Reasons to Question the Covid-19 Vaccination Narrative Gary Null PhD Progressive Radio Network, January 21, 2021 At this moment, hundreds of millions of people worldwide eagerly await the chance to be vaccinated against the SARS-2 virus. They have been given the assurance, through an endless barrage of media reports and commentaries, that these vaccines are safe and will prevent serious infection. We are told they are 95 percent effective, so how can we do much better than that? However, after examining the documentation that has been made available so far, there are very clear and legitimate challenges to this massive global propaganda campaign. Moreover, now that aggressive efforts are underway by governments and national health ministries for rapid vaccine deployment, we are beginning to receive a steady flow of reports about serious life-threatening injuries and deaths among people already receiving the first of two shots. The state of California’s head epidemiologist has called for halting the distribution of a specific lot number of Moderna’s vaccine after a series of concerning allergic reactions started occurring in clusters at various inoculation sites. Deaths in Norway after vaccination have risen to 33. Norway is now warning against vaccinating older patients with pre-existing illnesses. Last week a probe by the Paul Ehrlich Institute was launched after 10 elderly Germans died within 4 days of vaccination. Germany is also reporting many other severe side effects including anaphylaxis. In Israel, conditions of facial paralysis associated with Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine are worrying health authorities. One 23-year Israeli man was rushed to a hospital with a rare multisystem inflammatory syndrome within 24 hours of receiving the vaccine. Seemingly the man was already asymptomatic with the virus; this raises the question of whether the vaccine is more dangerous in people already infected – a medical concern that none of the SARS-Cov2 trials investigated nor were they ever designed to. Israelis are becoming increasingly wary and suspicious of these new vaccines. Opinions in the Israel National News are stating that Pfizer has been using the nation as a staging ground for rolling out its Covid-19 vaccine, the first country to have done so. Netanyahu in effect signed up seven million citizens to unwittingly be participants in a grand experiment. Consequently, the Israeli people were deprived of sufficient information about Pfizer’s vaccine to make a personal risk-benefit analysis. “What they [Israeli citizens] are being asked to inject is not a vaccine defined by the CDC as a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease,” writes Jerusalem Health Wellness counselor Ilana Rachel Daniel in her oped, “rather it is an experimental and novel technology…. It is in fact a medical device, a physical device that comes in a molecular sized package.” Pfizer, Moderna and Anthony Fauci have already made it abundantly clear that these vaccines are not intended to stop transmission but only to prevent serious illness. In the US, as of January 19th, 6,741 Americans having had serious enough vaccine adverse effects, with a total number of 29,081 events, that required special medical assistance or hospitalization after receiving the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. However this is only what has been recorded in the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), which the public can access; it does not include adverse events reported in the separate Data Link reporting system, which is private and regarded as more thorough. These incidents and the new data being released about the vaccines compel us to return to an earlier question. How accurate were Moderna’s and Pfizer’s headlines last autumn proclaiming 95 percent effectiveness amidst great fanfare? The question has been readdressed even by the prestigious British Medical Journal. Two weeks ago, the vaccine makers released more of their summary data. The journal’s associate editor Peter Doshi has recently challenged the trustworthiness of the companies’ results. The 95 percent efficacy was based solely on confirmed PCR tests, which itself is dubious because PCR was never developed to confirm nor diagnostically identify a live active viral infection. What was not reported in the original press releases were the “suspected” and “unconfirmed” Covid-19 cases in both the vaccinated and placebo groups. After these cases are included in the calculation, the Pfizer vaccine’s effectiveness nosedives to approximately 19 percent, far below the 50 percent threshold to authorize its use, according to Doshi. Evidently, Pfizer seemingly ignored the 3,410 unconfirmed Covid-19 cases from its original press release. Is this perhaps to increase stock price? Or perhaps to raise Fauci’s and the nation’s adrenaline levels for a miracle on the horizon? You decide. Another red flag in Pfizer’s initial report was the exclusion of 371 trial participants from their efficacy analysis. Pfizer fails to explain the rationale for excluding these individuals. In the meantime, distribution of Moderna’s and Pfizer’s vaccines have entered warp speed. Not all of the data to support their efficacy and safety has been publicly released. Pfizer states it will do so upon request. Moderna will provide its raw data only after all of its cinical trials have been completed. But, nevertheless, we are persuaded to roll up our sleeves without hesitation. The British Medical Journal’s article warrants first page headlines on newspapers across the country. It raises a very serious issue that should scientifically thwart false hopes and dreams that these Covid-19 vaccines will save us. They may be far more effective as cash cows instead of effective prophylaxes. However, no major press has bothered to give it a nod. What should this tell us? How necessary are these vaccines in this war against SARS-Cov2? Since we now have reliable evidence based upon the vaccine makers’ own data that they are likely far less effective than we have been led to believe, they will not prevent asymptomatic infection nor transmission. They carry certain risks. So should we believe that they will make life any better? There is mounting data that the vaccine will not prevent infection. Over 12,000 Israelis have tested positive within two weeks after receiving the first vaccine dose, and cases are increasing for those who received a second dose as well. In addition, there is still no certainty for how long immunity will last, and we are being told that vaccinated persons will still need to wear masks and social distance. Ergo, what good are these vaccines? What we do know is that living a healthy lifestyle will strengthen our immune systems and help ward off serious infections of any kind. Second, there are safe, effective and very inexpensive drug regimens that can be followed during the early onset of symptoms. Both hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and Ivermectin have been safely used for half century. Hundreds of studies document their efficacy. Thousands of physicians worldwide are coming forward to share their personal clinical experiences in their use to save lives and prevent unnecessary hospitalization. What is remarkable is that Anthony Fauci, the federal health agencies and the media know this is true. This is not subjective or speculative hearsay. It is well documented in the National Library of Medicine and accessible to everyone after several mouse clicks on the Library’s website. It is not conspiracy, therefore, to suggest something foul has been unfolding. Not only were HCQ and Ivermectin unsoundly ridiculed as a first line of defense to treat Covid-19 infections, there was absolutely nothing offered in their stead. In the case of HCQ, many states, such as New York, have made the drug unavailable even if doctors wish to prescribe it. What can be the motive for this bizarre, surreal scenario that contradicts the very moral basis upon which the practice of medicine is founded? It has also been shown that the dominant medical establishment efforts to prevent HCQ’s use included the publication of studies in major medical journals such as The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine attempting to conclude the drug was dangerous and posed serious risks. Yet these papers were later proven to be based on ill-founded data and research gathered by a shady private enterprise with no previous medical credibility. The studies were subsequently retracted. But the official recommendations against HCQ’s use were never lifted. And not a single member of the mainstream media has broke ranks with any of Fauci’s latest statements. The fact that the US has failed to recommend and institute effective preventative protocols, other than masks, social distancing and lockdowns, is a definitive sign of gross, and perhaps intentional, negligence and very likely incompetence. If a person tests positive, despite being asymptomatic, she or he is treated no different than those who exhibit signs of illness. Yet humans have carried and spread infectious microbes throughout history without indications of illness. Fortunately, a growing number of physicians, scientists and healthcare professionals are stating publicly their opposition to Washington’s draconian pandemic policies. And these are otherwise conservative, mainstream doctors, by no means conspiracy theorists, who are also voicing concerns over the new generation of vaccines that are frankly unwarranted and will likely barely make a dent in changing anything. Or, we may ask whether halting the pandemic is these vaccines’ real intention? Given governments’ horrendous track record of corruption and deceit, nothing should be left off the table as a possibility. This is a lesson for everyone without hesitation to become wise, alert and discern everything that is being stated about the virus, the pandemic and our federal and corporate responses to curtail it.