Connect with us


June Monthly

June Monthly



The investment climate in June will be shaped by forces that emerged in May.  Many countries began relaxing lockdowns and various activity-based alternative data, like traffic pattern, Open Table Reservations showed improvement on the margins.  Sentiment surveys, while mostly still depressed, were better than April readings.  The long slog back has begun.  There was also optimism over several different vaccines that had been initiated or soon will begin human tests.  The hope is that with regulatory forbearance, a vaccine may be ready by year-end.

At the same time, the US-China rivalry escalated.  The novel coronavirus added a new dimension to the older problems.  Restrictions on Huawei were tightened.  Nearly three dozen Chinese entities were sanctioned for human rights violations.  The US may tighten rules on foreign company listings on the US exchanges that may force the delisting of some Chinese-based companies.  The Trump Administration is urging that the government pension fund does allow investments in Chinese stocks or bonds.

China continues to press hard.  It has struck out at Australia for seeking an independent investigation into the origins of the coronavirus.  It successfully blocked Taiwan from being granted observer status at the World Health Organization. Border tensions with India have seen troop movements on both sides.  Beijing also signaled that it would insist on changes to Hong Kong's Basic Law to give local officials greater authority to repress dissent spurring fresh concern.  The US announced intentions to curb Hong Kong's special trade privileges after the State Department questioned its autonomy.

March was when the markets froze up.  Governments and central banks around the world began responding in earnest to the pandemic. The MSCI All Country World Index (ACWI) bottomed on March 23. So did the S&P 500, while Europe's Dow Jones Stoxx 600 bottomed a week earlier (March 16), and the MSCI Asia Pacific Index recorded its low a couple of days later (March 19).

April was about further policy response. Efforts were increased in terms of size, scope, and/or time. Officials were successful in removing the far left-hand tail risk. Punishing volatility in the markets eased. Stress in the funding markets relaxed.  The compression of demand, supply chain disruptions, the contagion in the US meat processing industry, and some peculiarities with the settlement of the deliverable futures light sweet crude oil contract, distorted the commodity prices. The negative oil prices were quickly reversed and were near $20 a barrel by the end of the month.

May was when the high-income economies likely hit a trough as many countries begin relaxing their lockdowns. Part of the rise in the price of some industrial commodities, including gasoline and iron ore, reflects a marginal improvement in demand. Of course, the difference between relaxing lockdowns and economic recovery may be quite stark, but the first thing that happens is that contractions slow and stop.

The lack of a strong EU response and a German Constitutional Court ruling made it more difficult for the ECB to keep the peripheral premium from widening over Germany and throwing a spanner into its transmission mechanism.  However, the ECB is likely to expand its Pandemic Emergency Purchase Progam of bond-buying and is undeterred by the controversial court decision.  The European Commission incorporated that German-French proposal for a 500 bln euro grant facility funded by EU bonds and the desire to appease several Northern European creditor nations, with a 250 bln euro loan facility.  Several countries in eastern and central Europe already had strained relations with Brussels, and they were put-off by all three camps without having been consulted.  A unanimous decision is required and this may difficult to reach next month and investors can be expected to punish Europe by withdrawing savings on disappointment (i.e., selling the euro, equities, and peripheral bonds)

Some countries, central banks that have not adopted negative rates, are explicitly considering them. The Bank of England and the Reserve Bank of New Zealand are the leading contender but will likely explore other policy options first. The Bank of England is likely to expand its bond-buying program in June.  Several facilities that the Federal Reserve announced are beginning to be formally launched, and this will continue into June. The Federal Reserve has pushed back against speculation that it would adopt negative rates.  Targeting a longer maturity than overnight fed funds is under consideration.  In the market's vernacular, this is called yield curve control.  

Several political decisions will be made in June as well that could have a meaningful impact in the months ahead.  These include whether UK Prime Minister makes good on this threat to leave the free-trade talks with the EU if there was no substantive progress by June, or will OPEC+ extend its deepest output cuts or begin relaxing them? In the United States, emergency unemployment benefits expire at the end of July.  Will they be extended?

Dollar:  The early survey data for May showed a definite improvement over April.  While it is commonly recognized that the US economy will contract sharply in Q2, data needs set the stage for a recovery in Q3 to validate expectations. The capital markets have continued to stabilize, and this has seen the Federal Reserve taper its Treasury purchases to $5 bln a day down from $75 bln a day at its peak in late March and early April.  Fed officials have made it clear that there is little interest in adopting a negative target rate.  Besides scaling its programs, a yield curve control strategy, which would entail targeting a longer-dated maturity in addition to the overnight fund's rate, could be the next innovation.  The Bank of Japan, for example, targets the 10-year bond, while the Reserve Bank of Australia targets the 3-year yield.  We suspect that if the recovery disappointed for any reason, it could be adopted by late Q3.  There is some risk that the US trade relations Hong Kong is adversely impacted, and exposed businesses should test contingency plans. 

Euro:  The euro has remained rangebound against the dollar in May, and volatility has eased.  Europe moves to center stage in June.  First, the ECB meets on June 4 and is widely expected to increase its Pandemic Emergency Purchase Plan by 250-500 bln euros.  The modest usage of the Pandemic Emergency Long-Term Refinancing Operation (less than one billion euros), some observers see the terms (-0.25 bp below the zero repo rate) could be made more attractive.  Second, and not entirely unrelated, the ECB's Targeted Long-Term Refinancing Operation, with a rate that could be as low as negative 100 bp if specific lending targets are met, could see strong demand of a billion euros or more.  The amount is likely to be inflated, but the rolling into the new facility some past operations that were made on less favorable terms.  Third, the EU heads of state are expected to decide on the joint effort to promote economic recovery among competing proposals. A compromise between conflicting interests could prevent a unanimous decision and precipitate a crisis.    Even if successful, a joint bond may not be the prelude to a fiscal union as partisans argue.  The European Stabilization Mechanism and the European Investment Bank issue bonds that are collective obligations.  Still, if Europe is the sum of its responses to the crisis, its collective action now is critical.   

(end of March indicative prices, previous in parentheses)

Spot: $1.1100   ($1.0955) 
Median Bloomberg One-month Forecast $1.1075 ($1.0925) 
One-month forward  $1.1110 ($1.0960)    One-month implied vol  6.4%  (6.3%)    

Yen:   The dollar-yen exchange rate was stable in May between JPY106 and JPY108.  Violations were rare and shallow.  Public support for Prime Minister Abe has fallen drop, and this may be invigorating plans for a JPY100 trillion (~$926 bln) economic relief package.  The decline in energy prices, which Japan does not exclude from its core measure that the central bank targets, drove the core CPI back below zero in April.  The BOJ expanded its corporate bond and commercial support efforts,  but the gradual rise in equities allowed it to slow its ETF purchases in May. Interest rate differentials are also low and stable, leaving the broad risk appetites to be the main driver of the exchange rate. 

Spot: JPY107.85 (JPY107.20)      
Median Bloomberg One-month Forecast JPY107.60  (JPY107.10)     
One-month forward JPY107.80  (JPY107.15)    One-month implied vol  5.4% (7.1%)  

Sterling:  Nothing seemed to go in the UK's favor in May, and sterling was dragged lower.  Although sterling recouped some of its earlier losses that carried it to six-week lows in the middle of May (~$1.2075), it was still the weakest of the majors, depreciating nearly 2.75% against the dollar.  The virus has hit the UK hard, and it is slower than many other countries to re-open.  Several Bank of England officials have played up the possibility of adopting a negative target rate.  It seems neither imminent nor inevitable.  At the June 18 meeting, the BOE is more likely to increases is the bond-buying program by GBP100-GBP200 bln. Trade talks with the EU do not appear to be going particularly well, and this may also weigh on sterling. 

Spot: $1.2345  ($1.2590)   
Median Bloomberg One-month Forecast $1.2355 ($1.2375) 
One-month forward $1.2345 ($1.2590)   One-month implied vol 8.9% (8.6%)

Canadian Dollar:  The combination of the risk-on attitude, reflected in the continued recovery of equities and the better supply/demand factor that lifted oil prices by 60% in May, underpinned the Canadian dollar.  The US dollar fell to two-month lows in late-May near CAD1.3725.   The Bank of Canada meets on June 3.  There seems to be no urgency to adjust policy at Governor Poloz's last meeting.  Macklem will succeed him, but there is a strong sense of continuity.  Headline CPI fell below zero in April for the first time since 2009, but this was driven by the drop in oil prices and exaggerates the deflationary pressure.  Underlying measures remain steady.  There appears potential toward CAD1.3500-CAD1.3600 if risk appetites remain strong. 

Spot: CAD1.3780  (CAD 1.3945) 
Median Bloomberg One-month Forecast  CAD1.3810 (CAD1.4140)
One-month forward  CAD1.3800  (CAD1.3945)    One-month implied vol  6.9%  (7.4%) 

Australian Dollar:  Since the end of March, the Australian dollar has been the best performing major currency, appreciating about 8.5% against the US dollar.  Australian equities were also a significant beneficiary of the reflation-trade with the main benchmark up nearly 5% in May.  The Federal Reserve had greater scope to approach the zero-bound than the Reserve Bank of Australia and this has resulted in the return of a normal relationship, where Australia offers an interest rate premium over the US.  Meanwhile, Australia's push for an independent investigation of the origins of the coronavirus have earned it the ire of Beijing, with a high tariff (80%) levied on Australia's barley exports to China and a ban on some beef.  While China can find alternative supplies, the same cannot be said Australian's iron ore (at least in the short-run), which may limit the fallout. 

Spot:  $0.6665 ($0.6510)       
Median Bloomberg One-Month Forecast $.0.6575  ($0.6460)     
One-month forward  $0.6665  ($0.6510)     One-month implied vol 10.8%  (11.6%)   

Mexican Peso:  The Mexican peso was the world's strongest currency in May, gaining nearly 9% against the US dollar.  It still is off almost 15% year-to-date, making it the third-weakest behind the Brazilian real (~ -24.5%) and the South African rand (~- 19.5%).  The shift in the peso's fortunes is more the result of the broader risk environment than an improvement in Mexico's economic or political outlook.  The calmer markets and the global liquidity encourages asset managers to re-establish positions to benefit from Mexico's high real and nominal rates that they were forced to cut in the dark days in March.  The peso also serves a proxy for many less liquid or accessible emerging markets currencies.  The JP Morgan Emerging Market Currency Index rose about 3.7% in May, the best monthly performance in more than four years.  The dollar has surrendered around half of this year's gains against the peso. The momentum could carry toward MXN21.00-MXN21.50, depending on the broader environment.

Spot: MXN22.18 (MXN24.15)  
Median Bloomberg One-Month Forecast  MXN22.38 (MXN 24.10)  
One-month forward  MXN22.28 (MXN24.20)     One-month implied vol 18.5% (19.6%)

Chinese Yuan:   At the risk of taking Chinese macroeconomic data at face value, it does appear the economy is recovering.  Nevertheless, more fiscal and monetary stimulus has been signaled.  The year-over-year decline in producer prices warns that a profit squeeze is still materializing.  As US-China tensions escalated, the dollar trended higher against the yuan.  The dollar appreciated against the yuan for four consecutive weeks through the end of May.  It is difficult to see how the tensions will ease in the coming months, especially given the US political cycle.  In late 2019, the dollar rose to nearly CNY7.1850 and stopped just shy in late May.  However, given the tensions, the risk is for additional dollar gains, though tempered by China's other objectives, such as deter capital flight and spur import substitution.  In April, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority was intervening to stop the Hong Kong dollar from appreciating, which appeared to be in demand, given the interest rate pick-up.  However, by the end of May, investors had become more concerned about the future of the peg that the forward points widened to the most in two decades.  

Spot: CNY7.1365  (CNY7.0630)
Median Bloomberg One-month Forecast  CNY7.1150(CNY7.0620) 
One-month forward CNY7.1350  (CNY7.0760)    One-month implied vol  4.7% (4.3%)


Read More

Continue Reading


Who Can You Trust?

Who Can You Trust?

Authored by James Howard Kunstler via,

“I’m sick and tired of hearing Democrats whining about Joe Biden’s…



Who Can You Trust?

Authored by James Howard Kunstler via,

“I’m sick and tired of hearing Democrats whining about Joe Biden’s age. The man knows how to govern. Just shut up and vote to save Democracy.”

- Rob Reiner, Hollywood savant

Perhaps you’re aware that the World Health Organization (WHO) is cooking up a plan to impose its will over all the sovereign nations on this planet in the event of future pandemics.

That means, for instance, that the WHO would issue orders to the USA about lockdowns, vaccines, and vaccine passports and we US citizens supposedly would be compelled to follow them.

Why the “Joe Biden” regime would go along with this globalist fuckery is one of the abiding mysteries of our time - except that they go along with everything else that the cabal of Geneva cooks up, such as attacks on farmers, and on oil production, and on relations between men and women, and on personal privacy, and on economic liberty throughout Western Civ, as if they’re working overtime to kill it off. And all of us with it.

I think they are working overtime at that because the sore-beset citizens of Western Civ are onto their game, and getting restless about it. So, the Geneva cabal is in a race against time before the center pole of their circus tent collapses and the nations of the world are compelled to follow the zeitgeist in the direction of de-centralizing, foiling all their grand plans.

The “Joe Biden” regime is pretending to ignore the reality that this WHO deal is actually a treaty that would require ratification by a two-thirds vote in the senate, an unlikely outcome. In any case, handing over authority to the WHO — in effect, to its chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus — to push around American citizens like a giant herd of cattle would be patently unlawful.

That center pole of the circus tent is the wobbling global economy. It’s barely holding up the canvas over the three rings of the circus. In the center ring, the death-defying spectacle of the Biden Family crime case is playing out before a huge audience (us). This week, a gun went off at the FBI and smoke is curling out of the barrel. FBI Director Christopher Wray was forced to verify that he’s been sitting on an incriminating document for three years from a “trusted” confidential human source, i.e., an informant, stating that the Biden Family received a $5-million bribe from a foreign entity when “JB” was vice-president.

That’s only one bribe of many others, of course, as documented in the Hunter Biden laptop, and it must be obvious it represents treasonous behavior that will demand resignation or impeachment. As this spools out in the weeks and months ahead, do you think Americans will be in the mood to accept further insults such as “Joe Biden” surrendering our national sovereignty to the WHO?

Anyway, you must ask yourself: why on earth should I trust the WHO about anything? Did they not participate in laying a trip on the world with Covid-19? How did those lockdowns work out? Do you think they destroyed enough businesses and ruined enough households? How’s the vaccination program doing? Effective? Safe? Yeah, maybe not so much. Maybe killing a lot of people, wrecking immune systems, sterilizing reproductive organs, causing gross disabilities, shattering lives.

Of course, in over three years neither the WHO nor the US medical authorities showed the slightest interest in helping to figure out how the Covid-19 virus was made in a lab, and exactly how it got loose in the world. Lately, Dr. Ghebreyesus has warned the world about much worse future pandemics supposedly coming down at us. Oh? Really? What does he know that we don’t? That possibly new efforts to concoct chimeric diseases are ongoing in labs around the world? (You know that dozens of such labs were discovered in Ukraine as the war got underway there in 2022.) What’s Dr. Ghebreyesus doing to stop that?

If US orgs and citizens are involved in this “research,” why doesn’t the WHO alert our government leaders so they can stop it? (Would they? I’m not so sure.) And, who is behind it this time? The Eco-Health Alliance again, like with Covid-19? By the way, that outfit got another whopping grant last fall from the NIH to “study” bat viruses — right after the NIH terminated a previous grant on account of The Eco-Health Alliance failing to turn over notebooks and other records.

No, you cannot trust the WHO about anything. The “trust horizon” (a concept introduced by the great Nicole Foss, late of The Automatic Earth dot com) is shrinking. You can no longer trust any distant authorities. You also cannot trust the US federal government (especially the executive branch behind “Joe Biden”). And notice: the trust horizon is shrinking just as the world is de-centralizing. This, you see, is the main contradiction behind all the Globalists’ twisted ambitions to control everything, including you. They are working against the current tide of human history which is pushing everything toward down-scaling, re-localization, and re-assertion of the sovereign individual person.

That trend will become increasingly evident as things organized at the giant scale start to implode — giant retail chains, medical behemoths, hedge funds, big banks, you name it. The world no longer has the mojo for globalism. There’s reason to wonder these days whether the USA has the mojo to remain a unified national polity of states. Our federal government is not only financially bankrupt beyond any coherent reckoning, it is also morally bankrupt, and it has decided to make war against its own people. None of this is satisfactory and none of this is working. It’s time to figure out who and what you can trust and act accordingly.

Tyler Durden Sun, 06/04/2023 - 09:20

Read More

Continue Reading


Removing antimicrobial resistance from the WHO’s ‘pandemic treaty’ will leave humanity extremely vulnerable to future pandemics

Drug-resistant microbes are a serious threat for future pandemics, but the new draft of the WHO’s international pandemic agreement may not include provisions…




Antimicrobial resistance is now a leading cause of death worldwide due to drug-resistant infections, including drug-resistant strains of tuberculosis, pneumonia and Staph infections like the methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus shown here. (NIAID, cropped from original), CC BY

In late May, the latest version of the draft Pandemic Instrument, also referred to as the “pandemic treaty,” was shared with Member States at the World Health Assembly. The text was made available online via Health Policy Watch and it quickly became apparent that all mentions of addressing antimicrobial resistance in the Pandemic Instrument were at risk of removal.

Work on the Pandemic Instrument began in December 2021 after the World Health Assembly agreed to a global process to draft and negotiate an international instrument — under the Constitution of the World Health Organization (WHO) — to protect nations and communities from future pandemic emergencies.

Read more: Drug-resistant superbugs: A global threat intensified by the fight against coronavirus

Since the beginning of negotiations on the Pandemic Instrument, there have been calls from civil society and leading experts, including the Global Leaders Group on Antimicrobial Resistance, to include the so-called “silent” pandemic of antimicrobial resistance in the instrument.

Just three years after the onset of a global pandemic, it is understandable why Member States negotiating the Pandemic Instrument have focused on preventing pandemics that resemble COVID-19. But not all pandemics in the past have been caused by viruses and not all pandemics in the future will be caused by viruses. Devastating past pandemics of bacterial diseases have included plague and cholera. The next pandemic could be caused by bacteria or other microbes.

Antimicrobial resistance

Yellow particles on purple spikes
Microscopic view of Yersinia pestis, the bacteria that cause bubonic plague, on a flea. Plague is an example of previous devastating pandemics of bacterial disease. (NIAID), CC BY

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is the process by which infections caused by microbes become resistant to the medicines developed to treat them. Microbes include bacteria, fungi, viruses and parasites. Bacterial infections alone cause one in eight deaths globally.

AMR is fueling the rise of drug-resistant infections, including drug-resistant tuberculosis, drug-resistant pneumonia and drug-resistant Staph infections such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). These infections are killing and debilitating millions of people annually, and AMR is now a leading cause of death worldwide.

Without knowing what the next pandemic will be, the “pandemic treaty” must plan, prepare and develop effective tools to respond to a wider range of pandemic threats, not solely viruses.

Even if the world faces another viral pandemic, secondary bacterial infections will be a serious issue. During the COVID-19 pandemic for instance, large percentages of those hospitalized with COVID-19 required treatment for secondary bacterial infections.

New research from Northwestern University suggests that many of the deaths among hospitalized COVID-19 patients were associated with pneumonia — a secondary bacterial infection that must be treated with antibiotics.

An illustrative diagram that shows the difference between a drug resistant bacteria and a non-resistant bacteria.
Antimicrobial resistance means infections that were once treatable are much more difficult to treat. (NIAID), CC BY

Treating these bacterial infections requires effective antibiotics, and with AMR increasing, effective antibiotics are becoming a scarce resource. Essentially, safeguarding the remaining effective antibiotics we have is critical to responding to any pandemic.

That’s why the potential removal of measures that would help mitigate AMR and better safeguard antimicrobial effectiveness is so concerning. Sections of the text which may be removed include measures to prevent infections (caused by bacteria, viruses and other microbes), such as:

  • better access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene;
  • higher standards of infection prevention and control;
  • integrated surveillance of infectious disease threats from human, animals and the environment; and
  • strengthening antimicrobial stewardship efforts to optimize how antimicrobial drugs are used and prevent the development of AMR.

The exclusion of these measures would hinder efforts to protect people from future pandemics, and appears to be part of a broader shift to water-down the language in the Pandemic Instrument, making it easier for countries to opt-out of taking recommended actions to prevent future pandemics.

Making the ‘pandemic treaty’ more robust

Measures to address AMR could be easily included and addressed in the “pandemic treaty.”

In September 2022, I was part of a group of civil society and research organizations that specialize in mitigating AMR who were invited the WHO’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) to provide an analysis on how AMR should be addressed, within the then-draft text.

They outlined that including bacterial pathogens in the definition of “pandemics” was critical. They also identified specific provisions that should be tweaked to track and address both viral and bacterial threats. These included AMR and recommended harmonizing national AMR stewardship rules.

In March 2023, I joined other leading academic researchers and experts from various fields in publishing a special edition of the Journal of Medicine, Law and Ethics, outlining why the Pandemic Instrument must address AMR.

The researchers of this special issue argued that the Pandemic Instrument was overly focused on viral threats and ignored AMR and bacterial threats, including the need to manage antibiotics as a common-pool resource and revitalize research and development of novel antimicrobial drugs.

Next steps

While earlier drafts of the Pandemic Instrument drew on guidance from AMR policy researchers and civil society organizations, after the first round of closed-door negotiations by Member States, all of these insertions, are now at risk for removal.

The Pandemic Instrument is the best option to mitigate AMR and safeguard lifesaving antimicrobials to treat secondary infections in pandemics. AMR exceeds the capacity of any single country or sector to solve. Global political action is needed to ensure the international community works together to collectively mitigate AMR and support the conservation, development and equitable distribution of safe and effective antimicrobials.

By missing this opportunity to address AMR and safeguard antimicrobials in the Pandemic Instrument, we severely undermine the broader goals of the instrument: to protect nations and communities from future pandemic emergencies.

It is important going forward that Member States recognize the core infrastructural role that antimicrobials play in pandemic response and strengthen, rather than weaken, measures meant to safeguard antimicrobials.

Antimicrobials are an essential resource for responding to pandemic emergencies that must be protected. If governments are serious about pandemic preparedness, they must support bold measures to conserve the effectiveness of antimicrobials within the Pandemic Instrument.

Susan Rogers Van Katwyk is a member of the WHO Collaborating Centre on Global Governance of Antimicrobial Resistance at York University. She receives funding from the Wellcome Trust and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Repeated COVID-19 Vaccination Weakens Immune System: Study

Repeated COVID-19 Vaccination Weakens Immune System: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Repeated COVID-19…



Repeated COVID-19 Vaccination Weakens Immune System: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Repeated COVID-19 vaccination weakens the immune system, potentially making people susceptible to life-threatening conditions such as cancer, according to a new study.

A man is given a COVID-19 vaccine in Chelsea, Mass., on Feb. 16, 2021. (Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images)

Multiple doses of the Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines lead to higher levels of antibodies called IgG4, which can provide a protective effect. But a growing body of evidence indicates that the “abnormally high levels” of the immunoglobulin subclass actually make the immune system more susceptible to the COVID-19 spike protein in the vaccines, researchers said in the paper.

They pointed to experiments performed on mice that found multiple boosters on top of the initial COVID-19 vaccination “significantly decreased” protection against both the Delta and Omicron virus variants and testing that found a spike in IgG4 levels after repeat Pfizer vaccination, suggesting immune exhaustion.

Studies have detected higher levels of IgG4 in people who died with COVID-19 when compared to those who recovered and linked the levels with another known determinant of COVID-19-related mortality, the researchers also noted.

A review of the literature also showed that vaccines against HIV, malaria, and pertussis also induce the production of IgG4.

“In sum, COVID-19 epidemiological studies cited in our work plus the failure of HIV, Malaria, and Pertussis vaccines constitute irrefutable evidence demonstrating that an increase in IgG4 levels impairs immune responses,” Alberto Rubio Casillas, a researcher with the biology laboratory at the University of Guadalajara in Mexico and one of the authors of the new paper, told The Epoch Times via email.

The paper was published by the journal Vaccines in May.

Pfizer and Moderna officials didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Both companies utilize messenger RNA (mRNA) technology in their vaccines.

Dr. Robert Malone, who helped invent the technology, said the paper illustrates why he’s been warning about the negative effects of repeated vaccination.

“I warned that more jabs can result in what’s called high zone tolerance, of which the switch to IgG4 is one of the mechanisms. And now we have data that clearly demonstrate that’s occurring in the case of this as well as some other vaccines,” Malone, who wasn’t involved with the study, told The Epoch Times.

So it’s basically validating that this rush to administer and re-administer without having solid data to back those decisions was highly counterproductive and appears to have resulted in a cohort of people that are actually more susceptible to the disease.”

Possible Problems

The weakened immune systems brought about by repeated vaccination could lead to serious problems, including cancer, the researchers said.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Sat, 06/03/2023 - 22:30

Read More

Continue Reading