Rate of adverse events caused by cv vax 50x higher than flu shots

From naturalness.com:

(Natural News) The number of people suffering serious adverse events following vaccination for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is 50 times higher than the number for seasonal flu shots, new reports indicate.

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is seeing a surge in new cases of COVID-19 vaccine injury that is massively outpacing similar cases for influenza vaccines and other jabs.

Through Dec. 22, with fewer than one million doses of China virus vaccines distributed, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) VAERS platform received 307 reports of emergency room visits, as well as 17 “life threatening” events.

There have also been a number of deaths reported, which is deeply concerning when considering the fact that Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines have only been available to the public for less than a month.

“In 2019-2020, about 175 million flu vaccine doses were given,” tweeted former New York Times reporter and Tell Your Children author Alex Berenson.

“1220 ER visits and 73 ‘life threatening’ events were reported. The data is on the CDC VAERS Website.”

Despite offering a few caveats for why there is this massive disparity, Berenson was basically forced to conclude that something is seriously wrong with COVID-19 vaccines that is causing a much higher share of patients to fall seriously ill or die after getting jabbed.

“… the first Covid vaccine doses have mostly been given to healthy people in settings where problems can be quickly treated,” Berenson notes, further indicting the jabs for affecting healthy people in a profoundly negative way.

“These problems are occurring BEFORE the rollout to older, less healthy people – and before the 2nd dose, which is known to be far more dangerous.”

Put bluntly, only stupid people are getting vaccinated for coronavirus

In the end, all of this simply confirms what Berenson admits was recognizable in the clinical trials – even though we know that clinical trials tend to understate real-world problems rather than overstate them.

“… because any smart drug company will try to bias the trials in its favor,” Berenson says.

All of that to say, getting vaccinated for the WuFlu is an exceptionally dangerous endeavor, especially since Big Pharma holds no liability for injury or death. Vaccine-injured people are completely on their own, in other words.

Considering the risk of getting sick, let alone dying, from the Chinese virus itself is next to nil, it makes no sense whatsoever to get vaccinated for it – especially when the risk of being harmed from the vaccine is higher than the risk of developing symptoms from natural infection.

The medical deep state will continue to push it on the masses, of course, even try to make it mandatory, but stand your ground and just say no, for the protection of you and your family.

And kudos to Berenson for being brave enough to tell the truth about these shots when so many others refuse to do so. Anthony Fauci and everyone else peddling them are guilty of crimes against humanity, and their day will come – hopefully sooner rather than later.

“It’s an experimental vaccine, i.e. not fully tested even according to the manufacturer’s schedule, and therefore must fall under the umbrella of human rights violations if it’s forced upon people,” wrote one Zero Hedge commenter.

“It also violates the Nuremberg Code of informed consent,” another responded. “These vax companies and Bill Gates know just how deadly they are … and vax companies are immune from prosecution for death or injury from the vax. Gates needs to be hanged from a lamppost and left swinging like a piñata while we have a shot at him with bats.”

More of the latest news about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) can be found at Pandemic.news.

Sources for this article include:

ZeroHedge.com

NaturalNews.com

Astonishing COV Testing Fraud Revealed

Doctor makes with a cotton swab a nasal swab

Originally published on www.mercola.com

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • PCR tests cannot distinguish between “live” viruses and inactive (noninfectious) viral particles and therefore cannot be used as a diagnostic tool. The false appearance of a lethal pandemic has been manufactured using cycle thresholds (CTs) that are too high
  • The higher the CT — i.e., the number of amplification cycles used to detect RNA particles — the greater the chance of a false positive. Research shows that to get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at 17 cycles. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically
  • The SARS-CoV-2 PCR test was developed based on a genetic sequence published by Chinese scientists, not the viral isolate. Missing genetic code was simply made up
  • November 30, 2020, 22 international scientists published a review challenging the scientific paper on PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 that was adopted as the standard across the world. The scientists are calling for the so-called Corman-Drosten paper to be retracted due to its numerous errors
  • The flaws of PCR testing have been capitalized upon to incite fear in order to benefit the Great Reset agenda developed by a technocratic elite

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought us many harsh lessons. Importantly, it has shown us how easy it is to manufacture panic and control entire populations through deceptive means. Topping the list of deceptive strategies is the use of a test that falsely labels healthy individuals as sick and infectious. This allows mass testing to drive the narrative that we’re in a lethal pandemic.

Of course, I’m talking about the now infamous reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. The fact is, the PCR test is not designed to be used as a diagnostic tool as it cannot distinguish between inactive viruses and “live” or reproductive ones.1

This is a crucial point, since inactive and reproductive viruses are not interchangeable in terms of infectivity. If you have a nonreproductive virus in your body, you will not get sick and you cannot spread it to others. Secondly, many if not most laboratories amplify the RNA collected far too many times, which results in healthy people testing “positive.”

The Crucial Detail That Nullifies Most PCR Test Results

The video above explains how the PCR test works and how we are interpreting results incorrectly. In summary, the PCR swab collects RNA from your nasal cavity. This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA. Due to its tiny size, it must be amplified to become discernible. Each round of amplification is called a cycle, and the number of amplification cycles used by any given test or lab is called a cycle threshold (CT).

The higher the CT, the greater the risk that insignificant sequences of viral DNA end up being magnified to the point that the test reads positive even if your viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive and poses no threat to you or anyone else.

Many scientists have noted that anything over 35 cycles is scientifically indefensible.2,3,4 A September 28, 2020, study5 in Clinical Infectious Diseases revealed that when you run a PCR test at a CT of 35 or higher, the accuracy drops to 3%, resulting in a 97% false positive rate.

Yet, a test known as the Corman-Drosten paper and tests recommended by the World Health Organization are set to 45 cycles,6,7,8 and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend running PCR tests at a CT of 40.9

The question is why, considering the consensus is that CTs over 35 render the test useless. When labs use these excessive cycle thresholds, you clearly end up with a grossly overestimated number of positive tests, so what we’re really dealing with is a “casedemic”10,11 — an epidemic of false positives.

Many are now questioning whether this was done on purpose to crash the global economy and provide cover for the implementation of what’s known as the Great Reset, which is nothing less than a global totalitarian takeover by unelected technocrats who seek to gobble up all the world’s assets.

Indeed, it seems quite clear we’re not dealing with a lethal pandemic in any real sense. Mortality statistics further prove this is the case, as overall mortality statistics have remained stable in 2020 and in line with previous years.12,13,14

In other words, people are dying from COVID-19, yes, but the illness is not killing an excess number of people. The same number of people would have died anyway, from something. Indeed, CDC data15 released August 26, 2020, showed only 6% of so-called COVID-19 deaths had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause on the death certificate.

“For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death,” the CDC stated, and any one of those comorbidities could have killed those people even if COVID-19 was nonexistent.

For Accuracy, Much Lower CTs Must Be Used

Now, if CTs above 35 are scientifically unjustified, just how low of a CT should be used? Quite a few studies have investigated this, so there’s no shortage of data at this point. The fact that the WHO, FDA and CDC still have not changed their CTs downward in light of all these data tells us they’re not interested in getting an accurate picture of the infection rate.

For example, an April 2020 study16 in the European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases showed that to get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at 17 cycles. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically.

By the time you get to 33 cycles, the accuracy rate is a mere 20%, meaning 80% are false positives. Beyond 34 cycles, your chance of a positive PCR test being a true positive shrinks to zero.

More recently, a December 3, 2020, systematic review17 published in the journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases assessed the findings of 29 different studies — all of which were published in 2020 — comparing evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection with the CTs used in testing.

As reported by the authors, “12 studies reported that CT values were significantly lower … in specimens producing live virus culture.” In other words, the higher the CT, the lower the chance of a positive test actually being due to the presence of live (and infectious) virus.

“Two studies reported the odds of live virus culture reduced by approximately 33% for every one unit increase in CT,” the authors noted. Importantly, five of the studies included were unable to identify any live viruses in cases where a positive PCR test had used a CT above 24. What’s more, in order to produce live virus culture, a patient whose PCR test used a CT at or above 35 had to be symptomatic.

So, to summarize, if you have symptoms of COVID-19 and test positive using a PCR test that was run at 35 amplification cycles or higher, then you are likely to be infected and infectious.

However, if you do not have symptoms, yet test positive using a PCR test run at 35 CTs or higher, then it is likely a false positive and you pose no risk to others as you’re unlikely to carry any live virus. In fact, provided you’re asymptomatic, you’re unlikely to be infectious even if you test positive with a test run at 24 CTs or higher.

Fearmongering Success Hinges on Incorrect Use of PCR Test

The video above includes several interviews with experts who have openly criticized the use of PCR testing to diagnose infections such as COVID-19. These include:

The inventor of the PCR test, the late Kary Mullis (he has spoken about the test for other infections, such as HIV, but died in August 2019, a few months before the COVID-19 pandemic broke out)

Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug company Pfizer

Professor Carl Heneghan, director of the Oxford University Center for Evidence-Based Medicine

Emeritus professor of immunology Beda M. Stadler, former head of the Bern Institute of Immunology

Clare Craig, a consultant pathologist

Stephen A. Bustin, professor of molecular medicine and a world-renowned expert on the PCR test

In 1993, Mullis spoke about the use of the PCR test to diagnose HIV. He explained that all the test does is amplify molecules into something you can detect, but it cannot tell you whether those particles actually pose a risk to your health.

He also points out that, using PCR, you can essentially find just about anything in anyone because most of us are walking around with pathogens of all sorts, but the load is either too low to be of concern or the particles are just dead debris that pose no risk.

Bustin points out that when you get a positive result using a CT of 35 or higher, you’re looking at the equivalent of a single copy of viral DNA. The likelihood of that causing a health problem is minuscule. Even Dr. Anthony Fauci has admitted that using a PCR test with a CT above 35 renders it more or less useless because at that point, you’re just detecting dead nucelotides. No live virus can be detected at CTs that high.

Fatal Errors Found in Paper on Which PCR Testing Is Based

November 30, 2020, a team of 22 international scientists published a review18 challenging the scientific paper19 on PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 written by Christian Drosten, Ph.D., and Victor Corman. The Corman-Drosten paper was quickly accepted by the WHO and the workflow described therein was adopted as the standard across the world.

According to Reiner Fuellmich,20 founding member of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss,21 or ACU),22,23 Drosten is a key culprit in the COVID-19 pandemic hoax.

The scientists demand the Corman-Drosten paper be retracted due to “fatal errors,”24 one of which is the fact that it was written (and the test itself developed) before any viral isolate was available. All they used was the genetic sequence published online by Chinese scientists in January 2020.

The fact that the paper was published a mere 24 hours after it was submitted also suggests it didn’t even undergo peer review. In an Undercover DC interview, Kevin Corbett, Ph.D., one of the 22 scientists who are now demanding the paper’s retraction, stated:25

“Every scientific rationale for the development of that test has been totally destroyed by this paper. It’s like Hiroshima/Nagasaki to the COVID test.

When Drosten developed the test, China hadn’t given them a viral isolate. They developed the test from a sequence in a gene bank. Do you see? China gave them a genetic sequence with no corresponding viral isolate. They had a code, but no body for the code. No viral morphology.

In the fish market, it’s like giving you a few bones and saying ‘that’s your fish.’ It could be any fish … Listen, the Corman-Drosten paper, there’s nothing from a patient in it. It’s all from gene banks. And the bits of the virus sequence that weren’t there they made up.

They synthetically created them to fill in the blanks. That’s what genetics is; it’s a code. So, its ABBBCCDDD and you’re missing some, what you think is EEE, so you put it in … This is basically a computer virus.

There are 10 fatal errors in this Drosten test paper … But here is the bottom line: There was no viral isolate to validate what they were doing. The PCR products of the amplification didn’t correspond to any viral isolate at that time. I call it ‘donut ring science.’ There is nothing at the center of it. It’s all about code, genetics, nothing to do with reality …

There have since been papers saying they’ve produced viral isolates. But there are no controls for them. The CDC produced a paper in July … where they said: ‘Here’s the viral isolate.’ Do you know what they did? They swabbed one person. One person, who’d been to China and had cold symptoms. One person. And they assumed he had [COVID-19] to begin with. So, it’s all full of holes, the whole thing.”

The conclusion of the review reads, in part:26

“A decision to recognize the errors apparent in the Corman-Drosten paper has the benefit to greatly minimize human cost and suffering going forward. Is it not in the best interest of Eurosurveillance to retract this paper? Our conclusion is clear. In the face of all the tremendous PCR-protocol design flaws and errors described here, we conclude: There is not much of a choice left in the framework of scientific integrity and responsibility.”

The critique against PCR testing is further strengthened by a November 20, 2020, study27 in Nature Communications, which found no viable virus in PCR-positive cases at all. The study evaluated data from 9,865,404 residents of Wuhan, China, who had undergone PCR testing between May 14 and June 1, 2020.

A total of 300 tested positive but had no symptoms. Of the 34,424 people with a history of COVID-19, 107 tested positive a second time. Yet, when they did virus cultures on these 407 individuals who had tested positive (either for the first or second time), no live virus was found in any of them!

Antibody Tests Are Equally Unreliable

 

Antibody tests are also turning out to have their share of quality problems. If you have antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, that would be evidence that your immune system successfully overcame the virus at some point in the past. However, the COVID-19 antibody test may also turn out positive if you have antibodies against common cold viruses.

June 30, 2020, the CDC admitted that prior exposure to coronaviruses responsible for the common cold can result in a positive COVID-19 antibody test, even if you’ve never been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 specifically.28

The saving grace is that studies29,30,31 suggest antibodies produced following exposure to coronaviruses that cause the common cold also appear to provide some general and long-lasting resistance against SARS-CoV-2.

One such study,32,33 published May 14, 2020, in the journal Cell, found 70% of samples from patients who had recovered from mild cases of COVID-19 had resistance to SARS-CoV-2 on the T-cell level, as did 40% to 60% of people who had not been exposed to SARS-CoV-2.

According to the authors, this suggests there’s “cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘common cold’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2.” In other words, if you’ve recovered from a common cold caused by a particular coronavirus, your humoral immune system may activate when you encounter SARS-CoV-2, thus rendering you resistant to COVID-19.

Another study34 discovered SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies are only found in the most severe cases — about 1 in 5. So, a negative antibody test doesn’t necessarily rule out the possibility that you’ve been infected and didn’t get sick. In fact, this finding suggests COVID-19 may actually be five times more prevalent than suspected — and five times less deadly than predicted.

In a letter to the editor35 published in the July 1, 2020, issue of American Family Physician, Drs. Mark Ebell, deputy editor for evidence-based medicine for the journal, and Henry Barry, reviewed some of the available data, noting that:

“When assessing whether patients had a previous infection and may be immune, it is important to avoid false-positives so that patients do not think they are immune when they are not.

Table 1 summarizes the false-positive rates at various population prevalence for the Cellex test and for a hypothetical test that is 90% sensitive and 99% specific. At relatively low population prevalences, which likely reflect current conditions in the United States and elsewhere, we would argue that false-positive rates are unacceptably high with the Cellex test.”

Ebell and Barry pointed out that many of the antibody tests that have provisional approval from the FDA still have not even been evaluated for accuracy. They also recommended that labs report test results “in a way that reflects the local population prevalence based on widespread testing and include the false-positive rate,” as this information “is needed to help family physicians better inform shared decision-making regarding previous infection and return to work or school.”

At present, you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone including that data in their reporting, and the way things are going, I wouldn’t hold my breath in anticipation of such helpful numbers being included in the future either.

High Time to End Mass Testing Scam

If the vast majority of people who test positive for COVID-19 infection have no symptoms, don’t feel sick and don’t look sick, is COVID-19 really a “deadly” disease? Or, is it more like HPV — a viral infection that most people have without knowing it, and which 90% are able to eliminate without treatment?

The primary justification for the tyrannical governmental interventions of COVID-19 was to slow the spread of the infection so that hospital resources would not be overwhelmed, causing people to die due to lack of medical care.

These interventions were not about stopping the spread altogether or even reducing the number of people that would eventually get infected. They certainly were never meant to prevent all death. Any rational analysis would rapidly conclude that this simply isn’t possible, under any circumstance.

Short-term stay-at-home orders and business closings were only intended to slow down the spread so that, eventually, naturally-acquired herd immunity — the best kind — would prevent it from reemerging. Yet the goal posts keep shifting as we go along.

Two-week lockdowns turned into months in some areas. Eventually, we were told everything would go back to normal as soon as a vaccine became available. But once the vaccines started rolling out, the narrative changed again, and we were told we’d still need masks, social distancing and lockdowns well into 2021 or even 2022 even with a vaccine. What, exactly, is going on?

The only rational reason for why government interventions continue is because they’re meant to erode our personal freedoms and civil liberties and transfer wealth to unelected technocrats who are controlling the pandemic narrative. It’s all fearmongering based on a combination of wildly manipulated data and flawed tests.

Aside from PCR testing data, there’s no evidence of a lethal pandemic at all. As mentioned, while there is such a thing as COVID-19, and people have and do die from it, there are no excess deaths due to it.36,37,38 The total mortality for 2020 is normal.

So, unless we think we should shut down the world and stop living because people die from heart disease, diabetes, cancer, the flu or anything else, then there’s no reason to shut down the world because some people happen to die from COVID-19.

What You Can Do

The good news is the hoax is starting to be exposed. In November 2020, a Portuguese appeals court ruled39,40 that the PCR test is “not a reliable test for SARS-CoV-2” and that “a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection.” Therefore, “any enforced quarantine based on the results is unlawful.”41 The court also noted that forcing healthy people to self-isolate could be a violation of their fundamental right to liberty.

As detailed in “Coronavirus Fraud Scandal — The Biggest Fight Has Just Begun” and “German Lawyers Initiate Class-Action Coronavirus Litigation,” additional legal cases are also to be expected, all of which will help expose the fraud perpetrated. As for what you can do in the meantime, consider:

  • Turning off mainstream media news and turning to independent experts — do the research. Read through the science.
  • Continue to counter the censorship by asking questions — arm yourself with mortality statistics and the facts on PCR testing, so you can explain how and why this pandemic simply isn’t a pandemic anymore.
  • If you are a medical professional, especially if you’re a member of a professional society, write an open letter to your government, urging them to speak to and heed recommendations from independent experts.
  • Sign The Great Barrington Declaration,42 which calls for an end to lockdowns.
  • Join a group so that you can have support — Examples of groups formed to fight against government overreach include Us for Them, a group campaigning for reopening schools and protecting children’s rights in the U.K., and the Freedom to Breathe Agency, a U.S. team of attorneys, doctors, business owners and parents who are fighting to protect freedom and liberty.

References

CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel July 13, 2020 (PDF)

The Vaccine Reaction September 29, 2020

Jon Rappaport’s Blog November 6, 2020

YouTube TWiV 641 July 16, 2020

Clinical Infectious Diseases September 28, 2020; ciaa1491

WHO.int Diagnostic detection of Wuhan Coronavirus 2019 by real-time RT-PCR, January 13, 2020 (PDF)

WHO.int Diagnostic detection of 2019-nCOV by real-time RT-PCR, January 17, 2020 (PDF)

Eurosurveillance 2020 Jan 23; 25(3): 2000045

FDA.gov CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel Instructions, July 13, 2020 (PDF) Page 35

10 PJ Media October 27, 2020

11 AAPS October 7, 2020

12, 36 YouTube, SARS-CoV-2 and the rise of medical technocracy, Lee Merritt, MD, aprox 8 minutes in (Lie No. 1: Death Risk)

13, 37 Technical Report June 2020 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.24350.77125

14, 38 Johns Hopkins Newsletter November 26, 2020 (Archived)

15 CDC.gov August 26, 2020

16 European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases April 27, 2020; 39: 1059-1061

17 Clinical Infectious Diseases December 3, 2020; ciaa1764

18, 26 Corman Drosten Review Report

19 Eurosurveillance, Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus by real-time RT-PCR

20 Fuellmich.com, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich Bio (German)

21 Acu2020.org Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss

22 Acu2020.org Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee, English

23 Algora October 4, 2020

24, 25 Undercover DC December 3, 2020

27 Nature Communications November 20, 2020; 11 Article number 5917

28 CDC Test for Past Infection

29 Biorxiv preprint DOI: 10.1101/2020.05.26.115832 (PDF)

30 Daily Mail June 12, 2020

31 Science Times June 12, 2020

32 Cell May 14, 2020 DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.05.015

33 Wall Street Journal June 12, 2020 (Archived)

34 Off-Guardian June 12, 2020

35 American Family Physician July 1, 2020; 102(1): 5-6

39 Judgment of the Lisbon Court of Appeal, Portugese Original

40 Judgment of the Lisbon Court of Appeal, English Translation

41 Geopolitic.org November 21, 2020

42 Great Barrington Declaration

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Head of Pfizer Research: CV Vacc is Female Sterilization

From HealthandMoneyNews.com:

The vaccine contains a  spike protein (see image) called  syncytin-1, vital for the formation of human placenta in women. If the vaccine works so that we form an immune response AGAINST the spike protein, we are also training the female body to attack syncytin-1, which could lead to infertility in women of an unspecified duration.

Dr. Wodarg and Dr. Yeadon request a stop of all corona vaccination studies and call for co-signing the petition

2020NEWS

On December 1, 2020, the ex-Pfizer head of respiratory research Dr. Michael Yeadon and the lung specialist and former head of the public health department Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg filed an application with the EMA, the European Medicine Agency responsible for EU-wide drug approval, for the immediate suspension of all SARS CoV 2 vaccine studies, in particular the BioNtech/Pfizer study on BNT162b (EudraCT number 2020-002641-42).

Dr. Wodarg and Dr. Yeadon demand that the studies – for the protection of the life and health of the volunteers – should not be continued until a study design is available that is suitable to address the significant safety concerns expressed by an increasing number of renowned scientists against the vaccine and the study design.

Oxford – Designer of Covid Vaccine Admits –“Vaccine Will Only Sterilize %70 of The Population”

On the one hand, the petitioners demand that, due to the known lack of accuracy of the PCR test in a serious study, a so-called Sanger sequencing must be used. This is the only way to make reliable statements on the effectiveness of a vaccine against Covid-19. On the basis of the many different PCR tests of highly varying quality, neither the risk of disease nor a possible vaccine benefit can be determined with the necessary certainty, which is why testing the vaccine on humans is unethical per se.

Furthermore, they demand that it must be excluded, e.g. by means of animal experiments, that risks already known from previous studies, which partly originate from the nature of the corona viruses, can be realized. The concerns are directed in particular to the following points:

  • The formation of so-called “non-neutralizing antibodies” can lead to an exaggerated immune reaction, especially when the test person is confronted with the real, “wild” virus after vaccination. This so-called antibody-dependent amplification, ADE, has long been known from experiments with corona vaccines in cats, for example. In the course of these studies all cats that initially tolerated the vaccination well died after catching the wild virus.
  • The vaccinations are expected to produce antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. However, spike proteins also contain syncytin-homologous proteins, which are essential for the formation of the placenta in mammals such as humans. It must be absolutely ruled out that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 could trigger an immune reaction against syncytin-1, as otherwise infertility of indefinite duration could result in vaccinated women.
  • The mRNA vaccines from BioNTech/Pfizer contain polyethylene glycol (PEG). 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance – this means that many people can develop allergic, potentially fatal reactions to the vaccination.
  • The much too short duration of the study does not allow a realistic estimation of the late effects. As in the narcolepsy cases after the swine flu vaccination, millions of healthy people would be exposed to an unacceptable risk if an emergency approval were to be granted and the possibility of observing the late effects of the vaccination were to follow. Nevertheless, BioNTech/Pfizer apparently submitted an application for emergency approval on December 1, 2020.

CALL FOR HELP: Dr. Wodarg and Dr. Yeadon ask as many EU citizens as possible to co-sign their petition by sending the e-mail prepared here to the EMA.

Not part of the original article but a comment….

After a little research it turns out that Syncytin-1 is also present in sperm, so it’s not only Women that will be steralised but Men as well. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261257414_Syncytin-1_and_its_receptor_is_present_in_human_gametes

 

New theory throws out Einstein’s theory of general relativity

 

From NexusNewsFeed.com:

“Using newer mathematical tools, my colleague and I have demonstrated a new theory that may accurately describe the universe.”

A pair of professors fr0m North Carolina State University are proposing an entirely new model of physics that could rewrite the way we think about matter.

Their extremely ambitious proposal, as outlined in an essay for The Conversation, does away with particles or waves, both fundamental building blocks of matter, and suggests instead that all the physical stuff in the universe is made up of “fragments of energy” instead.

Larry Silverberg and colleague Jeffrey Eischen’s theory would even end superceding Einstein’s theory of general relativity, which has been used for over a century to explain physical phenomena, most prominently the warping of space and time.

“Using newer mathematical tools, my colleague and I have demonstrated a new theory that may accurately describe the universe,” Silverberg argued in the essay. “Instead of basing the theory on the warping of space and time, we considered that there could be a building block that is more fundamental than the particle and the wave.”

The duo posit that rather than particles and waves existing as counterpoints, “it made logical sense for there to be an underlying connection between them.”

The theory is based on the fundamental idea that energy keeps flowing through space and time in never ending streams that never cross.

“Working from the idea of a universe of flowing energy lines, we looked for a single building block for the flowing energy,” Silverberg writes. “If we could find and define such a thing, we hoped we could use it to accurately make predictions about the universe at the largest and tiniest scales.”

Their new most basic unit of matter, dubbed a “fragment of energy,” is “a building block that looks like a concentration of energy – kind of like a star – having energy that is highest at the center and that gets smaller farther away from the center,” according to Silverberg.

The pair put their new theory to the test by evaluating two prominent astronomical observations that were used to confirm Einstein’s theory of general relativity.

The first was Mercury’s unusual orbit. Einstein suggested that space and time were being warped to cause the planet’s orbit to shift, thereby explaining shifts in light observed by astronomers.

The second was concerned with how light bends as it stretches across warped space time near the Sun.

Silverberg and Eischen argue that their fragment of energy theory solves the first problem by modeling the Sun as one giant fragment of energy, while Mercury is a much smaller fragment of energy orbiting it.

As for the second, they propose, the Sun retains its giant fragment of energy status while the light passing by is modeled as massless matter traveling at the speed of light.

Will it all hold up? Only time will tell — but it’s not every day that researchers challenge Einstein.

Surrender

By The All That Is.

The attitude of surrender is possibly the most powerful of all the spiritual principles on the path to wholeness. In essence, we are already whole, yet the fractured character structures, formed in each beings’ development, creates destructive, abusive and dis-empowered personalities that must be acknowledged and released, before higher states of consciousness can be embodied. Surrender is a letting go of all that is not you. The great yogi’s say, we are not our minds or what our mental attachments are. The great yogi’s ask who is it that is attached to money, fame or success?

As we begin to recognize these immature and outdated character structures and patterns, we are already over a huge hurdle.. Once we see the energetic relationship we are having with our experiences, we can actively make choices from a place of higher awareness. A well-known quote emphasizes the need for change, when it says… The definition of insanity is, doing the same thing again and again and yet expecting different results. As we begin to recognize these reactive and repetitive character traits, we can consciously choose to respond, instead of react. By cultivating presence in our meditation practice, we are fine-tuning our conscious awareness – our master tool, to take out into the World and our relationships.

How then do we embody the attitude of surrender to ourselves and at the same time, to the experience we are having?

We can define surrender as an active detachment from attachments and outcomes. This is the gate to the way AKA The Tao. To embody this attitude, is to no longer mind what happens. We can bring presence to our experience without an attachment to how things go or when things manifest. At this point, a higher plane of existence and flow is potentially available to create from, fluid like water.

I see this attitude, recognized in endearing characters like Winnie the Pooh, and Tha Dude in The Big Lebowski. Both characters do not care about the outcome. They are in the present flowing with what happens. Dissolving into the flow of the arising experience, takes away the pressure of knowing how things come together. As long as we have the awareness of what excites us and what is calling us at our more subtle levels, we can make the choices that resonate, free of concern. It is only our concerns that create mental blocks and control dramas in our lives. When we are free of concern, we are free to be as we are, and as we hold that vibration, others in our company will feel that sense of freedom.

This attitude of surrender, like vulnerability, has been culturally represented in the West, as a weakness. Surrender, for example, is commonly related to the action of succeeding defeat in battle. A surrendering of power. In this case, we can see how it relates to our practice, through the surrendering of the egoic power structure of the mind. This control program, most of us have, can be seen, tamed and ultimately let go of. What we are letting go of is the attachment to this voice as a sense of Self. We are more than the thoughts we have, we are the container of the thoughts. When thoughts are not there, who are we? Surrender is the gateway to spiritual development and pure experience.

In recent weeks I have been cultivating a practice of active detachment through the Sufi teaching about the man and his camel. Paraphrasing, it goes something like this… A Sufi master was riding his camel with his apprentice, when they needed to stop for the night to sleep. The Master leaves the apprentice to deal with the camel, whilst he prepares the room. The apprentice, taking on his master’s words about trusting Mohammad, decided not to tie up the camel and to trust in Mohammad. In the morning, as the two men came out to begin their next day’s travel, the camel was nowhere to be seen. The master turns to the apprentice and asks, what happened. The apprentice explained that he was following his guidance to trust Lord Mohammad, that He would look out for the camel and that he did not need to tie up the camel. The master replied. Trust in Mohammad but tie up your camel first! This is suggesting that we do what we can, by taking an active approach, whilst trusting the process we are on. There is an element of trust that needs to be cultivated, living with such openness to any outcome.

In my own Life, I have had countless experiences that have called on me to trust deeply the unfolding play, when I’ve been in the eye of the storm, with no sense of which way to turn. Life constantly has its riches being offered to us. If we can find a place of neutrality with our experience we will flow with the symphony of Life itself and manifest our highest calling. Be aware, to reach our highest calling is to dive into the deepest depths of the shadow and return self illuminated. These are simply words yet the most courageous souls have come here for exactly this work and at some point we are all to surrender who we think we are to reach the heights of Heaven on Earth.

I would also like to highlight a little the relationship between passivity and surrender. Passivity is not compatible on the path of self development. It breeds inertia and laziness. Surrender in its noble sense is a meeting of an inner relationship to your perceived sense of self, the small self with a name and particulars, and an expansion into liberated consciousness. Passivity is, in no way, an attitude that cultivates the conditions, for the warrior within, to overcome the individual mountain, we all have to climb. We can use the principle of surrender to detach from how the mountain top will look and feel, or even if we get there..

Attitudes like patience and presence, are also intimately connected to the state of surrender. By cultivating patience in our process, either in meditation or out in the World, we are building persistence and perseverance, noble traits of Kings & Queens. By becoming bigger than our selfish self, we create an inner environment of centered-maturity. True & balanced Mother’s & Father’s, Brother’s & Sister’s, free from concerns and attachments.

 

Let us close our eyes.

Taking three deep breaths to relax us into our bodies.

Anchor yourself in the present moment, with each inhalation. …

As we exhale, we can let go of any attachments to the past, or concern about the future.

Letting go of any desired outcome to this meditation.

Become the meditation.

Active detachment.

Witness the rise and fall of any thoughts, sensations or sounds…

Let them be.

Surrender to the flow of pure existence.

This vast emptiness. Full of presence.

Rest in the stillness.

This inquiry into Surrender, has been written to be part of a tutorial series, that is part of an amazing meditation app called Souse Guru. Created with Martin Bone’s vision and guidance of meditation. I am honoured to be asked to contribute to this beautiful project, to spread this sacred art form we know as meditation.

Original Article – https://theallthatis.one/2020/12/17/surrender/