Connect with us

Government

WHO Suddenly Shelves Plans For Second Phase Investigation Into Origins Of COVID-19: Report

WHO Suddenly Shelves Plans For Second Phase Investigation Into Origins Of COVID-19: Report

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times,

More…

Published

on

WHO Suddenly Shelves Plans For Second Phase Investigation Into Origins Of COVID-19: Report

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times,

More than three years after COVID-19 emerged in the Chinese city of Wuhan, the World Health Organization (WHO) has shelved its plan for the second phase of a study into the virus’ origins, Nature reported Tuesday.

In January 2021, a year after the initial outbreak, the WHO dispatched an international team of scientists and doctors from various disciplines to Wuhan, where they worked with Chinese experts to examine evidence about the virus. The phase one investigation yielded a report that only spawned more questions over the hypothesis that the virus might have escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which was tinkering with bat coronaviruses. It was also criticized for ignoring China’s failure to hand over complete, original data and samples.

In response to those concerns, the United Nations agency in July 2021 announced a plan for a more extensive second phase investigation. Specifically, it promised to find and review more data on “relevant laboratories and research institutions” in Wuhan, as well as data on wild animals sold at the city’s live animal markets in late 2019, to better understand whether it’s more likely that the pandemic began with human contact with an infected animal, or from a lab escape.

The proposed probe never materialized.

Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, an epidemiologist at the WHO in Geneva, Switzerland, told Nature that the plan “has changed.”

“There is no phase two,” Van Kerkhove told the scientific journal.

“The politics across the world of this really hampered progress on understanding the origins,” she said.

In response to The Epoch Times’ request for further comments, a spokesperson for Van Kerkhove said Nature’s report was “incorrect” and that she has asked the publication for correction.

Nature has yet to issue any correction at the point of this publication.

CCP Pushback

The mere discussion of a lab escape as a possible scenario in the first phase report irritated the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime, which turned it into an excuse not to allow another WHO mission into Wuhan.

Just days after the WHO proposed a second phase investigation, the regime mounted a pushback, claiming that the lab breach hypothesis shouldn’t even be talked about, let alone be the focus of further scrutiny.

Security personnel keep watch outside the Wuhan Institute of Virology during the visit by the World Health Organization (WHO) team tasked with investigating the origins of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, on Feb. 3, 2021. (Thomas Peter/Reuters)

The proposal, according to vice minister of China’s National Health Commission, Zeng Yixin, “did not respect common sense and violated science.” He also insisted that there wasn’t any “man-made virus” at the WIV, nor had the institute ever conducted gain-of-function experiments on the novel coronavirus.

“It is impossible for us to accept such an origin-tracing plan,” Zeng said at that time.

“We are opposed to politicizing the tracing work.”

Zeng’s comments prompted Washington to call out Beijing for its “dangerous” and “irresponsible” behavior.

“We are deeply disappointed,” said White House press secretary Jen Psaki said. “Their position is irresponsible, and frankly, dangerous. It’s not a time to be stonewalling.”

Amid the tension between China and the United States, the WHO was still seeking “directly engage” with Chinese officials and trying to establish collaborations with Chinese scientists, according to Van Kerkhove.

“We really, really want to be able to work with our colleagues there,” she told Nature. “It’s really a deep frustration.”

WHO Leadership Change

Nature’s report comes as Jeremy Farrar, a British pharmaceutical trust director involved in producing a paper arguing against the lab breach hypothesis, is set to take the helm of WHO’s science division.

According to emails obtained and publicized by independent journalist James Tobias via a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, Farrar had been working on a draft of the paper with Dr. Anthony Fauci, who led the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in as early as January 2020. At one point, the two appeared to discuss whether the virus could have been put in a serial passage between animals in lab experiments and then escaped.

The paper in question, titled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” was published in Nature Medicine in March 2020. It has since been widely cited by government officials—Fauci himself included—and mainstream media outlets as the scientific basis for dismissing the possibility that COVID-19 might have come out of a lab.

Tyler Durden Thu, 02/16/2023 - 17:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Escobar: The Geopolitics Of Al-Aqsa Flood

Escobar: The Geopolitics Of Al-Aqsa Flood

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

Global focus just shifted from Ukraine to Palestine. This…

Published

on

Escobar: The Geopolitics Of Al-Aqsa Flood

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

Global focus just shifted from Ukraine to Palestine. This new arena of confrontation will ignite further competition between the Atlanticist and Eurasian blocs. These fights are increasingly zero-sum ones; as in Ukraine, only one pole can emerge strengthened and victorious.

Hamas’ Operation Al-Aqsa Flood was meticulously planned. The launch date was conditioned by two triggering factors. 

  • First was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flaunting his 'New Middle East' map at the UN General Assembly in September, in which he completely erased Palestine and made a mockery of every single UN resolution on the subject. 

  • Second are the serial provocations at the holy Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, including the straw that broke the camel’s back: two days before Al-Aqsa Flood, on 5 October, at least 800 Israeli settlers launched an assault around the mosque, beating pilgrims, destroying Palestinian shops, all under the observation of Israeli security forces.

Everyone with a functioning brain knows Al-Aqsa is a definitive red line, not just for Palestinians, but for the entire Arab and Muslim worlds. 

It gets worse. The Israelis have now invoked the rhetoric of a “Pearl Harbor.” This is as threatening as it gets. The original Pearl Harbor was the American excuse to enter a world war and nuke Japan, and this “Pearl Harbor” may be Tel Aviv’s justification to launch a Gaza genocide.  

Sections of the west applauding the upcoming ethnic cleansing – including Zionists posing as “analysts” saying out loud that the “population transfers” that began in 1948 “must be completed” – believe that with massive weaponry and massive media coverage, they can turn things around in short shrift, annihilate the Palestinian resistance, and leave Hamas allies like Hezbollah and Iran weakened. 

Their Ukraine Project has sputtered, leaving not just egg on powerful faces, but entire European economies in ruin.

Yet as one door closes, another one opens: Jump from ally Ukraine to ally Israel, and hone your sights on adversary Iran instead of adversary Russia.  

There are other good reasons to go all guns blazing. 

A peaceful West Asia means Syria reconstruction – in which China is now officially involved; active redevelopment for Iraq and Lebanon; Iran and Saudi Arabia as part of BRICS 11; the Russia-China strategic partnership fully respected and interacting with all regional players, including key US allies in the Persian Gulf.

Incompetence. Willful strategy. Or both.

That brings us to the cost of launching this new “war on terror.” The propaganda is in full swing. For Netanyahu in Tel Aviv, Hamas is ISIS. For Volodymyr Zelensky in Kiev, Hamas is Russia. Over one October weekend, the war in Ukraine was completely forgotten by western mainstream media. Brandenburg Gate, the Eiffel tower, the Brazilian Senate are all Israeli now. 

Egyptian intel claims it warned Tel Aviv about an imminent attack from Hamas. The Israelis chose to ignore it, as they did the Hamas training drills they observed in the weeks prior, smug in their superior knowledge that Palestinians would never have the audacity to launch a liberation operation.

Whatever happens next, Al-Aqsa Flood has already, irretrievably, shattered the hefty pop mythology around the invincibility of Tsahal, Mossad, Shin Bet, Merkava tank, Iron Dome, and the Israel Defense Forces. 

Even as it ditched electronic communications, Hamas profited from the glaring collapse of Israel’s multi-billion-dollar electronic systems monitoring the most surveilled border on the planet. 

Cheap Palestinian drones hit multiple sensor towers, facilitated the advance of a paragliding infantry, and cleared the way for T-shirted, AK-47-wielding assault teams to inflict breaks in the wall and cross a border that even stray cats dared not. 

Israel, inevitably, turned to battering the Gaza Strip, an encircled cage of 365 square kilometers packed with 2.3 million people. The indiscriminate bombing of refugee camps, schools, civilian apartment blocks, mosques, and slums has begun. Palestinians have no navy, no air force, no artillery units, no armored fighting vehicles, and no professional army. They have little to no high-tech surveillance access, while Israel can call up NATO data if they want it. 

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant proclaimed “a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we will act accordingly.”

The Israelis can merrily engage in collective punishment because, with three guaranteed UNSC vetoes in their back pocket, they know they can get away with it. 

It doesn’t matter that Haaretz, Israel’s most respected newspaper, straight out concedes that “actually the Israeli government is solely responsible for what happened (Al-Aqsa Flood) for denying the rights of Palestinians.”

The Israelis are nothing if not consistent. Back in 2007, then-Israeli Defense Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin said, “Israel would be happy if Hamas took over Gaza because IDF could then deal with Gaza as a hostile state.” 

Ukraine funnels weapons to Palestinians

Only one year ago, the sweaty sweatshirt comedian in Kiev was talking about turning Ukraine into a “big Israel,” and was duly applauded by a bunch of Atlantic Council bots. 

Well, it turned out quite differently. As an old-school Deep State source just informed me:

“Ukraine-earmarked weapons are ending up in the hands of the Palestinians. The question is which country is paying for it. Iran just made a deal with the US for six billion dollars and it is unlikely Iran would jeopardize that. I have a source who gave me the name of the country but I cannot reveal it. The fact is that Ukrainian weapons are going to the Gaza Strip and they are being paid for but not by Iran." 

After its stunning raid last weekend, a savvy Hamas has already secured more negotiating leverage than Palestinians have wielded in decades. Significantly, while peace talks are supported by China, Russia, Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt - Tel Aviv refuses. Netanyahu is obsessed with razing Gaza to the ground, but if that happens, a wider regional war is nearly inevitable. 

Lebanon’s Hezbollah – a staunch Resistance Axis ally of the Palestinian resistance - would rather not be dragged into a war that can be devastating on its side of the border, but that could change if Israel perpetrates a de facto Gaza genocide. 

Hezbollah holds at least 100,000 ballistic missiles and rockets, from Katyusha (range: 40 km) to Fajr-5 (75 km), Khaibar-1 (100 km), Zelzal 2 (210 km), Fateh-110 (300 km), and Scud B-C (500 km). Tel Aviv knows what that means, and shudders at the frequent warnings by Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah that its next war with Israel will be conducted inside that country.   

Which brings us to Iran. 

Geopolitical plausible deniability

The key immediate consequence of Al-Aqsa Flood is that the Washington neocon wet dream of “normalization” between Israel and the Arab world will simply vanish if this turns into a Long War.

Large swathes of the Arab world in fact are already normalizing their ties with Tehran – and not only inside the newly expanded BRICS 11. 

In the drive towards a multipolar world, represented by BRICS 11, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), among other groundbreaking Eurasian and Global South institutions, there’s simply no place for an ethnocentric Apartheid state fond of collective punishment.    

Just this year, Israel found itself disinvited from the African Union summit. An Israeli delegation showed up anyway, and was unceremoniously ejected from the big hall, a visual that went viral. At the UN plenary sessions last month, a lone Israeli diplomat sought to disrupt Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi’s speech. No western ally stood by his side, and he too, was ejected from the premises. 

As Chinese President Xi Jinping diplomatically put it in December 2022, Beijing “firmly supports the establishment of an independent state of Palestine that enjoys full sovereignty based on 1967 borders and with East Jerusalem as its capital. China supports Palestine in becoming a full member of the United Nations.”

Tehran’s strategy is way more ambitious – offering strategic advice to West Asian resistance movements from the Levant to the Persian Gulf: Hezbollah, Ansarallah, Hashd al-Shaabi, Kataib Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and countless others. It’s as if they are all part of a new Grand Chessboard de facto supervised by Grandmaster Iran. 

The pieces in the chessboard were carefully positioned by none other than the late Quds Force Commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps General Qassem Soleimani, a once-in-a-lifetime military genius. He was instrumental in creating the foundations for the cumulative successes of Iranian allies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Palestine, as well as creating the conditions for a complex operation such as Al-Aqsa Flood. 

Elsewhere in the region, the Atlanticist drive of opening strategic corridors across the Five Seas - the Caspian, the Black Sea, the Red Sea, the Persian Gulf, and the Eastern Mediterranean - is floundering badly. 

Russia and Iran are already smashing US designs in the Caspian – via the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) – and the Black Sea, which is on the way to becoming a Russian lake. Tehran is paying very close attention to Moscow’s strategy in Ukraine, even as it refines its own strategy on how to debilitate the Hegemon without direct involvement: call it geopolitical plausible deniability.   

Bye bye EU-Israel-Saudi-India corridor

The Russia-China-Iran alliance has been demonized as the new “axis of evil” by western neocons. That infantile rage betrays cosmic impotence. These are Real Sovereigns that can’t be messed with, and if they are, the price to pay is unthinkable. 

A key example: if Iran under attack by a US-Israeli axis decided to block the Strait of Hormuz, the global energy crisis would skyrocket, and the collapse of the western economy under the weight of quadrillions of derivatives would be inevitable. 

What this means, in the immediate future, is that he American Dream of interfering across the Five Seas does not even qualify as a mirage. Al-Aqsa Flood has also just buried the recently-announced and much-ballyhooed EU-Israel-Saudi Arabia-India transportation corridor. 

China is keenly aware of all this incandescence taking place only a week before its 3rd Belt and Road Forum in Beijing. At stake are the BRI connectivity corridors that matter – across the Heartland, across Russia, plus the Maritime Silk Road and the Arctic Silk Road. 

Then there’s the INSTC linking Russia, Iran and India – and by ancillary extension, the Gulf monarchies. 

The geopolitical repercussions of Al-Aqsa Flood will speed up Russia, China and Iran’s interconnected geoeconomic and logistical connections, bypassing the Hegemon and its Empire of Bases. Increased trade and non-stop cargo movement are all about (good) business. On equal terms, with mutual respect - not exactly the War Party’s scenario for a destabilized West Asia.  

Oh, the things that a slow-moving paragliding infantry overflying a wall can accelerate.  

*  *  *

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/14/2023 - 23:20

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Visualizing All Attempted & Successful Moon Landings

Visualizing All Attempted & Successful Moon Landings

Since before Ancient Greece and the first Chinese Dynasties, people have sought to…

Published

on

Visualizing All Attempted & Successful Moon Landings

Since before Ancient Greece and the first Chinese Dynasties, people have sought to understand and learn more about the moon.

Curiosity and centuries of study culminated in the first moon landing in the 1960s. But there have been many other attempted moon landings, both before and after.

This chart by Visual Capitalists' Preyash Shah illustrates all the moon landings using NASA data since 1966 when Soviet lander Luna 9 touched down.

Race to the Moon

The 1960s and 1970s marked an era of intense competition between the U.S. and the Soviet Union as they raced to conquer the moon.

During the Cold War, space became a priority as each side sought to prove the superiority of its technology, its military firepower, and its political-economic system.

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy set a national goal to have a crewed lunar landing and return to Earth.

After several failed attempts from both sides, on July 20, 1969, the Apollo 11 mission was successful and astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first humans to set foot on the moon.

Mission Launch Date Operator Country Mission Type Outcome
Ranger 3 26-Jan-62 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Spacecraft failure
Ranger 4 23-Apr-62 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Spacecraft failure
Ranger 5 18-Oct-62 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Spacecraft failure
Luna E-6 No.2 4-Jan-63 OKB-1 ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Luna E-6 No.3 3-Feb-63 OKB-1 ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Luna 4 2-Apr-63 OKB-1 ☭ USSR Lander Spacecraft failure
Luna E-6 No.6 21-Mar-64 OKB-1 ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Luna E-6 No.5 20-Apr-64 OKB-1 ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Kosmos 60 12-Mar-65 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Luna E-6 No.8 10-Apr-65 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Spacecraft failure
Luna 5 9-May-65 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Spacecraft failure
Luna 6 8-Jun-65 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Spacecraft failure
Luna 7 4-Oct-65 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Spacecraft failure
Luna 8 3-Dec-65 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Spacecraft failure
Luna 9 31-Jan-66 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Successful
Surveyor 1 30-May-66 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Successful
Surveyor 2 20-Sep-66 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Spacecraft failure
Luna 13 21-Dec-66 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Successful
Surveyor 3 17-Apr-67 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Successful
Surveyor 4 14-Jul-67 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Spacecraft failure
Surveyor 5 8-Sep-67 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Successful
Surveyor 6 7-Nov-67 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Successful
Surveyor 7 7-Jan-68 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander Successful
Luna E-8 No.201 19-Feb-69 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Luna E-8-5 No.402 14-Jun-69 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Luna 15 13-Jul-69 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Spacecraft failure
Apollo 11 16-Jul-69 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander/
Launch Vehicle
Successful
Kosmos 300 23-Sep-69 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Kosmos 305 22-Oct-69 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Apollo 12 14-Nov-69 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander/
Launch Vehicle
Successful
Luna E-8-5 No.405 6-Feb-70 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Apollo 13 11-Apr-70 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander/
Launch Vehicle
Partial failure
Luna 16 12-Sep-70 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Successful
Luna 17 10-Nov-70 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Successful
Apollo 14 31-Jan-71 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander/
Launch Vehicle
Successful
Apollo 15 26-Jul-71 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander/
Launch Vehicle
Successful
Luna 18 2-Sep-71 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Spacecraft failure
Luna 20 14-Feb-72 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Successful
Apollo 16 16-Apr-72 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander/
Launch Vehicle
Successful
Apollo 17 7-Dec-72 NASA ???????? U.S. Lander/
Launch Vehicle
Successful
Luna 21 8-Jan-73 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Successful
Luna 23 16-Oct-75 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Partial failure
Luna E-8-5M No.412 16-Oct-75 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Launch failure
Luna 24 9-Aug-76 Lavochkin ☭ USSR Lander Successful
Chang'e 3 1-Dec-13 CNSA ???????? China Lander Operational
Chang'e 4 7-Dec-18 CNSA ???????? China Lander Operational
Beresheet 22-Feb-19 SpaceIL ???????? Israel Lander Spacecraft failure
Chandrayaan-2 22-Jul-19 ISRO ???????? India Lander Spacecraft Failure
Chang'e 5 23-Nov-20 CNSA ???????? China Lander Successful
Hakuto-R Mission 1 11-Dec-22 ispace ???????? Japan Lander Spacecraft failure
Chandrayaan-3 14-Jul-23 ISRO ???????? India Lander Successful
Luna 25 10-Aug-23 Roscosmos ???????? Russia Lander Spacecraft failure

After the Apollo missions, the fervor of lunar exploration waned. From 1976 to 2013, no moon landing attempts occurred due to budget constraints, shifting priorities, and advances in robotic missions.

However, a new chapter in space exploration has unfolded in recent years, with emerging players entering the cosmic arena. With its Chang’e missions, China has made significant strides, landing rovers on the moon and exploring the far side of the moon.

India, too, has asserted its presence with the Chandrayaan missions. In 2023, the country became the 4th nation to reach the moon as an unmanned spacecraft landed near the lunar south pole, advancing the country’s space ambitions to learn more about the lunar ice, potentially one of the moon’s most valuable resources.

Exploring Lunar Water

Since the 1960s, even before the historic Apollo landing, scientists had theorized the potential existence of water on the moon.

In 2008, Brown University researchers employed advanced technology to reexamine lunar samples, discovering hydrogen within beads of volcanic glass. And in 2009, a NASA instrument aboard the India’s Chandrayaan-1 probe confirmed the presence of water on the moon’s surface.

Water is deemed crucial for future space exploration. Beyond serving as a potential source of drinking water for future moon explorations, ice deposits could play a pivotal role in cooling equipment. Lunar ice could also be broken down to produce hydrogen for fuel and oxygen for breathing, essential for supporting extended space missions.

With a reinvigorated interest in exploring the moon, manned moon landings are on the horizon once again. In April 2023, NASA conducted tests for the launch of Artemis I, the first American spacecraft to aim for the moon since 1972. The agency aims to send astronauts to the moon around 2025 and build a base camp on the lunar surface.

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/14/2023 - 22:45

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

“We Can’t Force The Human Body To Accept Foreign Genetic Code” Dr. McCullough On mRNA Technology

"We Can’t Force The Human Body To Accept Foreign Genetic Code” Dr. McCullough On mRNA Technology

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch…

Published

on

"We Can't Force The Human Body To Accept Foreign Genetic Code'' Dr. McCullough On mRNA Technology

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough warned that messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines inject “foreign genetic code” into human beings, which the body fails to break down or expel for a prolonged period of time.

Colorized scanning electron micrograph of a cell (purple) infected with a variant strain of SARS-CoV-2 virus particles (pink), isolated from a patient sample. (NIAID via The Epoch Times)

Research on mRNA “has been going on for decades,” Dr. McCullough said during an Oct. 5 interview. The 2023 Nobel Prize for medicine was awarded to two scientists for making “messenger RNA long-lasting in the human body,” he said. “I mean, it has been tested in multiple applications … It's an absolute bust. It was just the worst idea ever to install the genetic code for a lethal protein without being able to shut it off. It wasn't the fact that it was rushed; it's just ill-conceived from the very beginning.”

We can't force the human body to accept foreign genetic code and produce a foreign protein … Messenger RNA for vaccines is a completely failed concept. It’s a dangerous concept, and the U.S. government wasn't honest. They should have been honest. Trump should have come out and said, ‘Listen, it's on our website; our military's been working on this since 2012.’”

During a testimony at the European Parliament last month, Dr. McCullough said, “There's not a single study showing that the messenger RNA is broken down” in the human body once it is injected.

There's not a study showing it leaves the body.” Since the vaccines are “made synthetically, they cannot be broken down.”

He added that the lethal protein from the [COVID-19] vaccines found in the human body after vaccination was found to be circulating “at least for six months, if not longer.”

In the case of seasonal jabs, that is, taking an injection or booster at the end of six months as recommended by the authorities, “there's another installation in more circulating potentially lethal protein.”

Scientist Drew Weissman, who won the 2023 Nobel Prize in Medicine for his role in developing mRNA technology, warned in a 2018 paper that not only did clinical trials of mRNA vaccines produce “more modest [results] in humans than was expected based on animal models,” but that the “side effects were not trivial.”

Dr. Mccullough’s comments come as the Gates Foundation is spending $40 million on countries in Africa and other economically backward nations to produce new mRNA vaccines in efforts to prevent diseases like tuberculosis and malaria.

Concealing a ‘Global Security Threat’

In the Steve Deace interview, Dr. McCullough said that the ineffectiveness of the technology was not unknown to the government since they’ve been testing it for nearly 40 years.

He referred to a February 2023 paper published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), which cited that the U.S. government has been investing billions of dollars in developing messenger RNA technology since 1985.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) began investing in mRNA tech in 2011. DARPA then launched the Pandemic Prevention Platform (P3) program in 2016 that sought to produce “relevant numbers of doses” against infections within 60 days of identifying them.

The ADEPT P3 was a program by the U.S. military “to end pandemics in 60 days.” There is no other technology “that our government has invested more in,” Dr. McCullough said.

Dr. McCullough cited another paper that stated there were “over 9,000 patents on messenger RNA. And all the patent assignees are big entities. At the top is Sanofi, then Cervavac, BioNTech, Moderna, and the U.S. government. No single person invented messenger RNA. Someone who comes up in 2021 and says, ‘You know I invented it’. That's impossible. This has been going on for decades.”

Dr. McCullough pointed out that the United States and China have been in “collaboration for years” in their research on infectious and lethal coronavirus.

However, officials like Anthony Fauci, the former head of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Francis Collins, the former head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and “a whole cadre of scientists, they collaborated to conceal this global security threat.”

“They actually intentionally lied to the world and said the virus came out of nature. They knew it came out of the Wuhan lab,” he said, citing a research paper by Ralph Baric and Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi that was published in the Nature journal in 2015.

Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi is affiliated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, while Mr. Baric is from the Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

They said they created SARS-CoV-2 virus. They called it the Wuhan Institute of Virology 1 virus. That was the prototype SARS-CoV-2. So, that's in 2015. Instead of bringing Ralph Baric out [and asking] ‘Dr. Baric, how do we get ourselves out of this disaster,’ you masterminded this virus funded by the US.”

‘Pull All COVID-19 Vaccines Off the Market’

In his interview, Dr. McCullough made three recommendations. “I say number one, I've called in the US Senate [and] now the European Parliament [to] pull all COVID-19 vaccines off the market before anyone else is harmed.”

“Number two, US, EU and all westernized Nations [should] pull out of the WHO. They're not trustable. And number three, I'm following the World Council for Health. I am recommending a halt on all childhood vaccines, the entire vaccine schedule until this is clarified since messenger RNA is now on the schedule without any concerns for safety.

Cardiologists Dr. Aseem Malhotra (left) and Dr. Peter McCullough (right) in Dallas, Texas, on Nov. 29, 2022. (Bao Qiu/The Epoch Times)

While some studies related to the safety of COVID-19 vaccines have shown the jabs to be safe, others have raised concerns about the safety of the shots.

A December 2022 study analyzed trials comparing vaccine recipients with individuals who did not receive a vaccine or were given a placebo.

It concluded that “compared to placebo, most vaccines reduce, or likely reduce, the proportion of participants with confirmed symptomatic COVID-19, and for some, there is high-certainty evidence that they reduce severe or critical disease.”

However, a June 2022 study that looked at mRNA vaccinations found that “Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events of special interest (AESI).”

“The excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest surpassed the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group in both Pfizer and Moderna trials.”

‘Shedding’ the Infection

During the interview, Mr. Deace asked about hearing issues that he and his colleague suffered and whether they had any ties with the vaccines. While he did not take a COVID-19 shot, the colleague was vaccinated. Mr. Deace asked if this was “further proof that basically the last few years Peter everybody was a lab rat whether you took the vaccine or not.”

Syringes and vials of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine are prepared to be administered at a drive-up vaccination site in Reno, Nev., on Dec. 17, 2020. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)

“It's true, nearly all of us have been exposed to the Wuhan spike protein,” Dr. McCullough replied. “When I see patients in the office, we check antibodies against the spike protein. Invariably, they're elevated. Rarely, I'll find somebody who hasn't been exposed.”

Dr. McCullough pointed out that there are “clear-cut papers” showing individuals suffering hearing loss after taking COVID-19 jabs. “It's all related to the spike protein,” he said. mRNA vaccines work by instructing cells in the body to produce the spike protein found on the surface of the COVID-19 virus.

Once vaccinated, an individual’s muscle cells begin producing spike protein pieces, displaying them on cell surfaces, which end up triggering the immune system to create antibodies. When such an individual gets infected with the COVID-19 virus, these antibodies will then fight the virus.

Dr. McCullough warned that even people who have not received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines can eventually get affected by messenger RNA through a vaccinated individual via “shedding.”

Shedding means that one has been exposed to the spike protein or to the messenger RNA from close contact with another individual. We know both of them can travel via exosomes which are small phospholipid packets that can be exhaled [via] breath, through sweat, [and] various forms of body fluid, typically you know very close contact.”

“There was a big project called the Eva project in the UK showing 78 percent of women who take a vaccine—they actually have menstrual abnormalities. And those who even didn't take a vaccine, they end up having menstrual abnormalities. There's been plenty of these reports that have occurred.”

Dr. McCullough cited an interview he did with scientist Helene Banoun, an expert on shedding, who believes such things “clearly happens, for sure, in people who've taken the vaccine within 30 days, close contact.”

“Now, two studies—one in the United States, one in Japan—[show] the messenger RNA comes through breast milk. The spike protein may be shedded potentially for a much longer duration of time. It's been shown in the human body now for months, maybe even years afterward. And that's the rationale for what our recent proposal to actually undergo spike protein detoxification.”

The cardiologist pointed out that “every signal” related to cardiovascular disease, neurologic disease, blood clots, immune disease, and cancer “is up.”

“There can be debates on why all these chronic diseases are up, all-cause mortality up in every single area of the world,” he said. “The two big exposures we've had are COVID-19 infection and now COVID-19 vaccines, and I think both mechanisms have led to this wave of disease.”

“I think more powerfully with the vaccines since the vaccines are largely genetic, they're given every six months, and they install the genetic code for the disease-promoting and lethal Wuhan spike protein.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/14/2023 - 22:10

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending