The following excerpt is from a much longer article, which is well worth taking the time to read through for it provides a very cogently communicated boost to your understanding of the Covid/Vax psyop.
Enjoy the excerpt but please read the rest of the article in Substack
Why the Covid Vaccines Were Never Likely to Be Effective
We have all noticed that most of the individuals who have gotten ill were vaccinated and had received their boosters. One of the predictions we regretfully made before the COVID vaccines entered the market was that the vaccination program would prevent the population from developing herd immunity to COVID-19 and thus indefinitely prolong the pandemic. A somewhat related parallel was the chicken pox vaccine (which had no real justification for being created) resulting in a permanent sustained increase of Shingles (a disease much worse than chickenpox) because the vaccinated populations lost their herd immunity to varicella zoster.
For those who remember, at the start of the pandemic, everyone predicted the virus would follow three waves like other famous respiratory viruses such as the 1918 Influenza. Presently we are experiencing a sixth wave of COVID-19, and private documents leaked to me by a colleague who works for the WHO suggest the WHO is planning for this pandemic to continue for years (that is the most I can share in order to protect the identity of the leaker).
Due to these events, I was requested to write an article on why the COVID vaccines were unlikely to be effective. With pharmaceutical products, I prefer to focus on their dangers rather than their ineffectiveness because being ineffective is typically less impactful than being toxic. This is a common thought process and has held true with discussions on the COVID vaccinations, where questions of their safety are discussed more often than questions of their efficacy. I believe shortcomings in their efficacy is critically important to discuss for two reasons:
•The basis for the mandates is predicated upon the vaccines being effective, particularly in the prevention of infection, and most importantly transmission.
• The refusal to consider other means for addressing the pandemic were based upon “increasing vaccination uptake“ being the best approach for addressing the pandemic.
Because vaccines have assumed the role of a holy sacrament, when you attempt to discuss any issue with an injection, most doctors will default to “I believe vaccines were the most beneficial medical innovation ever invented” and in varying degrees turn hostile towards the injured patient who attempts to bring a vaccination side effect to their attention. The blind faith given to immunizations makes it extremely easy to market highly dubious or unproven claims about these products, because regardless of their absurdity, they are taken up as gospel by the medical profession. What has happened with the COVID vaccines is particularly egregious, but all of it was based upon a century of building blind faith in these injections (for those wishing to learn more on this topic in the immediate future, Suzanne Humphries MD has done an excellent job exposing it here).
At the time when the COVID vaccines were first being proposed, there were two major issues nearly everyone studying the issue was aware of:
•Despite decades of work, the Chinese government (and Western programs working in conjunction with the Chinese government) had not been able to develop a safe or effective vaccination for SARS-CoV-1. This is because SARS is a very difficult pathogen for which to make a safe and effective vaccination.
•It typically takes years to develop a new vaccine, and months to manufacturer it once a formulation has been decided upon.
On many levels, I think Operation Warp Speed was a monumental achievement, and the clever design of it (best described by Peter Navarro) pulled off a variety of things many had thought were impossible. However, the individuals who ran Operation Warp Speed only appeared to understand the business aspect of the pharmaceutical development and not the medical aspect.
Typically elected officials defer questions of science to scientific experts within their administration. The only noteworthy exception I know of was Ron DeSantis, who (as detailed in Scott Atlas’s book) independently looked at the data and came up with a radically different (and highly successful) approach to addressing the pandemic (DeSantis’s approach mirrored the Great Barrington Declaration).
In my opinion, the lack of medical knowledge on vaccination within the Trump administration to a large extent invalidated Operation Warp Speed because at the end of the day there was no getting around the fact that it was impossible for a somewhat safe and effective vaccine to be made in the short timeframe alloted (a few individuals like Paul Alexander did attempt to bring attention to the medical issues but were ignored as everyone deferred to Fauci and Birx).
From having studied these industries (pharmaceutical, chemical, etc.) over the years, I have observed that whenever a not fully safe or effective product is brought to market, industry will bridge the gap in safety or efficacy through corrupt scientific studies, lobbying, lawsuits, marketing and public relations. This situation is analogous to one trying to fit a square peg through a circular hole, and opting to pound the peg into the hole with a hammer rather than round off its corners when resistance to the product is encountered. I would argue this is also what happened with the COVID-19 vaccines.
When potential vaccines were being evaluated, a variety of vaccination platforms were considered. Because the mRNA platform was best able to meet the needs of industry, it was the one that was ultimately settled upon (with recombinant adenovirus vector vaccine being the second choice). There were however numerous serious issues in their design that scientists such as Mike Yeadon and Stephanie Seneff pointed out well before the vaccines entered the market. The predicted consequences of these design flaws have since proven themselves, so it is almost certain the manufacturers were also aware of these issues.
I was able to identify a few potential explanations for why badly designed vaccines were chosen:
•The chosen design represented the only possible way to get a product that could be approved onto the market in the short window of time before the pandemic ended. On a related note Fauci has been pushing for mRNA vaccines for years because they allow a much shorter turn around time from identifying a targeted antigen sequence to creating a mass produced vaccine for that sequence. This is especially necessary for a rapidly changing virus like influenza because it is nearly impossible to accurately predict what the dominant strain will be at the time traditional vaccines need to be made to be ready in time for the Flu season.
•Bringing mRNA technology to the forefront had the potential to rescue the pharmaceutical industry from the existential threat it was facing over its inability to develop new pharmaceutical drugs. There are so many applications of mRNA technology that it likely represents a multi-trillion dollar industry. To many this presumably justified taking advantage of the “emergency situation” to conduct the large-scale human experimentation necessary to develop the technology.
•Having a vaccine which selected for the propagation of variants (that the original vaccine did not work against) was a long-term business strategy to sell future vaccines designed for those variants.
•Something more nefarious was in the works.
Once it became clear to me how bad the mRNA vaccines were going to be, I investigated what approaches were being pursued by countries outside the Western sphere of influence. Russia chose an adenovirus vaccination platform (like Johnson and Johnson and AstraZeneca), which could have either been due to safety concerns over the mRNA technology, nationalistic pride or an inability to produce the mRNA technology.
China however, despite receiving many solicitations for an mRNA vaccine, chose to avoid these newer spike protein production factories entirely, and instead went for an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 virus vaccine. While rarely publicized, China’s vaccine, which is used around the world has subsequently proven itself to be the most effective vaccination on the market.
Note: Cuba, India and Iran (despite spending much less money and having a more primitive vaccine development apparatus than the United States) have also developed alternatives to the spike protein producing vaccines. Cuba has developed a variety of protein subunit vaccines (this is what Novavax has been unsuccessfully trying to do since the start of the pandemic) while India and Iran, like China have used inactivated viruses.
This has often led me to wonder if the SARS-CoV-2 virus was deliberately designed by the Chinese military because:
•It was a dangerous virus that was not deadly enough to expose the Chinese government to an existential risk by releasing it
•The most likely vaccine to be developed in response to the virus (and expected to be mandated upon Western populations) would be highly dangerous.
Meeting both of these conditions in turn facilitated the creation of a stealth weapon to disable China’s adversaries. As China was collaborating with Fauci’s contingent to conduct covert gain of function research, the Chinese military was almost certainly aware of America’s biologic countermeasures technology. Given that a vaccine that rapidly produced SARS-CoV-2’s novel spike proteins in the blood is highly dangerous and it was reasonable to predict this would the most likely method of vaccination to be developed against SARS-CoV-2 (assuming you understood the full spectrum of vaccine countermeasures available), China’s complicity in this disaster is an interesting question to ponder.
READ THE REST OF THIS GREAT ARTICLE ON SUBSTACK
Visit People’s Media at Liberty Rising
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Leave a Reply