66 Comments

I tell everyone I can, so long as it doesn’t feel cruel, that the reason so many people have had unpleasant side effects from these speedy jabs is that they were designed intentionally to cause harm.

Expand full comment

On my daily walk yesterday I met someone I hadn’t seen in a few weeks. He said he had Covid but was getting better and his wife was home sick with Covid. Everyone I know who has become infected with Covid was vaccinated beforehand. I am not vaccinated because I learned about 50 years ago that it takes decades to develop safe and effective vaccines.

I like this couple, whom I have seen most weeks for the past 2 years on my daily walks. I decided to do something I have never done before. I told him that everyone I knew who has become infected with Covid was vaccinated beforehand. Not surprisingly, he wouldn’t listen. I told him I think the vaccine weakens immunity. He reacted as I thought he would. He dismissed my opinion and walked away. His wife is more reasonable and perhaps we can have a discussion. Or perhaps, I’ve made two enemies.

I am tired of seeing people harming themselves.

Expand full comment

Great to have had Dr McCullough come to Alberta, Canada and deliver some truth bombs. His keynote speech to the Association of Physicians and Surgeons called 'House of Medicine on Fire' is worth every single minute of the one hour talk. #ExitTheWHO

Expand full comment

I hope this holds true...because the rest of us who haven't taken the jabs have been sick with worry about our friends and family...so if they get through 5 years they might be okay?

Expand full comment

Dr. McCullough is a SuperHero who has spoken out in the face of an unprecedented adversity...Proud to $upport Dr. McCullough's Substack..

Expand full comment

"There are none so blind as those who will not see," as the saying goes. People who have been vax'd continue to suffer: first from their fear of death from the Covid flu due to the year (2020) of rampant fearmongering; from their fear of death they were driven to the deadly experimental jab that has resulted in what will likely be life-long physical problems. Doctors everywhere seem to refuse to connect the horrible adverse effects and deaths to the vax adding greater harm to these already injured people for whom death might be a blessing.

I have one friend who finally came around and admitted she and her family should not have gotten the jab, but that it was fear of death from the Covid flu that drove them to it. I have steered her to Dr. McCullough's blog and his help with treatments. I hope she has started listening to him. But there are few people who will truly see what is happening.

The good news is that vaccine uptake (with many types of vaccines) is on the wane so we can only hope people are starting to get the message.

Expand full comment

Dr. McCullough has been fond of quoting the "4.2%" from the Schmeling report since it was released, but it raises more questions than it answers. This specifically was referencing the primary series of shots in Denmark, and a handful of batch numbers nearly three years ago.

This does not address the very different geographic distribution in the US, different manufacturing plants and processes, perhaps different 'intentions' in their makeup.

Most importantly, this paper does not address the potency of the many (6?) 'boosters' introduced over the subsequent years. We can assume the formulations are being constantly 'adjusted', and the frequent, often immediate, SAEs of the primary series may have been reason to tone-down the initial damaging effects of future formulations to minimize 'vaccine hesitancy.'

Have there been ANY studies on the SAEs of the 'boosters', of how their effects compare to the primary series?? I realize any 'boosters' must include the longer-term effects of the primary series, but all those who keep taking 'boosters' must be increasing their risks of a 'bad batch' with every subsequent dose, and increasing their likelihood of a SAE. Yet, vicariously, I see few people dropping after taking yet another 'booster', but more people dying many months or years after their last injection.

Dr. McCullough suggests his experience parallels Schmeling's percentages, and has seen no ill effects come from his patients who have no arm soreness. I wish he would go into further detail about his observations of his many patients and peers about the makeup of the now-many boosters. Seems nobody else is deep-diving the subsequent 'boosters' either.

If any in this audience can provide me information, it would be very much appreciated.

Expand full comment

Wouldn't the now faster arising heart issue facts coincide with the variations and adulterations of all the batch vials of the mRNA manufacturing/storage/and delivery problems in evidence be the greatest "CULPRIT" to bolster the marketing nonsense of the "Safe and Effective" continued claims by Big pHARMA? Who was watching the watchers in all this subcontracting of Jab Juice? No one?

Expand full comment
Nov 21, 2023·edited Nov 21, 2023

I first saw the chart included in this piece about 3-4 months ago. It was discussed in a Kim Iverson podcast. I tracked down the academic paper and skimmed it.

To me it raises all kinds of damning questions.

1) It appears the Denmark regulators were aware some batches of doses were less potent, as evidenced by them running far fewer tests on the less potent batches. They may even have known these batches were placebos. What really did these regulators know, and what did they think about it?

2) The varying potency of different batches appears to be intentional by the manufacturers. Was it deliberate? Why did they do that? Were they experimenting on the public without informing them?

3) Was the practice of varying batch potencies carried out in other countries?

4) If some of the batches were placebos, weren't the pharma companies carrying out a fraud on the public? If they knowingly committed fraud, doesn't that puncture pharma's legal immunity?

Maybe these questions have been answered and I'm unaware. If that's the case, someone please let me know

Edit- This was written in this substack: "The good news is that Schmeling et al have shown that about one third of vaccine recipients have zero side effects and in my experience this tends to remain the case during the period of time we have for observation thus far." This doesn't make sense. If one-third of the vaccines are placebos/less potent as was reported, and with multiple doses, the number of unaffected people should be fewer than one-third. If someone had two shots, and a single non-placebo shot causes adverse effects, that person's odds of being unaffected would be 1/3 squared = 1/9.

Expand full comment

By the way many people do not admit to being unvaccinated. NHS was 10% that they admitted to. It was certainly higher for them to drop the mandate.

Expand full comment

Actually I had 27%. Must have come from Prof Norman Fenton who challenged the ONS through the Ombudsman and won.

Expand full comment

Were 1/3 of batches “placebo”?

Expand full comment
founding

Its like rolling the Dice with 1/3 odds of no problems. I wouldn't take those odds, would you?

Expand full comment

The only vaccine cattle need is the black-leg vaccine.

Expand full comment