Former BMJ editor: Health research should be considered fraudulent until proven otherwise

Image: Former BMJ editor: Health research should be considered fraudulent until proven otherwise

(Natural News) A former editor for the British Medical Journal (BMJ) posited that health research should be considered fraudulent until proven otherwise.

“Stephen Lock, my predecessor as editor, became worried about research fraud in the 1980s – but people thought his concerns eccentric,” wrote Richard Smith in a July 2021 piece for the BMJ. “Is it time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise?”

According to Smith, health research is based on trust. Health professionals and journal editors reading the results of a clinical trial assume that the trial happened and that the results were honestly reported.

Monash Health professor of obstetrics and gynecology Ben Mol, however, remarked that these medical practitioners could be wrong 20 percent of the time. While this did not surprise Smith, it made the erstwhile journal editor rethink medical research.

A recent webinar hosted by epidemiology professor Ian Roberts of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) bolstered Smith’s thoughts. Roberts’ doubts toward honest reporting of clinical trials stemmed from a colleague, who asked if he was aware that the systematic review he presented was based on trials that never happened.

This led Roberts to investigate the trials, which he found never happened. In another set of trials Roberts investigated, he found that many of the trials included in the review could not be trusted. The LSHTM professor later wrote about the problem of the “many untrustworthy and zombie trials” in the BMJ in a bid to make the Cochrane Collaboration and anybody conducting systematic reviews to take the problem of fraud very seriously. (Related: Whistleblower: Pfizer FORGED signatures of trial participants, falsified and fabricated trial data.)


“We have long known that peer review is ineffective at detecting fraud, especially if the reviewers start, as most have, by assuming that the research is honestly reported,” Smith wrote.

He recalled one such case in the 1990s, when he was part of a panel investigating one of Britain’s “most outrageous cases of fraud.” The statistical reviewer of the study told the investigation panel that he found multiple problems with the study and only hoped that it was better done than reported.

“We asked if had ever considered that the study might be fraudulent, and he told us that he hadn’t,” Smith recalled.

Journals and their publishers incentivizing unverified data

Smith explained that journals and publishers’ business models depend on publishing – preferably several studies as cheaply as possible. This leaves little incentive to check for fraud, and opens both journals and publishers to reputational damage and even possible legal risks.

Funders like universities and other research institutions have incentives to bankroll and publish studies and disincentives to make a fuss about fraudulent research. Even regulators lack the legal standing and the resources to respond to what is clearly extensive fraud. With research being increasingly international with participants from different institutions in many countries, there is no single body that will take on the task of investigating fraud claims.

The former BMJ editor found an ally in Barbara K. Redman. She argued in her book “Research Misconduct Policy in Biomedicine: Beyond the Bad-Apple Approach” that research misconduct is a systems problem. The system provides incentives to publish fraudulent research and does not have adequate regulatory processes.

Researchers progress by publishing research and peer review is not designed to detect fraud because the system is built on trust. This, in turn, makes it easy to publish fraudulent data.

Research authorities, however, insisted that fraud was rare in research. They added that when it does happen, it would not matter because science was self-correcting and that no patient had suffered because of scientific fraud.

Smith wrote: “All those reasons for not taking research fraud seriously have proved to be false and, 40 years on from Lock’s concerns, we are realizing that the problem is huge, the system encourages fraud, and we have no adequate way to respond.

“It may be time to move from assuming that research has been honestly conducted and reported to assuming it to be untrustworthy until there is some evidence to the contrary.”

Watch the video below to know more about one of the biggest research frauds during the pandemic involving Pfizer.

This video is from the High Hopes channel on

More related stories:

Former Pfizer VP: ‘Clear evidence of fraud’ in Pfizer study claiming 95% efficacy.

Pfizer, FDA have known for decades that antibody-dependent enhancement occurs in the vaccinated; tried to cover it up.

Moderna and Pfizer vaccine trials RIGGED by vaccinating the control group… blatant science FRAUD exposed.

Sources include:

Russia to halt oil exports to nations that impose price cap on Russian crude

Image: Russia to halt oil exports to nations that impose price cap on Russian crude

(Natural News) Russia will ban exports of oil and other petroleum products to countries that would impose a cap on the price of Russian crude. Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak made the announcement on September 1, a day before finance ministers from the Group of Seven (G-7) most industrialized countries met to discuss the price cap.

“We will simply not supply oil and petroleum products to companies or states that impose restrictions, as we will not work non-competitively,” Novak said.

He warned that this completely destroys the market and argued that interference in market mechanisms in commodities like oil would have a destabilizing impact on energy security worldwide.

G7, an inter-governmental political forum consisting of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States, will be implementing the price cap for global purchases of Russian oil because they believe this will slash Moscow’s overall revenues. However, this has so far been treated with skepticism in the oil market.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, who led efforts to build a coalition, said: “The price cap will advance two key objectives. The first is reducing revenues that Putin needs to continue waging his war of aggression, and the second is maintaining a reliable supply of oil to the global market and putting downward pressure on the price of energy for people in the U.S., in the U.K. and around the world.”

While western powers placed sanctions on many Russian energy exports, Moscow is still reaping billions of dollars by channeling oil exports to Asian markets.


Earlier this year, the European Union (EU) imposed a partial ban on Russian oil purchases, which is expected to stop 90 percent of Russia’s exports to the 27-member bloc. Meanwhile, China has been reselling excess imports of Russian gas to Europe. While this action helped ease Europe’s energy difficulties, it made the EU dependent on Beijing for its energy needs.

Britons will endure cold winter days due to price cap on energy bills

The United Kingdom will implement a price cap on energy bills from £1,971 ($2,330) at present to £3,549 ($4,189) beginning October.

Tyler Durden of ZeroHedge predicted “that cap is expected to rise to £5,439 ($6,427) by January and £7,272 ($8,594) by spring.” These are all due to skyrocketing wholesale NatGas and electricity prices caused by declining Russian energy supplies to Europe, made worse by western sanctions that have backfired. (Related: FREEZE ‘TIL YOU’RE BROKE: Millions of Brits face energy poverty this winter due to UK government’s price cap increase.)

Analysts are worried that this change initiated by the U.K.’s energy regulator Ofgem will send millions of British households into energy poverty.

“An increase of this much cannot be budgeted for by households with no wiggle room. Come October, low-income households will simply not turn on their heating,” stated Peter Smith, National Energy Action charity director of policy and advocacy.

The increase in cap rate could also push inflation higher as U.K. economists at Citi warned consumer price index (CPI) inflation could reach 18.6 percent in January amid soaring energy prices.

“The last time CPI printed above 18 percent was during the stagflationary years of the mid-1970s (more precisely, 1976) after an oil supply shock led to soaring energy prices worldwide,” Durden said.

Philip Keetley, a resident in the east England town of Grimsby, told Reuters that he didn’t turn on his cooling fan at home as Britain sweltered under a record heatwave this summer because he could no longer afford it.

He lost his job as a council adviser in April and lives on 600 pounds ($706.44) a month from a social security scheme. Half of the money goes on rent and what remains is barely covering the essentials.

“The cost of living has increased and yet you’re still expected to live on the money provided for when there wasn’t a crisis. I either can have my heating on or eat,” Keetley said.

Visit for more news related to fuel supply.

Watch the below video that talks about Gazprom’s announcement that it will not reopen the Nord Stream 1 pipeline.

This video is from the TruNews channel on

More related stories:

GRID INSANITY: British government will start paying citizens huge sums to NOT use electrical appliances.

Oil price could TRIPLE to $380 / barrel, warns JPMorgan, from Putin simply reducing oil exports from Russia.

EU’s embargo on Russian oil will cause oil prices to skyrocket – but Russia will be largely unharmed.

OIL LAUNDERING: India imports Russian oil at a discounted price, refines it and sells to the West for massive profits.

Sources include:

The American Kleptocracy: A Government of Liars, Thieves & Lawbreakers

By: John & Nisha Whitehead

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable.”—H. L. Mencken

The American kleptocracy (a government ruled by thieves) continues to suck the American people down a rabbit hole into a parallel universe in which the Constitution is meaningless, the government is all-powerful, and the citizenry is powerless to defend itself against government agents who steal, spy, lie, plunder, kill, abuse and generally inflict mayhem and sow madness on everyone and everything in their sphere.

Think about it.

Almost every tyranny being perpetrated by the U.S. government against the citizenry—purportedly to keep us safe and the nation secure—has come about as a result of some threat manufactured in one way or another by our own government.

Cyberwarfare. Terrorism. Bio-chemical attacks. The nuclear arms race. Surveillance. The drug wars. Domestic extremism. The COVID-19 pandemic.

In almost every instance, the U.S. government (often spearheaded by the FBI) has in its typical Machiavellian fashion sown the seeds of terror domestically and internationally in order to expand its own totalitarian powers.

Who is the biggest black market buyer and stockpiler of cyberweapons (weaponized malware that can be used to hack into computer systems, spy on citizens, and destabilize vast computer networks)? The U.S. government.

Who is the largest weapons manufacturer and exporter in the world, such that they are literally arming the world? The U.S. government.

Which country has a history of secretly testing out dangerous weapons and technologies on its own citizens? The U.S. government.

Which country has conducted secret experiments on an unsuspecting populace—citizens and noncitizens alike—making healthy people sick by spraying them with chemicals, injecting them with infectious diseases and exposing them to airborne toxins? The U.S. government.

What country has a pattern and practice of entrapment that involves targeting vulnerable individuals, feeding them with the propaganda, know-how and weapons intended to turn them into terrorists, and then arresting them as part of an elaborately orchestrated counterterrorism sting? The U.S. government.

Are you getting the picture yet?

The U.S. government isn’t protecting us from terrorism.

The U.S. government is creating the terror. It is, in fact, the source of the terror.

Consider that this very same government has taken every bit of technology sold to us as being in our best interests—GPS devices, surveillance, nonlethal weapons, etc.—and used it against us, to track, control and trap us.

So why is the government doing this? Money, power and total domination.

We’re not dealing with a government that exists to serve its people, protect their liberties and ensure their happiness. Rather, these are the diabolical machinations of a make-works program carried out on an epic scale whose only purpose is to keep the powers-that-be permanently (and profitably) employed.

Case in point: the FBI.

The government’s henchmen have become the embodiment of how power, once acquired, can be so easily corrupted and abused. Indeed, far from being tough on crime, FBI agents are also among the nation’s most notorious lawbreakers.

Whether the FBI is planting undercover agents in churches, synagogues and mosques; issuing fake emergency letters to gain access to Americans’ phone records; using intimidation tactics to silence Americans who are critical of the government, or persuading impressionable individuals to plot acts of terror and then entrapping them, the overall impression of the nation’s secret police force is that of a well-dressed thug, flexing its muscles and doing the boss’ dirty work.

It’s a diabolical plot with far-reaching consequences for every segment of the population, no matter what one’s political leanings.

As Rozina Ali writes for The New York Times Magazine, “The government’s approach to counterterrorism erodes constitutional protections for everyone, by blurring the lines between speech and action and by broadening the scope of who is classified as a threat.”

This is not an agency that appears to understand, let alone respect, the limits of the Constitution.

For instance, the FBI has been secretly carrying out an entrapment scheme in which it used a front company, ANOM, to sell purportedly hack-proof phones to organized crime syndicates and then used those phones to spy on them as they planned illegal drug shipments, plotted robberies and put out contracts for killings using those boobytrapped phones.

All told, the FBI intercepted 27 million messages over the course of 18 months.

What this means is that the FBI was also illegally spying on individuals using those encrypted phones who may not have been involved in any criminal activity whatsoever.

Even reading a newspaper article is now enough to get you flagged for surveillance by the FBI. The agency served a subpoena on USA Today / Gannett to provide the internet addresses and mobile phone information for everyone who read a news story online on a particular day and time about the deadly shooting of FBI agents.

This is the danger of allowing the government to carry out widespread surveillance, sting and entrapment operations using dubious tactics that sidestep the rule of law: “we the people” become suspects and potential criminals, while government agents, empowered to fight crime using all means at their disposal, become indistinguishable from the corrupt forces they seek to vanquish.

To go after terrorists, they become terrorists. To go after drug smugglers, they become drug smugglers. To go after thieves, they become thieves.

It’s hard to say whether we’re dealing with a kleptocracy (a government ruled by thieves), a kakistocracy (a government run by unprincipled career politicians, corporations and thieves that panders to the worst vices in our nature and has little regard for the rights of American citizens), or if we’ve gone straight to an idiocracy.

This certainly isn’t a constitutional republic, however.

Some days, it feels like the government is running its own crime syndicate complete with mob rule and mafia-style justice.

In addition to creating certain crimes in order to then “solve” them, the FBI—the government’s law enforcement agency—also gives certain informants permission to break the law, “including everything from buying and selling illegal drugs to bribing government officials and plotting robberies,” in exchange for their cooperation on other fronts.

USA Today estimates that government agents have authorized criminals to engage in as many as 15 crimes a day (5600 crimes a year). Some of these informants are getting paid astronomical sums: one particularly unsavory fellow, later arrested for attempting to run over a police officer, was actually paid $85,000 for his help laying the trap for an entrapment scheme.

In addition to procedural misconduct, trespassing, enabling criminal activity, and damaging private property, the FBI’s laundry list of crimes against the American people includes surveillance, disinformation, blackmail, entrapment, intimidation tactics, and harassment.

For example, the Associated Press lodged a complaint with the Dept. of Justice after learning that FBI agents created a fake AP news story and emailed it, along with a clickable link, to a bomb threat suspect in order to implant tracking technology onto his computer and identify his location. Lambasting the agency, AP attorney Karen Kaiser railed, “The FBI may have intended this false story as a trap for only one person. However, the individual could easily have reposted this story to social networks, distributing to thousands of people, under our name, what was essentially a piece of government disinformation.”

Then again, to those familiar with COINTELPRO, an FBI program created to “disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and neutralize” groups and individuals the government considers politically objectionable, it should come as no surprise that the agency has mastered the art of government disinformation.

The FBI has been particularly criticized in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks for targeting vulnerable individuals and not only luring them into fake terror plots but actually equipping them with the organization, money, weapons and motivation to carry out the plots—entrapment—and then jailing them for their so-called terrorist plotting. This is what the FBI characterizes as “forward leaning—preventative—prosecutions.”

Another fallout from 9/11, National Security Letters, one of the many illicit powers authorized by the USA Patriot Act, allows the FBI to secretly demand that banks, phone companies, and other businesses provide them with customer information and not disclose the demands. An internal audit of the agency found that the FBI practice of issuing tens of thousands of NSLs every year for sensitive information such as phone and financial records, often in non-emergency cases, is riddled with widespread violations.

The FBI’s surveillance capabilities, on a par with the National Security Agency, boast a nasty collection of spy tools ranging from Stingray devices that can track the location of cell phones to Triggerfish devices which allow agents to eavesdrop on phone calls.

In one case, the FBI actually managed to remotely reprogram a “suspect’s” wireless internet card so that it would send “real-time cell-site location data to Verizon, which forwarded the data to the FBI.”

The FBI has also repeatedly sought to expand its invasive hacking powers to allow agents to hack into any computer, anywhere in the world.

Indeed, for years now, the U.S. government has been creating what one intelligence insider referred to as a cyber-army capable of offensive attacks. As part of this cyberweapons programs, government agencies such as the NSA have been stockpiling all kinds of nasty malware, viruses and hacking tools that can “steal financial account passwords, turn an iPhone into a listening device, or, in the case of Stuxnet, sabotage a nuclear facility.”

In fact, the NSA was responsible for the threat posed by the “WannaCry” or “Wanna Decryptor” malware worm which—as a result of hackers accessing the government’s arsenal—hijacked more than 57,000 computers and crippled health care, communications infrastructure, logistics, and government entities in more than 70 countries.

Mind you, the government was repeatedly warned about the dangers of using criminal tactics to wage its own cyberwars. It was warned about the consequences of blowback should its cyberweapons get into the wrong hands.

The government chose to ignore the warnings.

That’s exactly how the 9/11 attacks unfolded.

First, the government helped to create the menace that was al-Qaida and then, when bin Laden had left the nation reeling in shock (despite countless warnings that fell on tone-deaf ears), it demanded—and was given—immense new powers in the form of the USA Patriot Act in order to fight the very danger it had created.

This has become the shadow government’s modus operandi regardless of which party controls the White House: the government creates a menace—knowing full well the ramifications such a danger might pose to the public—then without ever owning up to the part it played in unleashing that particular menace on an unsuspecting populace, it demands additional powers in order to protect “we the people” from the threat.

Yet the powers-that-be don’t really want us to feel safe.

They want us cowering and afraid and willing to relinquish every last one of our freedoms in exchange for their phantom promises of security.

As a result, it’s the American people who pay the price for the government’s insatiable greed and quest for power.

Suffice it to say that when and if a true history of the United States is ever written, it will not only track the rise of the American police state but it will also chart the decline of freedom in America: how a nation that once abided by the rule of law and held the government accountable for its actions has steadily devolved into a police state where justice is one-sided, a corporate elite runs the show, representative government is a mockery, police are extensions of the military, surveillance is rampant, privacy is extinct, and the law is little more than a tool for the government to browbeat the people into compliance.

Somewhere over the course of the past 240-plus years, democracy has given way to kleptocracy, and representative government has been rejected in favor of rule by career politicians, corporations and thieves—individuals and entities with little regard for the rights of American citizens.

This dissolution of that sacred covenant between the citizenry and the government—establishing “we the people” as the masters and the government as the servant—didn’t happen overnight. It didn’t happen because of one particular incident or one particular president. It is a process, one that began long ago and continues in the present day, aided and abetted by politicians who have mastered the polarizing art of how to “divide and conquer.”

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, our freedoms have become casualties in an all-out war on the American people.

Shocking: UK Government Admits COVID Vaccinated Children Are 4423% More Likely to Die of Any Cause & 13,633% More Likely to Die of COVID-19 Than Unvaccinated Children

Editor’s Note

We should be cautious in analyzing the categorization of mortality and morbidity. The ONS analyses deaths from vaccinated and non vaccinated. Table 6 below of the ONS contains a dataset pertaining to:

  1. deaths involving Covid-19,
  2. deaths not involving Covid-19 and
  3. all-cause deaths by age group

Deaths involving Covid-19 is a total misnomer, i.e. the tabulated results of the PCR test which is totally invalid (according to the WHO and the CDC). A positive PCR case does not confirm that death is attributable to Covid-19. Was an autopsy conducted or was it just a PCR test?

There is no differentiation between the three categories indicated above.

The only category which has meaning is “all cause deaths by age group”

What is important is to establish and compare mortality pertaining to vaccinated and unvaccinated based on autopsies which reveal the cause of death.

Covid-19 related deaths is a meaningless concept.

M. Ch.  August 23, 2022



The UK Government has quietly confirmed that the Covid-19 vaccines are killing children at an unprecedented rate.

Shocking figures contained in an official report, published just hours before Boris Johnson announced his resignation as Prime Minister of the UK, reveal Covid-19 vaccinated children are 4423%/45x more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children and 13,6333/137x more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated children.

A UK Government agency, known as the Office for National Statistics (ONS), recently published new data on deaths by vaccination status in England.

The latest dataset from the ONS is titled ‘Deaths by Vaccination Status, England, 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2022‘, and it can be accessed on the ONS site here, and downloaded here.


Table 6 of the dataset contains data on deaths involving Covid-19, deaths not involving Covid-19 and all-cause deaths by age group in England between 1st January 2021 and 31st May 2022, and it includes the number of deaths among children aged 10 to 14 by vaccination status, and teenagers aged 15 to 19 by vaccination status.

However, it is quite clear from the data that the ONS are not being as transparent as we would like to believe. This is because they fail to provide the death rate per 100,000 person-years among children or teenagers, whereas they have provided it for all other adult age groups in every other table contained in the dataset.

For example, here’s a snapshot of the data from table 1 of the dataset showing the death rate per 100,000 person-years by vaccination status in April 2022 –


Unfortunately for the ONS, they have failed in their attempts to disguise the horrific mortality rates among Covid-19 vaccinated children because they still provide us with enough information for us to calculate the mortality rates ourselves.

Here’s a snapshot of the ONS data on deaths among children aged 10 to 14 between 1st Jan 2021 and 31st May 2022 by vaccination status –


The data above includes the number of deaths and the number of person-years among each vaccination group.

Therefore, all we need to do is divide each vaccination group’s ‘person-years’ by 100,000, and then divide the number of deaths among each vaccination group by the answer to the previous equation, to work out the mortality rates by vaccination status.

e.g. Unvaccinated 2,881,265 Person-years / 100,000 = 28.81
Unvaccinated Covid-19 Deaths (9) / 28.81 = 0.3 Deaths per 100,000 person-years

The following two charts show the mortality rates by vaccination status per 100,000 person-years among children aged 10 to 14 in England for the period 1st January 2021 to 31st May 2022, according to the figures provided by the ONS –

Due to the large amount of information contained in the above two charts we’ve cherry-picked the most significant findings to create the following chart –

In regard to Covid-19 deaths, the ONS reveals that the mortality rate among unvaccinated children aged 10 to 14 equates to 0.31. But in regards to one-dose vaccinated children the mortality rate equates to 3.24 per 100,000 person-years, and in regards to triple vaccinated children the mortality rate equates to a shocking 41.29 per 100,000 person-years.

These figures reveal that unvaccinated children are much less likely to die of Covid-19 than children who have had the Covid-19 injection.

Based on Pfizer’s vaccine efficacy formula, this data reveals that the Covid-19 injections are now proving to have negative effectiveness against death among children, with the real-world effectiveness between January 2021 and May 2022 being as follows –


Unvaccinated Death Rate – Vaccinated Death Rate / Unvaccinated Death Rate x 100 = Vaccine Effectiveness against Death

The Covid-19 injections are proving to have real-world negative effectiveness against death of minus-966.67% among partly vaccinated children, and a shocking real-world negative effectiveness against death of minus-13,633.33% among triple vaccinated children.

This isn’t anywhere near the claimed 95% effectiveness against death made by Pfizer, is it?

In other words, partly vaccinated children are 11x/966.67% more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated children, and triple vaccinated children are 137.3x/13,633.33% more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated children.

And unfortunately, there is little improvement when it comes to non-Covid-19 deaths. Here’s the chart again showing the mortality rates by vaccination status among children in England –

The all-cause death mortality rate equates to 6.39 per 100,000 person-years among unvaccinated children, and is ever so slightly higher at 6.48 among partly vaccinated children.

However, the rate goes from bad to worse following the administration of each injection. The all-cause death mortality rate equates to 97.28 among double-vaccinated children, and a shocking 289.02 per 100,000 person-years among triple-vaccinated children.

This means, according to the UK Governments own official data, double vaccinated children are 1422% / 15.22x more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children. Whilst triple vaccinated children are 4423% / 45.23x more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children.

Unfortunately, we see much of the same when it comes to vaccinated teenagers.

The following two charts show the mortality rates by vaccination status per 100,000 person-years among teenagers aged 15 to 19 in England for the period 1st January 2021 to 31st May 2022, according to the figures provided by the ONS –

Again, due to the large amount of information contained in the above two charts we’ve cherry-picked the most significant findings to create the following chart –

What we discover from the above is that triple vaccinated teenagers are 136% / 2.35x more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated teenagers, and 38% more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated teenagers.

The worst figures in terms of all-cause deaths are however among double-vaccinated teenagers. Official UK Government data reveals that double vaccinated teenagers, with a mortality rate of 36.17 per 100,000 person-years, are 149.3% / 2.5 x more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated teenagers with a mortality rate of 14.51 per 100,000 person-years.

To summarise, the official UK Government figures published by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, prove that COVID-vaccinated children and teenagers are more likely to die of both Covid-19 and any other cause than unvaccinated children and teenagers.

This indicates that in regard to Covid-19, vaccination is actually worsening the immune response to the alleged virus and increasing the risk of both hospitalisation and death. But in regards to all-cause deaths, this indicates the Covid-19 injections are directly killing children.



Embalmers find FOOTLONG clots in dead bodies of the fully vaccinated

Image: Embalmers find FOOTLONG clots in dead bodies of the fully vaccinated

(Natural News) The bodies keep on piling up, and many of them are loaded with clots that are sometimes more than a foot in length.

Embalmers all around the world have seen a sharp uptick in “fibrous” and “rubbery” clotting ever since Operation Warp Speed was launched. Fully vaccinated bodies are reportedly having to be dredged of these clots, which do not appear to be made from blood.

Citing the Health Ranger and his research into the subject, The Epoch Times ran a piece highlighting the phenomenon. (Related: Check out this video from Brighteon featuring embalmer Richard Hirschman to learn more about the “engineered biostructure” clots being found in fully vaccinated cadavers.)

“We have tested one of the clots from embalmer Richard Hirschman, via ICP-MS,” the Health Ranger told the Times. “We also tested side by side live human blood from an unvaccinated person.”

What sets these clots apart from blood clots is that they are mostly devoid of minerals such as iron, potassium and magnesium. Were these actual blood clots, then they would have high levels of these minerals.

What exactly are these mystery clots being found in fully vaccinated bodies?

We are told that some of the clots being pulled out of people’s bodies are even more than a foot long – in some cases running the entire length of a person’s leg.

That is a lot of clotting, and it is certainly no joking matter when considering the sheer number of people out there who are still alive and have these things growing inside of them.


“Prior to 2020, 2021, we probably would see somewhere between 5 to 10 percent of the bodies that we would embalm [having] blood clots,” Hirschman also told the Times, explaining that now upwards of 70 percent of dead bodies are clotted.

“We are familiar with what blood clots are and we’ve had to deal with them over time. For me to embalm a body without any clots, kind of like how it was in the day, prior to all of this stuff … It’s rare. The exception is to embalm a body without clots.”

The Health Ranger released a data chart comparing the mineral compositions of unvaccinated blood and the clot material. In every category except for sodium, carbon and phosphorus, the clot material was deficient in minerals.

“Notice that the key elemental markers of human blood such as iron are missing in the clot (which is just at 4.4 percent of blood),” the Health Ranger told the Times – you can see the chart at the Times website.

“Similar story with magnesium, potassium, and zinc. These are clear markers for human blood. Live human blood will always have high iron, or the person would be dead. These clots have almost no iron, nor magnesium, etc.”

Wade Hamilton, a cardiologist versed in clots, told the Times that the lack of magnesium, potassium, and iron in the clot samples suggests that “they are not the usual post-mortem clots.”

“In fact, there was no blood flow in these vessels,” he added. “These structures raise but do not totally answer some interesting questions.”

“The combination of the low electrolytes and the novel very strong string-like structures suggests that these areas where the string-like structures are seen in the blood vessels did not receive circulation. They are not ‘normal’ post-mortem findings according to experienced embalmers bent on obtaining total body vascular access from one site, which because of the unusual ‘clots,’ they were unable to do.”

Hamilton went on to suggest that the structures could be at least partially composed of spike proteins that unfolded and formed “a different configuration.”

More stories like this one can be found at

Sources for this article include: