductible. Your support, regardless of its size, is invaluable to us. It will not only sustain our current efforts but will also empower us to explore groundbreaking initiatives like the worldwide stadium events, fostering hope and solidarity.

As a nonprofit firmly entrenched in this movement, we do not qualify for the millions of dollars available through foundation grants that most organizations are able to access. We also have no access to lucrative corporate sponsorships – another typical source of tremendous funding for nonprofit organizations. 

To donate, please visit

Thank you for your time, compassion, and unwavering support. Together, we will stop the Covid-19 “vaccines”.


COVID Vax in Pregnancy Protects Young Infants Against Omicron

— But only about one-fourth of pregnant women reported getting the vaccine

Maternal COVID vaccination in pregnancy protected young infants against Omicron-associated hospitalization, but few women actually receive the vaccine during pregnancy, according to new data from the CDC.

At least one maternal vaccine dose had an effectiveness of 54% (95% CI 32-68) against COVID-related hospitalization among infants younger than 3 months of age, and an effectiveness of 35% (95% CI 15-51) for infants younger than 6 months, reported researchers led by Regina Simeone, PhD, of CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases in Atlanta, in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reportopens in a new tab or window (MMWR).

Newborns are ineligible for COVID vaccination until 6 months of age, but are at high risk for severe outcomes from the virus. In fact, infants younger than 6 months have the highest COVID-associated hospitalization rates outside of seniors.

The case-control study from Simeone and colleagues spanned March 2022 to May 2023 and included 716 hospitalized infants under 6 months of age at 26 hospitals across 20 states in the Overcoming COVID-19 Network. In total, 78% of the 377 infants hospitalized and confirmed to have COVID-19 were babies whose mothers were unvaccinated. Most of the infants hospitalized for COVID-19 were previously healthy (77%), and critical illness occurred in 13%.

“Maternal vaccination, including receipt of a third dose during pregnancy, has been associated with reduced risk for infant hospitalization. Further, maternal vaccination during pregnancy has not been associated with increased risk for adverse pregnancy and infant outcomes,” noted Simeone and co-authors.

Their findings were released alongside two other MMWRs showing lower rates of COVID vaccine uptakeopens in a new tab or window during pregnancy compared with other vaccinations recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), and provider differencesopens in a new tab or window when it came to recommending the vaccines for this patient population.

Vaccine Uptake in Pregnancy, Hesitancy

A survey study led by Hilda Razzaghi, PhD, of CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, found that pregnant women were less likely to get the COVID vaccine during the 2022-2023 flu season compared with other vaccines recommended by ACIP during pregnancy to reduce the risk of pertussisopens in a new tab or window and influenza among women and their infants.

In an online survey conducted this year from March 28 to April 16 among more than 1,800 pregnant women, 27.3% said they received the bivalent COVID booster, as compared with 47.2% for the annual flu shot and 55.4% for the tetanus toxoid, diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine.

Looking at the COVID shot specifically, women were nine times more likely to receive a bivalent booster if a provider recommended it (63.2% vs 6.8% when a provider did not).

Razzaghi’s team also found an increase in flu vaccine hesitancy during pregnancy for the 2022-2023 season (24.7% very hesitant) versus prior seasons (17.2% in 2021-2022 and 17.5% in 2019-2020) and for Tdap vaccination as well (19.8% vs 14.7% and 15.1%, respectively).

In the study, hesitancy for these recommended vaccines was higher in Black versus white women, according to the researchers, who added that prioropens in a new tab or window studiesopens in a new tab or window have shown that pregnant Black women are less likely to receive vaccine recommendations from their provider.

“Maternal vaccination coverage remains suboptimal,” Razzaghi and co-authors wrote. “Culturally relevant vaccination recommendations from health care providers are critical to improving vaccination coverage, decreasing persistent disparities in vaccination coverage, combatting increases in vaccine hesitancy observed since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, and reducing adverse maternal and infant illness and associated complications including death from these three vaccine-preventable diseases.”

Provider Influence

Survey data from healthcare providers found that ob/gyns were the most likely to recommend COVID-19 vaccination to their pregnant patients, Mehreen Meghani, MPH, also of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, and colleagues detailed.

Of the 1,538 providers surveyed who cared for pregnant patients, ob/gyns were most likely to recommend the COVID vaccine (94.2%), followed by pediatricians (90.4%) and family practitioners or internists (82.1%), with nurse practitioners (NPs)/physician assistants (PAs) being least likely to recommend it (76.0%).

When asked how important it was for women of reproductive age to stay up to date with COVID vaccination, 80.8% of the ob/gyns said it was very important, as compared with 78.8% of pediatricians, 69.1% of family practitioners or internists, and 55.6% of the NPs/PAs.

“One in five providers felt that it was only somewhat important that women of reproductive age stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccination, despite evidence that these women delay vaccination or remain unvaccinated,” the study authors pointed out.

Providers who already offered Tdap and flu-shot vaccinations were more likely to offer or administer COVID shots as well.

These findings came from the Fall 2022 DocStyles survey. Most of the 1,752 responders were family practitioners or internists (57.2%), while pediatricians, ob/gyns, or NPs/PAs each made up 14.3% of the study sample. A majority of the providers were male (55.8%), and more than 60% had practiced for more than 10 years and worked in an outpatient setting.

Most of the providers in the study offered or administered the COVID-19 vaccine (53.5%), the flu shot (80.7%), and Tdap vaccination (71.9%) at their practice, though only 39.7% of ob/gyns offered the COVID vaccine.


COVID 19 deaths and injuries

Yes Vote Campaigners Spitty & Hitty are Topping Australian Trends on Twitter

Yes Vote Campaigners Spitty & Hitty are Topping Australian Trends on Twitter

By AussieCossack

Yes, Vote campaigners Spitty & Hitty are topping Australian trends on Twitter.

Apparently, the phone lines at Cooma Police Station are going off with thousands of concerned locals ringing them on ☎️ 0264520099 to ask why no charges have been laid.

Original source:

COVID 19 deaths and injuries

Excess Deaths From Cardiovascular Diseases Up 44% Last Year Among UK Citizens Aged 15-44: Report

Excess Deaths From Cardiovascular Diseases Up 44% Last Year Among UK Citizens Aged 15-44: Report


A new and disturbing analysis reveals that excess deaths from cardiovascular diseases have jumped in the UK over the past several years.

Using official government data for deaths in England and Wales between 2010 and 2022, former BlackRock portfolio manager Ed Dowd and his partners at Phinance Technologies found that excess death rates from cardiovascular diseases were up 13% in 2020, 30% in 2021, and 44% in 2022, which “point to a worrying picture of an even greater acceleration in coming years of deaths & disabilities.”

What’s more, they found that “deaths per year from cardiovascular diseases had been trending lower from 2010 to
2019, with a significant downward slope,” until 2020, when the trend reversed. They also found that in 2022, men began outpacing women in cardiovascular diseases.

The analysis also found that disabilities are skyrocketing.

Dowd and co. conclude that: “When looking at excess deaths for cardiovascular diseases, the Z-score in 2020 was around 3, indicating that prior to the start of the vaccinations there was already a signal pointing to an increase in cardiovascular deaths. That trend however accelerated substantially in 2021 and 2022 where we observe Z-scores of around 7.5 and 10.5, respectively. These are extreme events that we believe need a thorough investigation.”

Original source:

COVID 19 deaths and injuries

Yale University Researchers Have Developed an Airborne Method for Delivering mRNA Right to Your Lungs

Yale University Researchers Have Developed an Airborne Method for Delivering mRNA Right to Your Lungs

  • Yale University researchers have developed an airborne method for delivering mRNA right to your lungs
  • In a study on mice, the scientists created polymer nanoparticles to encapsulate mRNA, making it inhalable
  • Researchers say this “new method of delivery could ‘radically change the way people are vaccinated,’” making it easier to vaccinate people in remote areas or those who are afraid of needles
  • An airborne mRNA product could be used to rapidly vaccinate the masses, without their knowledge or consent
  • Academic endorsement exists for the use of compulsory, covert bioenhancements, including drugs and vaccines, on the public; the U.S. government also has a history of covert bioweapon experiments


Yale University researchers have developed a new airborne method for delivering mRNA right to your lungs. The team has also used the method to vaccinate mice intranasally, opening the door for human testing in the near future.

While scientists are hailing the creation as an easy way to vaccinate the masses, critics wonder if the development of an airborne vaccine could be used for nefarious purposes, including covert bioenhancements,2 which have already been recommended in academic literature.

Yale Team Develops Airborne mRNA, Delivers It to Lungs

In a study on mice, Yale scientists created polymer nanoparticles to encapsulate mRNA, making it inhalable so it can reach the lungs. Courtney Malo, editor with Science Translational Medicine, which published the study, explained:

“The ability to efficiently deliver mRNA to the lung would have applications for vaccine development, gene therapy, and more. Here, Suberi et al. showed that such mRNA delivery can be accomplished by encapsulating mRNAs of interest within optimized poly(amine-co-ester) polyplexes [nanoparticles].

Polyplex-delivered mRNAs were efficiently translated into protein in the lungs of mice with limited evidence of toxicity. This platform was successfully applied as an intranasal SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, eliciting robust immune responses that conferred protection against subsequent viral challenge. These results highlight the potential of this delivery system for vaccine applications and beyond.”

The team, led by cellular and molecular physiologist Mark Saltzman, explained that the inhalable mRNA vaccine successfully protected against SARS-CoV-2, which “opens the door to delivering other messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics for gene replacement therapy and other treatments in the lungs.”

For the study, mice received two intranasal doses of nanoparticles carrying mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, which proved to be effective in the animals. In the past, lung-targeted mRNA therapies had trouble making it into the cells necessary to express the encoded protein, known as poor transfection efficiency.

“The Saltzman group got around this hurdle in part by using a nanoparticle made from poly(amine-co-ester) polyplexes, or PACE, a biocompatible and highly customizable polymer,” a Yale University news release explained. In a previous study, Saltzman had tried a “prime and spike” system to deliver COVID-19 shots, which involved injecting mRNA shots into a muscle, then spraying spike proteins into the nose.

It turned out the injection portion may be unnecessary, and Saltzman has high hopes for the airborne delivery method, beyond vaccines:

“In the new report, there is no intramuscular injection. We just gave two doses, a prime and a boost, intranasally, and we got a highly protective immune response. But we also showed that, generally, you can deliver different kinds of mRNA. So it’s not just good for a vaccine, but potentially also good for gene replacement therapy in diseases like cystic fibrosis and gene editing.

We used a vaccine example to show that it works, but it opens the door to doing all these other kinds of interventions.”

Air Vax Could ‘Radically Change’ How People Are Vaccinated

Saltzman says this “new method of delivery could ‘radically change the way people are vaccinated,’” making it easier to vaccinate people in remote areas or those who are afraid of needles.10 But that’s not all. An airborne vaccine makes it possible to rapidly disseminate it across a population.

By releasing the vaccine in the air, there’s no need to inject each person individually — which is not only time-consuming but difficult if an individual objects to the shot. This isn’t the case with an airborne vaccine, which can be released into the air without consent or even the public’s knowledge.

A similar strategy is being used with mRNA in shrimp, which are too small and numerous to be injected individually. Instead, an oral “nanovaccine” was created to stop the spread of a virus. Shai Ufaz, chief executive officer of ViAqua, which developed the technology, stated:

“Oral delivery is the holy grail of aquaculture health development due to both the impossibility of vaccinating individual shrimp and its ability to substantially bring down the operational costs of disease management while improving outcomes …”

While the Yale scientists are targeting an intranasal mRNA product, the outcome is the same — get as many exposed as possible with the least amount of cost and effort. According to the Yale study:

“An inhalable platform for messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics would enable minimally invasive and lung-targeted delivery for a host of pulmonary diseases. Development of lung-targeted mRNA therapeutics has been limited by poor transfection efficiency and risk of vehicle-induced pathology.

Here, we report an inhalable polymer-based vehicle for delivery of therapeutic mRNAs to the lung. We optimized biodegradable poly(amine-co-ester) (PACE) polyplexes [nanoparticles] for mRNA delivery using end-group modifications and polyethylene glycol. These polyplexes achieved high transfection of mRNA throughout the lung, particularly in epithelial and antigen-presenting cells.

We applied this technology to develop a mucosal vaccine for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and found that intranasal vaccination with spike protein–encoding mRNA polyplexes induced potent cellular and humoral adaptive immunity and protected susceptible mice from lethal viral challenge. Together, these results demonstrate the translational potential of PACE polyplexes for therapeutic delivery of mRNA to the lungs.”

US Government Has History of Bioweapons Release

When you put the pieces of the puzzle together, a disturbing picture emerges. As reported by The Epoch Times, we have a history of the U.S. government taking extreme measures to mandate and promote COVID-19 shots to the public. Now, researchers have developed an airborne mRNA vaccine, offering a vehicle by which to rapidly vaccinate the masses without their knowledge or consent.

Is there proof that the government or another entity has plans to covertly release an air vax on the population? No. But there is a history of it carrying out secret bioweapon simulations on Americans. In 1950, the U.S. Navy sprayed Serratia marcescens bacteria into the air near San Francisco over a period of six days.

Dubbed “Operation Sea Spray,” the project was intended to determine how susceptible the city was to a bioweapon attack. Serratia marcescens turns whatever it touches bright red, making it easy to track. It spread throughout the city, as residents inhaled the microbes from the air. While the U.S. military initially thought Serratia marcescens wouldn’t harm humans, an outbreak occurred, with some developing urinary tract infections as a result.

At least one person died “and some have suggested that the release forever changed the area’s microbial ecology,” Smithsonian Magazine reported. This wasn’t an isolated incident, as the U.S. government carried out many other experiments across the U.S. over the next 20 years. So, while it’s disturbing to think of an air vax experiment being conducted on an unsuspecting public, it’s not unprecedented.

Bioethics Study Promotes Covert, Compulsory Bioenhancement

Adding to the story is academic endorsement of the use of compulsory, covert bioenhancements. Writing in the journal Bioethics, Parker Crutchfield with Western Michigan University, Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, discusses moral bioenhancements, which refers to the use of biomedical means to trigger moral improvements.

Drug treatments, including vaccines, and genetic engineering are potential examples of bioenhancements. Further, according to Crutchfield:

“It is necessary to morally bioenhance the population in order to prevent ultimate harm. Moral bioenhancement is the potential practice of influencing a person’s moral behavior by way of biological intervention upon their moral attitudes, motivations, or dispositions.

The technology that may permit moral bioenhancement is on the scale between nonexistent and nascent, but common examples of potential interventions include infusing water supplies with pharmaceuticals that enhance empathy or altruism or otherwise intervening on a person’s emotions or motivations, in an attempt to influence the person’s moral behavior.”

Some argue that moral bioenhancements should be compulsory for the greater good. Crutchfield believes this doesn’t go far enough. He also wants them to be covert:

“I take this argument one step further, arguing that if moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory, then its administration ought to be covert rather than overt. This is to say that it is morally preferable for compulsory moral bioenhancement to be administered without the recipients knowing that they are receiving the enhancement.”

He even goes so far as to suggest “a covert compulsory program promotes values such as liberty, utility, equality and autonomy better than an overt program does.” So here we have evidence of academic support for covertly releasing drugs and other bioenhancements onto the public. This, combined with the creation of an airborne mRNA vaccine and the government’s history of experimenting on the public, paints an unsettling picture of the future.

Problems With mRNA COVID Shots Persist

Aside from the concerns of airborne delivery, mRNA COVID-19 shots are associated with significant risks — no matter how you’re exposed. People ages 65 and older who received Pfizer’s updated (bivalent) COVID-19 booster shot may be at increased risk of stroke, according to an announcement made by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration.

Further, a large study from Israel revealed that Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis, leading to the condition at a rate of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 persons.24 Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.

At least 16,183 people also say they’ve developed tinnitus after receiving a COVID-19 shot. The reports were filed with the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database. But considering only between 1%27 and 10% of adverse reactions are ever reported to VAERS, the actual number is likely much higher.

It’s because of risks like these that informed consent is essential for any medical procedure, including vaccinations. The development of airborne mRNA jabs, however, makes the possibility of informed consent being taken away all the more real.

Original source:

COVID 19 deaths and injuries

Western Australia Health Authority Data Shows We are Killing 5 People For Every Person We Might Save if the Vaccine Worked (Which It Doesn’t)

Western Australia Health Authority Data Shows We are Killing 5 People For Every Person We Might Save if the Vaccine Worked (Which It Doesn’t)


How could anyone not notice this? In 2021, there were 0 deaths reported for all other vaccines combined but 87 reported for the COVID vaccine. That’s not “bad luck.” That’s a disaster.

Executive summary

While watching this John Campbell video, I noticed the stats for Death at 11:28 into the video.


Whoa baby. My eyes jumped to the death line immediately (towards the bottom of the screen).

In 2021: zero deaths from all other vaccines combined, but 87 deaths reported for the COVID vaccine!?!?!

Since nobody has looked into this, I guess I will because it sounds incriminating to me.

My calculations show that the West Australia stats imply a vaccine kill rate of at least 223 deaths per million doses which is a VERY deadly vaccine that should never have been put on the market. It means we are killing at least 5 people for every 1 person we MIGHT save from a COVID death. This is nonsensical.

But it turns out the vaccine isn’t saving anyone from dying from COVID. We know that from the US Nursing home data.

So it’s even more nonsensical.

The vaccine should be stopped as a useless intervention that is costing lives.


Here’s the source material from the Australian government health authority so you can verify this yourself (see Western Australian Vaccine Safety Surveillance – Annual Report 2021, page 34).

John earlier in the video pointed out that there were 5.756M total vaccine doses given in 2021, of which 3.949M were COVID vaccines.

So the odds you got a COVID shot were 2.2:1.

Since there were no deaths reported for any other vaccines, let’s conservatively assume that we expected 1 death to happen, but got 87.

That’s not a statistical anomaly. That cannot happen by chance (less than 2e-135).

So something caused those deaths.

The $1M question is:

If it wasn’t the vaccine that killed these people, what killed them, why are the deaths ONLY happening to people who got the COVID vaccine, and why is nobody talking about the real killer?

Could it be that, god forbid, the vaccine isn’t as safe as they told us!?!?!?

Estimating the minimum deaths per COVID vaccine dose

Now, let’s estimate the kill rate of the vaccine which we have estimated at 1 per 1,000 doses in past articles.

There were 87 reported deaths * <under reporting factor (URF)> = estimated number of actual deaths.

To get the under reporting factor for this region, we can use the number of anaphylaxis cases reported to calculate a lower bound on the URF (because anaphylaxis cases are far more likely to be reported because they happen instantly after injection and are often required to be reported).

Per Table 6, there were 2.6 confirmed anaphylaxis cases per 100,000 doses for the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine.

Per the Blumenthal paper published in JAMA, the rate of anaphylaxis for the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine is 0.027% which is 27 per 100,000.

So we have a minimum URF of 10.

I think this is very conservative because John Campbell noted in his presentation that the rates of adverse events per dose were on average, about double the rate of adverse events in the US. So this would imply a minimum URF of 20 since the minimum URF for VAERS in the US is estimated at around 45.

So, a conservative estimate of the kill rate of the vaccine is 870 deaths per 3.9M doses.

That’s 223 deaths per 1 M doses.

The risk benefit is NEGATIVE. The intervention is nonsensical.

The Pfizer study had 2 COVID deaths in the control arm of nearly 22,000 patients.

So let’s say the vaccine was 100% effective in reducing COVID deaths. It would have prevented 2 deaths per 22,000 patients over the 6 month efficacy period of the vaccine (since the authorities admit the vaccine protection wanes and you have to get it every 6 months).

So let’s look at 1M people vaccinated. They are given two doses.

At least 446 people will die from the vaccine.

But if the vaccine works really well and the COVID variant has an IFR comparable to the original strain (Omicron IFR is nearly 10X lower than the original strain). then we will save 91 lives.

So we are killing 446 people to save at most 91 lives. What kind of government thinks that is sensible?

So based on the original variant, we are killing 5 people for every person we might save. And Omicron is nearly 10X less deadly than the original strain, making the risk/reward even more lopsided (closer to killing 50 people to save 1 person).

But wait… it gets worse. How many people is the vaccine really saving from a COVID death? The answer is ZERO.


The vaccines didn’t impact the infection fatality rate at all. Omicron had a major impact. The vaccines: no reduction at all; they actually made things worse for a while.

This is a graph of COVID infections (blue bars, left axis) and COVID deaths (red line, right axis) for residents of US nursing homes.

See how consistent things are before Omicron? The red line basically traces out the infection peaks, i.e., the deaths are proportional to infections.

Look what happened in December 2020 when the vaccine rolled out for the nursing homes. The red line actually got HIGHER above the blue bars! Things got worse! Then they settled back to normal. But look what happened after Omicron rolled out in December 2021: the red lines are now a fraction on the blue bars. The risk of death decreased, not from the vaccine, but because the variant was less deadly!!!

The vaccine didn’t reduce the risk of death at all. It’s all about the variant.

The vaccine didn’t reduce infections either since as you can see, even after almost everyone was vaccinated in 2021, there were still large infection spikes in 2022 like nothing happened.

So we killed people for nothing.


A safe vaccine should kill fewer than 1 person per M doses.

So the COVID vaccine isn’t safe at all… It is orders of magnitude unsafe.

Plus the risk/reward for the vaccine is non-existent: the vaccine clearly kills at least 5 times as many people as it might save.

And the expected number of people it might save is actually measurable now with the US nursing home data. It’s ZERO.

Extrapolating these numbers to the 650M vaccinated in the US would yield 145,000 dead Americans. Note that in America we will shut down a baby formula factor for just two deaths. So what do we do if there are 145,000 American deaths??

The answer: we mandate you take it! That’s how science works in America and most doctors and every medical association supports the insanity without question. And no health authority will ever do the risk/benefit calculation I just did above.

Bottom line: Any government deploying these vaccines is running from this data that is in plain sight. That’s why the governments, such as the US government, engage in censorship; because they don’t want anyone to know the truth.

Remember: Any government that engages in censorship to win an argument is always on the wrong side of the issue. There are no exceptions in history to this rule.

Original source:

COVID 19 deaths and injuries

Dr. Peter McCullough Breaks Down How the COVID Vaccines Injure and Kill

Dr. Peter McCullough Breaks Down How the COVID Vaccines Injure and Kill

By LauraAboli

Dr. Peter McCullough Breaks Down How the COVID Vaccines Injure and Kill

Cardiovascular Disease
• “We’ve seen cardiac arrest now two years after these shots.”
• Myocarditis (heart inflammation)
• Acceleration of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease
• Heart attacks
• Posterior orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS)
• Aortic dissection
• Atrial fibrillation
• Cardiac arrest in the absence of myocarditis

Neurologic Disease
• Stroke (both ischemic and hemorrhagic)
• Guillain–Barré syndrome (can cause ascending paralysis leading to death)
• Small fiber neuropathy (numbness and tingling)

Blood Clots
• “The spike protein is the most thrombogenic protein we’ve ever seen in human medicine.”
• Unusually large and resistant blood clots
• Blood clots that are not dissolving with conventional treatments

Immunologic Abnormalities
• Vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia
• Multisystem inflammatory disorder

Click Here To Play the Video

Original source:

COVID 19 deaths and injuries

Dr. Phillip Buckhault’s Testimony on DNA Contamination in Pfizer’s mRNA Vaccine

Dr. Phillip Buckhault’s Testimony on DNA Contamination in Pfizer’s mRNA Vaccine

Hard evidence of DNA Contaminants in Pfizer and Moderna’s “vaccines” despite being seen as “pro-mRNA” (as evident in the clip above, Dr. Buckhaults is a fan of mRNA technology).

Click Here To Play the Video

BREAKING: Dr. Phillip Buckhault’s Testimony on DNA Contamination in Pfizer’s mRNA Vaccine

Hard evidence of DNA Contaminants in Pfizer and Moderna’s “vaccines”

If you aren’t familiar with the background of this story, it began earlier this year when Kevin McKernan shared his findings on DNA Plasmid Contaminants through his substack. These findings caused concern because governments and regulators around the world have consistently reassured the public that the Pfizer’s experimental COVID Vaccine does not modify an individual’s DNA. This is because, according to the regulator’s explanation, the vaccines contain only mRNA instead of DNA. However, in early 2023, Kevin discovered traces of DNA Plasmids Contaminants in the Pfizer and Moderna vials, which raised alarm.

His findings were profound, providing definite proof of a pharmaceutical product being out of specs (OOS), as I wrote here in March.

Many simply brushed off Kevin’s findings as fear-mongering. One of the biggest problems with the current medical fiasco we are experiencing today is that conversations and discourse cannot progress due to people attacking each other and resorting to name-calling instead of genuinely seeking the truth. However, the truth eventually comes out over time, although it took longer than expected.

Kevin’s findings were eventually reproduced across several independent labs, one of which is run by Dr. Phillip Buckhaults, a molecular biologist and cancer genomics expert from the University of South Carolina. Dr. Buckhaults was alarmed at the findings of DNA contaminants, and what’s admirable about him is his courage to address what he found, despite being seen as “pro-mRNA” (as evident in the clip above, Dr. Buckhaults is a fan of mRNA technology).

The problem with the “vaxxers and antivaxxers” war is that it has become so toxic that nobody wants to investigate anything for fear of being attacked or having their careers and livelihoods derailed for speaking out against the “official narrative.”

On September 14, 2023, Dr. Phillip Buckhaults testified before the South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs Ad-Hoc Committee, shedding light on the issue. Expressing surprise at the presence of DNA Contaminants in the vaccines, Dr. Buckhaults highlighted the urgent need for thorough investigations. Furthermore, he acknowledged the challenges in determining the cause of suspicious deaths following vaccination, making it difficult to attribute them to COVID or the vaccines themselves.

Dr. Buckhaults proposed that further investigation and genetic analysis of vaccinated individuals, specifically examining stem cells, should occur to identify any potential genetic modifications. Integrating plasmid DNA into the genomes of stem cells can leave lasting effects such as cancer and autoimmune diseases, raising concerns about the long-term impact of the vaccine.

With regard to booster shots, Dr. Buckhaults expressed his hesitation to receive them until he can ensure they do not contain DNA plasmids. This cautious approach underscores the need for careful evaluation and verification of the CDC-recommended booster shots.

Dr. Buckhaults’ testimony garnered the interest of renowned doctors like Dr. Wafik S. El-Deiry, who raised his personal concerns regarding the experimental vaccines.

Dr. Buckhaults’ testimony garnered the interest of renowned doctors like Dr. Wafik S. El-Deiry, who raised his personal concerns regarding the experimental vaccines.



COVID 19 deaths and injuries

Scientists Claim to Have Developed a ‘Rapid Acting’ Pill that Vaccinates Against COVID-19

Scientists Claim to Have Developed a ‘Rapid Acting’ Pill that Vaccinates Against COVID-19

So you just caused a mortality rate not seen since WW2 and the new pill is safe?

“Scientists claim to have developed a ‘rapid acting’ pill that vaccinates against COVID-19 without the ‘discernible side effects’ of existing vaccines.
Here’s what you need to know.”

Covid vaccine pill breakthrough promises ‘no side effects’

Scientists claim to have developed a ‘rapid acting’ pill that vaccinates against COVID-19 without the ‘discernible side effects’ of existing vaccines. Here’s what you need to know.

COVID shots may soon be replaced by a pill after scientists claim to have developed an oral vaccine that prevents infection of the virus without the side effects of current treatments.



COVID 19 deaths and injuries

COVID Booster Warning From Florida Surgeon General, Who Advises People Not to Get New Vaccine

COVID Booster Warning From Florida Surgeon General, Who Advises People Not to Get New Vaccine

By Melissa Rudy

While speaking at a Thursday news conference for Gov. Ron DeSantis in Jacksonville, Florida, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, that state’s surgeon general, advised people to steer clear of the updated booster vaccine for COVID-19.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not yet approved the new vaccine — which is reportedly designed to protect against the BA.2.86 omicron subvariant.

“There’s a new vaccine that’s coming around the corner, a new mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and there’s essentially no evidence for it,” Ladapo said during the news conference, according to local news outlets.

“There’s been no clinical trial done in human beings showing that it benefits people” he said.

“There’s been no clinical trial showing that it is a safe product for people — and not only that, but then there are a lot of red flags.”

Ladapo - COVID vaccine

While speaking at a Thursday news conference for Gov. Ron DeSantis in Jacksonville, Florida, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, surgeon general of Florida, advised people to steer clear of the updated booster vaccine for COVID-19.

In terms of specific concerns, Ladapo warned that the updated vaccines “actually cause cardiac injury in many people.”

The state surgeon general urged Floridians to make their own decisions based on their particular “resonance of truth,” rather than on “very educated people telling you what you should think.”

“When they try to convince you to be comfortable and agree with things that don’t feel comfortable, [that] don’t feel like things you should agree with, that is a sign, right? That’s a gift,” he said.

Instead of relying on the new vaccines, Ladapo urged people to adopt healthy nutrition habits.

DeSantis appointed Ladapo, a doctor who trained at Harvard and was previously a UCLA medical researcher, as surgeon general in 2021.

COVID booster

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not yet approved the new vaccine, which is reportedly designed to protect against the BA.2.86 omnicron subvariant.

Dr. Marc Siegel, a professor of medicine at NYU Langone Medical Center and a Fox News medical contributor, pointed out that “COVID vaccines, in the vast majority of cases, are safe.”

He told Fox News Digital, “Physicians with knowledge of vaccines should be involved in deciding the risk/benefit for their patients and offering advice, but it is ultimately up to the individual.”

“For younger, healthier patients with intact immune systems and a foundation of immune memory against SARS-CoV-2 from prior vaccines and infection, I may choose to not recommend an additional booster at this time, but vilifying it is a dangerous move that undermines patient choice and the vaccine as one of my most important tools,” he went on.

High-risk groups — including the elderly, along with those who have obesity, diabetes, chronic heart disease, lung disease and cancer — should be prioritized in receiving vaccines, the doctor said.

“The new version that targets the XBB 1.5 subvariant, which is still about 20% of cases, has also been shown to be effective against the emerging EG.5 and BA.2.86 subvariants,” Siegel said.

Although this is not an entirely new vaccine, it is a slight variation of the previous version, the doctor noted.

Woman getting vaccinated

“The new version that targets the XBB 1.5 subvariant, which is still about 20% of cases, has also been shown to be effective against the emerging EG.5 and BA.2.86 subvariants,” Siegel said.

“There is no reason for full clinical trials prior to use,” he said. “We will quickly amass new data. It is no longer an experimental vaccine.”

There is a much higher risk of myocarditis from COVID than from the vaccine, according to the doctor, who added that the vaccine also decreases the risk of developing long COVID.

“Additional fearmongering about an effective and safe vaccine is not helpful,” he added.

“It is an individual choice,” said Dr. Siegel.

“COVID is still a nasty virus that can affect multiple organ systems, including the brain,” Siegel said. “The vaccine is a useful tool that should not be maligned, attacked or mischaracterized.”

The doctor added that he will be recommending the booster for many people — but not for all.

“I won’t offer it to those who just had COVID recently,” he said.

Dr. Brett Osborn, a board-certified neurosurgeon and longevity expert in West Palm Beach, Florida, said he agrees with Dr. Ladapo’s recommendation “as it applies to the masses.”

Osborn told Fox News Digital, “As time goes by, RNA viruses tend to lessen in pathogenicity, meaning that they cause lesser symptoms as the virus mutates further away from its original strain (of SARS-COV-2) that was responsible for the pandemic of 2020.”

As time goes on, the severity and mortality rate of COVID will continue to decline and soon will be comparable to influenza, the doctor predicted — “therefore, the booster is simply not necessary.”

In his Florida clinic, Osborn said he does not recommend the influenza vaccine to patients, as “the infection itself nearly always assumes a benign course in low-risk individuals, and similarly, I do not believe that our immune systems should be deprived of challenges.”

Older woman vaccine

The “high-risk” population of Americans — namely the elderly, the morbidly obese and/or those with type II diabetes — may want to consider getting boosted, Dr. Osborn of Florida said.

“For that population, the risks of a COVID-19 infection, or even one of its less aggressive variants, may be greater than the risk of a booster, even if it has undergone limited testing,” he said.

A young girl receives the coronavirus vaccine

The CDC, for its part, recommends that everyone six months of age and older in the United States receive a COVID-19 vaccination.

Osborn also pointed out that vaccines for influenza and other viruses undergo testing for 10-15 years before they are publicly deployed.

“Getting boosted is a personal decision — one that must be made in conjunction with your physician, who can best determine your risk-benefit ratio,” he said.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that everyone six months and older in the United States receive a COVID-19 vaccination.

The CDC website also states that “most people ages six years and older who are not moderately or severely immunocompromised and have received 1 dose of a bivalent mRNA vaccine do not need any further vaccine doses at this time.”

It added, “People ages 65 years and older who received 1 dose of a bivalent vaccine have the option to receive 1 additional dose at least 4 months after the first bivalent dose.”

Original source:

COVID 19 deaths and injuries

CDC Nursing Home Data: The Vaccine Increased the Risk of the Elderly Dying From COVID

CDC Nursing Home Data: The Vaccine Increased the Risk of the Elderly Dying From COVID


This “gold standard” data proves the “misinformation spreaders” were right. The COVID vaccine did the opposite of what the CDC promised you: it actually made things worse, not better.

Executive summary

I’m on vacation in September with my wife so my Internet access has been limited.

I wanted to call your attention to the work I have been doing since August 24, 2023 after I realized that the US Nursing Home data has everything we need to figure out whether the vaccines reduced the risk of death for the elderly or increased it.

It increased it. They lied.

Check out the tweet and the subtweet below.

Here’s the graph that tells the story.

The red arrow is when the vaccines started. The orange dead:alive odds post infection should have dropped like a rock. It went the wrong way. Similarly, it should have dropped like a rock after the booster in August 2021. It went the wrong way. THE VACCINE MADE THE ELDERLY MORE LIKELY TO DIE FROM COVID.

Cases are shown for reference to prove the dead:alive odds ratio (OR) is stable whether cases are rising or falling, but the meat is in the odds-ratio line. The OR is supposed to drop below the trendline after the vaccine rolls out. It went the wrong way when the primary series was rolled out and did the same thing when the boosters rolled out in August 2021.

In short, there is now no doubt: COVID vaccine made things worse for the elderly.

And the vaccine makes things worse for kids too as we now know.

And everyone in between.

I thought you’d want to know.

If the vaccine worked, the odds of dying would drop below the trendline. It doesn’t. The primary series and boosters both caused the odds of dying to increase from the trendline. See my github repo for the code that produced this data.

This tweet goes into more detail:

Debunking the attempts to debunk this analysis will have to come later as I’m time constrained, but I’ve listened to all of the objections from Professor Jeffrey Morris and I found all of them uncompelling and not a single one had any evidentiary support where he actually showed me using data that he was right. They were all hand-waving arguments.

I showed my analysis and my numbers. Publicly. It’s all there in my Github repo.

He needs to do the same. He still hasn’t.

And he cannot possibly explain what happened at Apple Valley Village which PERFECTLY fits my hypothesis and doesn’t fit his at all (see my tweet for details). The IFR was zero prior to the vaccines. Less than 30 days post-shot, the IFR jumped to nearly 30%!

He has a serious problem explaining how that nursing home fits his hypothesis. That’s why he avoids talking about it. He can’t say it’s an anecdote. It happened. How can he explain it?


The COVID vaccines did the opposite of what was promised.

I hope others will build on the analysis I did here.

Original source:

"All In" Starter Package

The Fast Start

Level 2️⃣

Level 1️⃣

Level 4️⃣ (5000 USD)

Level 3️⃣ (1500 USD)