This document is taken from a thread byEhden @eh_den.(1) He writes "We all owe HUGE gratitude to the people of http://gogo.al who published it. I just helped to make it visible." The only contribution by Australian Voice is to compile his comments and images into one document.
Background: Pfizer has been extremely aggressive in trying to protect the details of their international COVID19 vaccine agreements. Luckily, I've managed to get one.
We have all heard of vaccines made by AstraZenica, Pfizer–BioNTech, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson aka Janssen and Novavax, all produced in the West. On the other hand we have heard almost nothing about Sputnik V (Russian), Covaxin (India) or CoronaVac aka Sinovac (Chinese). You should not be confused by the many different names. All of the widely used vaccines fall into three or four basic kinds, based on the different way they work. But it is even more important to recognize that they all are different ways to achieve the same goal: put the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 = Covid-19 virus into your body. Why is this important? Because the spike protein is a biologically active toxin which is dangerous to humans. Several important points are covered in this short discussion (8 minutes) by Dr Bryam Bridle from this podcast interview with Alex Pierson of "On Point". More detailed information can be found at the end of this article.
DR. BRYAM BRIDLE: WE MADE A BIG MISTAKE CREATING THE "COVID-19 VACCINES" • MAY 2021
HOW ARE COVID-19 “VACCINES” DIFFERENT FROM TRADITIONAL VACCINES?
It turns out that an Extension Veterinarian at the South Dakota State University can give a cogent answer to this question since animal breeders also use traditional vaccines on a regular basis.
“How are COVID-19 vaccines different from the ones livestock producers are used to?
“It turns out COVID-19 vaccines are quite different from those we use in animals. The technology used to create them is substantially advanced compared to the vaccines we’ve used over the years.
“To review what we learned in science class, vaccines trick the body into thinking it’s been exposed to an infectious germ. The immune response generated by the vaccine is “remembered” by the body when it actually becomes infected with the germ. The result is that disease effects are prevented or greatly diminished in the vaccinated animal.
“To accomplish this, typical vaccines contain the same germ (or parts of it) we want the body to respond to immunologically. Animal vaccine manufacturers either treat the germ to kill it (while preserving enough of the structure for the immune system to respond to) or artificially grow it such that it can still multiply in the body, yet not cause illness. Killed vaccines such as our dog’s rabies vaccine are examples of the former, while modified-live vaccines (e.g., intranasal pneumonia shots given to calves) exemplify the latter.
“Unlike most animal vaccines, these COVID-19 vaccines don’t contain the germ itself. They use an artificially created protein molecule called messenger RNA (mRNA). Messenger RNA is used by cells all the time to instruct their internal machinery to make the essential proteins needed for cell survival and function.
"The COVID-19 coronavirus uses its “spike protein” to infect cells in our bodies. Think of the spike protein as a “hook” that allows it to attach to and invade a body cell (a cell lining our lung surface, for example). The COVID-19 mRNA vaccine works when the mRNA molecule gets into the regular cells in our body and tells them to make a duplication of that spike protein. Our regular cells then stick that duplication out on their surface for the immune cells of the body to respond to. And respond they do, making antibodies that bind up the spike protein on any actual COVID-19 virus or destroying any body cells that have already been infected, cutting off the virus’ reproduction.
"Therefore, instead of relying on the vaccine germ itself to alert the body’s immune system, mRNA vaccines essentially tell the body to naturally “make” the part of the germ to which the body will respond. Because mRNA is just a simple chain of molecules, there’s no way it can cause the disease."(1)
The similarity between mRNA vaccines and traditional vaccines is that they both “teach” the immune system to create antibodies against a pathogen, either rabies or an infection from Covid-19. With a traditional vaccine, the immune system is presented with a weakened pathogen which allows the body to make antibodies before we encounter the full-blown pathogen in the real world. The mRNA vaccines do not introduce the pathogen, the Covid-19 virus, itself. Instead they introduce a messenger RNA molecule which causes our own cells to create a spike protein on their surfaces. These cells with the newly created spike protein then “teach” the immune system to produce antibodies to the Covid-19 virus because the spike is a prominent feature of that virus.
THIS SOUNDS OK. WHAT'S ALL THE FUSS ABOUT?
The Center For Disease Control (CDC) in the U.S. gives an explanation somewhat shorter than this one, but it contains a false statement: “COVID-19 mRNA vaccines give instructions for our cells to make a harmless piece of what is called the 'spike protein'. The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19.”(2) The CDC claims the spike protein created by the mRNA molecule is of itself harmless. However this one piece of misinformation is at the heart of most of the deaths and other adverse effects from the mRNA injections. (This is discussed at length in the article But there is something else is missing from the account given by the Vet from South Dakota and the CDC. They do not mention how the mRNA molecules can travel through the body to give its message to cells without being destroyed by the immune system as an alien intruder. In order to put the mRNA into your body and in contact with your cells it must be enclosed in a lipid nanoparticle. This is a completely new pharmaceutical drug delivery system first approved in 2018.
Herre is a summary of the differences between mRNA injections and traditional vaccines, and the dangers which arise from causing our bodies to create spike proteins:
Dr Michael Yeadon insists the statement by the CDC is mistaken in claiming the spike protein created on the surface of the immune cells is harmless. Instead he insists the spike protein is biologically active. In particular it is fusogenic, that is, it makes cells stick together and it can initiate blood coagulation, the formation of blood clots.(4)
Doctors4CovidEthics like Dr Wolfgang Wodarg insist the Official Account ignores the fact that after millions of these nanoparticles containing mRNA are injected into your arm, some of them will enter the bloodstream. Then some of the cells they encounter will take up the nanoparticles in the same way that the immune cells do. This is another way that mRNA injections differ from traditional vaccines. Traditional vaccines stay in the arm at the site of the injection. It was assumed that the material in the mRNA injections would behave in the same way, but this has been shown to be incorrect, as Dr Bryam Bridle explains.
As they flow around the body they will be taken up by the endothelial cells lining the blood vessels, more perhaps in places with a slow blood flow. Then the endothelial cells will produce a spike protein and the contact between the spike protein and the platelets in the blood stream will create a blood clot. Remember the Vet said: “Because mRNA is just a simple chain of molecules, there’s no way it can cause the disease.” This is true, but the millions of nanoparticles spread throughout our bodies, creating spike proteins wherever possible. Since spike proteins are toxic the mRNA molecules are not harmless. They don't cause you to have a Covid-19 infection, but the damage they cause is much worse.
In addition to producing blood clots caused by interaction between the spike proteins and platelets in the blood stream, when an epithelial cell produces a spike on its surface it also deposits the waste created by this process on its surface. Many healthy people have killer T cells in their bloodstream. These cells, also known as cytolytic T cells, or CD8+ T-cells, are T lymphocytes, a type of white blood cell that kills cancer cells, cells that are infected with viruses, or cells that are damaged in other ways. The killer T cells are programmed to attack and destroy any cell which has such waste deposits on its surface. Since the epithelial layer is only one cell thick, if one or more are destroyed blood will leak out and this will trigger blood clotting.
This means spike proteins can activate blood clotting in two different ways. Clots will form simply by contact with platelets in the blood stream after the spike protein has been created by an epithelial cell. The other mechanism is explained above. When epithelial cells take up the genetic mRNA instructions to produce a spike protein, they deposit waste materials on their surface. As soon as killer T cells detect this waste they will destroy these cells, create a hole in the blood vessel and this will initiate blood clots. Even a casual look at the kinds of adverse events created by mRNA injections shows many different kinds of damage caused by blood clots and/or bleeding. (This is discussed in Almost Half of UK Yellow Card Deaths Directly Caused by the mRNA Induced Spike Proteins.)(5)
Now we have seen the dangers posed by mRNA injections, it is time to look at each one in more detail.
PFIZER/BIONTECH (BNT162b2): WHERE DOES THE mRNA COME FROM?
Pfizer/BioNTech has created one of the two completely new mRNA injections. The way it works once injected has been explained above in some detail. The other has been created by Moderna. Both of these are called genetic vaccines because the mRNA molecule contains the genetic instructions for creating the Covid-19 spike protein in your body. There is another genetic vaccine made by Novavax, but it uses DNA rather than mRNA.
Pfizer and Moderna create the mRNA molecule using a process called nucleoside modification. Nucleotides are the molecular building-blocks of DNA and RNA. Nucleosides are a kind of nucleotide molecule without a phosphate molecule. Why is this modification necessary? It just so happens that the human body is immune to RNA. What this means is that any RNA molecule introduced into the body will be attacked by the body and destroyed. So to use mRNA to enter cells and create the Covid-19 spike protein, the mRNA molocule must be modified.
The American immunologist Drew Weissman and Katalin Karikó, a Hungarian biochemist, discovered there were modifications of nucleosides in the RNA that would suppress the ability of RNA to provoke an immune response. As explained in Wikipedia:
"A nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (modRNA) is a synthetic messenger RNA (mRNA) in which some nucleosides are replaced by other naturally modified nucleosides or by synthetic nucleoside analogues."(6)
modRNA is modified RNA in which some of its components, known as neucleosides, are replaced by naturally modified neucleoside molecules or synthetic molecules called neucleoside analogues. Here we see why this approach is called a genetic vaccine. RNA molecules are essential in in coding, decoding, regulating and expressing genes. The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine is only possible because the mRNA molecules have been modified to escape destruction by our own defence mechanisms. Just to understand the personal side of this new technology, we should note that since 2013, Katalin Karikó has been a vice president and promoted to senior vice president in 2019 at BioNTech RNA Pharmaceuticals.
PFIZER/BIONTECH (BNT162b2): WHAT ELSE IS IN THE INJECTIONS?
Pfizer/BioNTech lists the following lipids as excipients (extra ingredients) used to make the lipid nanoparticles containing the mRNA molecule: Cholesterol, Distearoylphosphatidylcholine (DSPC), ALC-0315 and ALC-0159. The first two are previously approved ingredients, while the other two are proprietary and have rarely if ever been used in this way before.
An article entitled “Excipients as potential agents of anaphylaxis in vaccines: analyzing the formulations of the current authorized COVID-19 vaccines” lists ALC-0159 as a potential agent “for immediate hypersensitivity reactions, as they have been involved in previously reported reactions.”(7) The substance of concern here is polyethylene glycol (PEG) which is a component of the lipid ALC-0159. An article “Suspicions grow that nanoparticles in Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine trigger rare allergic reactions” published in December, 2020, reported that during two weeks severe allergy-like reactions occurred in at least eight people who received the COVID-19 vaccine produced by Pfizer/BioNTech. The article continued:
“PEG has never been used before in an approved vaccine, but it is found in many drugs that have occasionally triggered anaphylaxis—a potentially life-threatening reaction that can cause rashes, a plummeting blood pressure, shortness of breath, and a fast heartbeat. Some allergists and immunologists believe a small number of people previously exposed to PEG may have high levels of antibodies against PEG, putting them at risk of an anaphylactic reaction to the vaccine.”(8)
MODERNA (mRNA-1273): WHAT ELSE IS IN THE INJECTIONS?
Moderna's Covid-19 vaccines use the same mRNA method to instruct our cells to make spike proteins as Pfizer/BioNTech, and its mRNA is another example of a nucleoside-modified messenger RNA. It is different from Pfizer/BioNTech in the lipid used to form the nanoparticles which contain the mRNA molecule. Moderna uses a lipid known as SA-102.
The authors of “Excipients as potential agents of anaphylaxis in vaccines: analyzing the formulations of the current authorized COVID-19 vaccines” have identified Tromethamine and 1,2-dimyristoyl-rac- glycol)-2000]-N,N- methoxypolyethylene glycol-2000 [PEG2000- DMG] as "potential agents for immediate hypersensitivity reactions, as they have been involved in previously reported reactions." Tromethamine is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug to reduce pain. This is a report which confirms an alergic reaction from the use of this drug:
"Other adverse reactions occurring approximately 1 to 10% of the time during treatment with ketorolac tromethamine ophthalmic solutions included allergic reactions, corneal edema, iritis, and ocular inflammation."(9)
On 30 December 2020 the CDC posted the following document: “COVID-19 Vaccines: Update on Allergic Reactions, Contraindications, and Precautions”.(10) This diagram is found on page 21 of that document.
It highlights the ingredients in each vaccine which might cause an alergic reaction. Notice that the Pfizer/BionTech ingredient is described as 2-[(polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide. However if you look up ALC-0159 in Wikipedia, you will find that this is its full biochemical description.(11) The CDC has also produced the following guide for dealing with allergic reactions and Anaphylaxis after Covid-19 vaccinations: “Interim Considerations: Preparing for the Potential Management of Anaphylaxis at COVID-19 Vaccine Sites”.(12) This shows that both the manufacturers and the regulators are well aware of the risk of anaphylactic shock from the Covid-19 vaccines by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna.
MODERNA AND SM-102
Controversy has arisen over Moderna's use of SM-102 as a lipid in its Covid-19 vaccine. On the 21st of May, 2021 they released a document dealing with the safety of this ingredient. They point out:
“Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients used for commercial pharmaceutical manufacturing adhere to strict guidelines under FDA-regulated Good Manufacture Practice (GMP) protocols to ensure their safety for human and veterinary use. (…) The SDS for Cayman’s SM-102 (Item # 33474) accurately represents that the mixture of chemicals in the product are 90% chloroform (a common solvent) and 10% SM-102. While it is a common solvent, chloroform has several known serious hazards, which have been included on Cayman’s SDS. Neither the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances (RTECS), or the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) Classification and Labelling Inventory list any hazards associated with SM-102.”(13)
However if you look at SM-102 (Item No. 33474) you can find this statement:
Furthermore if you look up the Safety Data Sheet for SM-102 it is quite clear that this is a poison.(15)
It is toxic if inhaled, it is suspected of causing cancer, damaging fertility or an unborn child, and it causes damage to the central nervous system, the kidneys, the liver and the respiratory system with prolonged or repeated exposure. The company may say that several agencies do not "list any hazards associated with SM-102", but it is clear some of us that all agencies which are supposed to regulate the pharmaceutical industry have been "captured" by the companies they have been set up to supervise.
NOVAVAX (NVX-CoV 2373)
Novavax is described by its manufacturers as a recombinant nanoparticle vaccine. is produced by creating an engineered baculovirus containing a gene for a modified SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Baculoviridae is a kind of virus which infects insects. It is assumed that they cannot replicate in humans. Next the baculovirus is used to infect a culture of Sf9 moth cells which come from the Spodoptera frugiperda moth. The moth cells create the spike protein and display it on their cell membranes. Finally the spike proteins are harvested and put onto synthetic lipid nanoparticles each of which display up to 14 spike proteins.(16) In this way Novavax creates a nanoparticle that mimics the COVID-19 viral structure with its protein spikes on the surface. Immune response mounted against this shell works against the live COVID-19 virus, too.(17)
This is a long and detailed document addressed in the first instance to The Hon. Brad Hazzard, MP in New South Wales, where the author, Tony Nikolic practices law. It is also addressed to 14 members of the Australian Federal Parliament. It is reproduced here with the author's permission as a Guest Post on Australian Voice. Many important issues are examined in this document and he has invited the Premier’s office and Minister for Health to provide evidence justifying the lockdowns and the need to vaccinate healthy people. I have provided a crude Table of Contents for those seeking specific information or references.
Tony Nikolic was also interviewed by Asia Pacific Today on 16 July, 2021.
Below is a screenshot of Tony Nikloic's interview with Asia Pacific Today.
Note: Some people have problems with this video on Bitchute. Asia Pacific Today has suggested this as an alternative:
Note: This document could only be reproduced as image files, so you cannot cut and paste from it. Screenshots will work, however.
This document has the following sections:
Informed Consent-Vaccine Rollouts-State Orders
Public Health Orders
The Sustained Assault
Invitation for Public Scrutiny and Debate by leading Scientists
COVID-19-summary of evidential facts
Invitation for Response
Totality of Autonomy (w/r to medical treatment)
Conflicting interests (Autonomy vs state)
Purpose of this letter: We only see one side of the story
COVID infection and Mortality Research
Nature of Vaccines promoted by State and Federal Government
This article is based on data from the following document: “SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England, Technical briefing 17 , 25/6/2021 ”. (1) It is an analysis of "Table 4. Attendance to emergency care and deaths by vaccination status among Delta confirmed cases (sequencing and genotyping) including all confirmed Delta cases in England, 1 February 2021 to 21 June 2021" which is reproduced below. My conclusion is that from the data given about 263,424 people recorded because of attendance to emergency care and deaths in England, the percentage of deaths from Covid-19 are virtually the same for people who have been vaccinated (0.09%) and people who have not (0.08%). The evidence for this conclusion is given below the table.
Earlier I posted a mistaken analysis of this data which is reproduced at the end of the article. A criticism by Sarah W @Ask__me__why forced me to re-examine the data. I claimed that the percentage of vaccinated people who died from Covid-19 in England was almost 4 times higher than the percentage of unvaccinated people who died from Covid-19. This conclusion was based on a serious oversight.
The US company Center for Disease Control (CDC) gives us the Official Science for mRNA "vaccines" which is reproduced in part here:
"COVID-19 mRNA vaccines give instructions for our cells to make a HARMLESS piece of what is called the'spike protein'.The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19.
"COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle.Once the instructions (mRNA locked inside lipid nanoparticles) are inside the immune cells, the cells use them to make the protein piece (aka spike protein). After the protein piece is made, the cell breaks down the instructions and gets rid of them."(1)
In the first sentence the word 'harmless' is in capitals to draw attention to it. This is the first scientific error in the Official Story. The spike protein is not harmless. There were several studies written before the approval for the mRNA "vaccines" which demonstrated that, and several since then. Dr Michael Yeadon has explained that it is biologically active in that it can cause bleeding, blood clots and cell fusion. Notice that the statement does not refer to nanoparticles at all. The phrase 'mRNA locked inside lipid nanoparticles' has been added as clarification. I have written a longer article here explaining much more about how these "vaccines" work.
This is based primarily on a series of tweets by ☭NovaShpakova☭@NovaShpakova. This is what she says about herself:
For 22 yrs I've researched the networks that comprise the policy-making arm that protects the interests of the global capitalist class. And despite the absurd blame-game heard from BOTH sides of the propaganda machine, I know for a FACT all the leaders are fucking in the backroom.
She has collected a series of documents to show just how closely Russia, the supposed great "thread" to the West, works with the WEF in order to transform the world economy into a "multi-polar" world, and they can all be seen below. You can see in the first article that Atlantic Council & Russia are making policy TOGETHER for the WEF. Note the Global Platform for Geo-strategic Partners contains Atlantic Council, Chatham House/UK, CIIS/China,RAND/US, and Valdai Club/Russia. So there is ongoing geostrategic cooperation between the USA, UK, Russia and China which somehow is never discussed in the media.
This is an invaluable insight into the level of complete control imposed during the Covid Emergency. It is openly borrowed via screenshot from an episode of UK Column News - 9th June 2021.(1) They presented a summary of insights from the PhD by Steven Hassan: THE BITE MODEL OF AUTHORITARIAN CONTROL.(2)
As you read through the techniques of authoritarian control you should recognize they are all being used on us daily, and have been since the beginning of 2020. The policies listed below give the nitty-gritty details of how the world's elite have created a WORLDWIDE COVID-19 CULT. If the people who planned the Covid Emergency did not use this PhD as a model for their operations, they might as well have. If you want to understand why so many people are acting strangely, you need to look no further.
On the 12th of Januaray, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a document entitled "CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel".(1) The cover page states clearly it is "Instructions for Use". On the first page the PDF explains the Diagnostic Panel is a "real-time RT-PCR test intended for the qualitative detection of nucleic acid from SARS-CoV-2 in upper and lower respiratory specimens." It is 80 pages long and goes into minute details about what should be done to perform the test correctly.
I will show the authors of this document knew full well the test they gave instructions for was scientifically and medically useless. They carefully noted its defects in the middle of the report under a heading Limitations on pages 40-41. All of this is of no importance, however, when we realize that it is really a political tool.
THE PCR TESTS LOOKS FOR PARTS OF THE SARS-CoV-2 VIRUS
The standard PCR test is set up to look for two different parts of SARS-CoV-2,the virus that causes Covid-19, the E and RdRp gene.(2) There around 30,000 proteins in the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Here is a picture of where these two genes fit into the total sequence:
The person who supervised the development of the test, Christian Drosten, chose 20-30 of the 30,000 proteins as "typical". One is the Ee-gene, the envelope gene, which exists in many SARS viruses. There is a second primer: RdRp primer which codes an enzyme, and this is typical of SARS viruses as well. In practice most labs only look for the E-gene, which can be done quickly and is not specific to the Wuhan virus. In what follows I will show the only valid result of any PCR test is "these molecules are there" in the specimen. No PCR test can say the SARS-CoV-2 virus has infected the person who gave the specimen.(3)
THE PCR TEST IS LIMITED BY COVID-19 PREVALENCE
The "prevalence" of a disease refers to the percentage of the population being tested which has the disease. On page 40 under "Limitations" we find this:
"Positive and negative predictive values are highly dependent on prevalence. False-negative test results are more likely when prevalence of disease is high. False-positive test results are more likely when prevalence is moderate to low."
The issue of prevalence is a well known issue for any kind of medical testing. If the prevalence of the disease is high in the population, a positive test is more likely to be correct (or a negative test mistaken) since so many people have the disease. If the prevalence of the disease is low in the population, a positive test is more likely to be mistaken since so few people have the disease. This graph from a talk by Dr Wolfgang Wodarg shows the relationship between prevalence and reliability.
There is little doubt the prevalence of Covid-19 is greatest in the winter months. In Dr Wodarg's graph below we can see that the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in Germany was only above 10% for 7 weeks. Testing at other times would have been "pointless" or "Ungezietes" because the prevalence of Covid-19 infections would have been low.
So what will be the reliability of PCR tests for fragments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus over the summer months? Governments run these PCR tests all year around. They and most of the people who pay attention to the results completely ignore the way the small number of Covid-19 infections in many parts of the year means that their "results" are statistically meaningless.
POSITIVE PCR TEST DOES NOT PROVE THE SUBJECT HAS AN INFECTIOUS VIRUS.
The passage below highlights two different limitations. The first is that even though the swab taken from a person yields a positive PCR test, this does not mean that that person actually has an infectious virus. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the first 12 words of this sentence on their own completely destroys the reliability of any PCR test.
"Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent for clinical symptoms."
When we remember that the CDC is one of the great movers and shakers in world of Covid-19 science, this statement should stop the whole Covid-19 pandemic in its tracks. The fact that it does not just shows clearly THE COVID EMERGENCY IS NOT BASED ON SCIENTIFIC OR MEDICAL RESEARCH. The Emergency is based on POLITICAL DIRECTION BY PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE LEGALLY RECOGNIZED POLITICAL SYSTEMS.
POSITIVE PCR TEST DOES NOT SHOW WHAT CAUSED THE SYMPTOMS OF AN INFECTION
Remember PCR test is not a test for an illness. It looks for two genes which can be part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but they can also be parts of other SARS viruses. An infection is usually identified by symptoms like a cough, a cold, hoarseness, a temperature, bronchitis, or a fever. The idea that someone can "have" Covid-19 without an infection and/or symptoms is simply a medical myth. Until the Covid Emergency anyone who said a person could have a viral infection with no symptoms would not have lasted very long in medical school.
If the person who provided the swab for the test actually had an infection and symptoms of Covid-19, the PCR test does not itself prove that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was the cause of the illness. Why is this? No causal connection is shown because there are about 20 upper respiratory illnesses which have the same symptoms. In other words, because the test only identifies two small parts of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, it cannot identify which of the many pathogens has infected the subject of the test. Here a list of pathogens with Covid-19 like symptoms from a document supervised by Mr Drosten himself:
The first five on the list are closely related to SARS-CoV-2: HCoV-HKU1 (Human Coronavirus, identified in Hong Kong), HCoV-OC43, HCoV-NL63 (identified in the Netherlands), HCov-299E, MERS-CoV (Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome identified in the Middle East). Next there are 6 different kinds of influenza. Rhinovirus is said to be the usual cause of the common cold. Enterovirus can also cause the common cold. Respiratory syncytial virus can hospitalize infants, cause colds in adults and pneumonia in older people. Parainfluenza viruses can cause croup, bronchiolitus and pneumonia. Metapneumovirus causes lower respiratory infection in young children. Adenovirus can cause mild respiratory infections in young children and can become a life-threatening multi-organ disease in people with a weakened immune system. Human bocavirus can cause lower respiratory tract infections.(3)
After what we have seen, it comes as no surprise that this point is also one of the listed Limitations of the PCR test in the CDC PDF on page 41:
"This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens."
Here we see again that the PCR test is MEDICALLY USELESS. If a person comes to a medical facility with symptoms the first task of doctors is to determine what is causing the symptoms. This task is known as differential diagnosis. It involves considering all the things which could be causing the symptoms and then eliminating them one by one. There are in fact tests which can look for up to 20 pathogens in one test. If a doctor wanted to help an infected person they would not give them a PCR test, because it can't help to eliminate any of the possible causes. Instead they might use one of these multiple tests to help them identify the cause.
Simply by looking at the way the standard Covid-19 PCR test works we can see that it has not been designed for any scientific or medical research and no such claims are made for it in instructions: CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. When used to test a patient, it can tell a doctor NOTHING RELEVANT TO THE TREATMENT OF A PATIENT. Surprising as it may seem, I believe the test was devised not to provide medical information. The people who wrote the Instructions knew it had no medical value. The people behind this test, like Mr Drosten, must have known that its only value was political. The test looks "scientific" to outsiders because it is based on a standard instrument used in medical and scientific research. Like all the other "science" behind the Covid Emergency, it is a fraud. The Covid Emperor Has No Clothes, but only the very brave are prepared to say this publicly.
My intention is to look at the differences between the deaths caused by AstraZenica injections and the deaths caused by the Pfizer injections based on the data given in the UK Yellow Card system.(1) This system has not been properly set up as a random sample, however since there is no public database deliberately constructed as a random sample, this may well be as good as we can get for the UK. Furthermore, this analysis assumes a conclusion I argued for in a previous article: “Almost Half of UK Yellow Card Deaths Directly Caused by the mRNA Induced Spike Proteins”.(2) My investigation deals only with deaths reported in the Yellow Card system by 12/05/2021 attributed to AstraZenica and Pfizer. I divide these deaths into three groups: deaths described in a way that shows they were caused by blood clots and haemorrhage, deaths described in a way that does not obviously (to me) show they were caused in this way, and deaths which are recorded but not described further. The spreadsheet which provides all numbers and calculations is given at the end of the article.
I began by looking at the percentage of reports of deaths in the total of all reports for each medication:
0.449% of AstraZencia's reports indicated death
0.64% of Pfizer reports indicated death
0.05% of AstraZenica's and Pfizer's reports together indicated death.