Berenson: Moderna Falsely Said No Serious Adverse Vaccine Effects in Phase 2 Trial; Their Own Data Says Otherwise

Investigative reporter Alex Berenson is a controversial source on matters Covid. He generally hews to Great Barrington Declaration views, that Covid is not a serious pathogen, that the lockdown were unnecessary and a violation of individual rights, that masking does not work. Nevertheless, he’s also been diligently investigating studies that question the safety and efficacy of the Covid vaccines, particularly the mRNA vaccines. And he appears to have a serious finding, based on Moderna’s own claims versus the data in a paper that the journal Vaccines published in February 2021.

The very short version is that Moderna maintained, both in its clinical trial data to the FDA, and in the Vaccines paper that there were no “serious adverse effects” in a trial group of 400 versus a control of 200.1 In fact, there were 14, including three miscarriages, seven during the placebo-controlled phase of that trial (the first shot), seven more with a booster (no typo, Moderna started trials of a booster in January 2021). As Dima at Military Summary is wont to say, “That’s a lot.”

Mind you, Moderna and the FDA misrepresented vaccine safety by hiding these injuries. The Journal Vaccines published a paper in February 2021 on the Moderna Phase 2 study, claiming there were no severe adverse effects; the data showing otherwise was made public only at the end December 2022.

This information is potentially significant since some lawyers claim that understating adverse effects would amount to fraud and would void the liability waiver the Federal government issued under the Emergency Use Authorization. If Berenson’s finding is deemed to be significant, we may seem some vaccine injury cases filed to try to surmount this indemnification.

The Moderna study in question was its Phase 2 trial. Phase 1 trials are very small and are to investigate safety and dose levels. Phase 2 trials usually involve more participants and gather more data about safety as well as collect information about efficacy. If Phase 2 goes well, the Phase 3 trial administers the treatment to a much larger population. Only after the Phase 3 trial can the drug maker apply for FDA approval.

In Berenson’s article, he contrasts Moderna’s statements in the Vaccines paper (emphasis his)….:

with the data made public only recently (the table excerpt is a bit confusing; the top row presents total severe adverse events as seven; the rows below break out only cardiac disorders):

Berenson also notes:

I wish Berenson had presented a timeline with populations, number of jabs, and side effects. As he explains, the data on this population of 600 of the initial subjects + controls, which became 550 who took the shots because the control population was soon offered the opportunity to get the shot.2

Here is the guts of his post:

Because it started in May 2020, two months before the big pivotal trials, the P201 trial had a placebo-controlled arm for longer than any other mRNA Covid jab trial.

Regulators and public health experts had always believed that if the shots had side effects, they would be evident quickly. Moncef Slaoui, the head of Operation Warp Speed, the government program that helped develop the jabs, told federal officials that 99 percent of side effects from vaccines became visible within 60 days.

But the gap in serious side effects between placebo and vaccine recipients widened for as long as the P201 trial progressed, belying Slaoui’s assumption.

The P201 results raise the question of what might have happened if regulators had forced Moderna and Pfizer to continue collecting placebo-controlled safety their much larger pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials for even two or three more months in early 2021…

…we do not have and will never have long-term safety data comparing people who received the jabs with those who received a placebo. The P201 safety dataset is the longest publicly available.

It is not comforting.

The miscarriage reports are striking, given the small number of women of childbearing age – almost certainly no more than 150, and possibly closer to 100 – in the trial.

Worse, in its final report on side effects, Moderna disclosed a third miscarriage in 2021 in a P201 trial subject after she received a booster shot. (Moderna began testing boosters on the P201 trialists in January 2021, at a time when the public was being told that Covid boosters would probably not be needed for years, if ever.)

In all, in its final report, Moderna counted a total of 11 people who suffered serious side effects among about 350 people who received the jabs plus a single booster shot.

In addition, two placebo recipients suffered serious side effects after the trial was unblinded and they took the jab. Finally, in the trial’s final phase, Moderna gave 60 people a second booster; one of those 60 developed stage four cancer.

In all, 14 people who received jabs in the trial suffered serious side effects.

These trialists were a generally healthy group – healthier than the Phase 3 trialists, or average Americans. For example, Moderna excluded people with diabetes from P201, and few people in the trial were obese.

Recall that NC regular IM Doc, among his many claims to fame, was on an Institutional Review Board for over a decade and its chair for about five years. From the FDA:

Under FDA regulations, an Institutional Review Board is group that has been formally designated to review and monitor biomedical research involving human subjects. In accordance with FDA regulations, an IRB has the authority to approve, require modifications in (to secure approval), or disapprove research. This group review serves an important role in the protection of the rights and welfare of human research subjects.

That means IM Doc is a very seasoned interpreter of clinical trials and their use of statistics. He pointed out that Emergency Use Authorization process bypassed the Institutional Review Board process, eliminating a critically important patient protection.

Readers may remember that IM Doc was very critical of the initial data presentation of the Pfizer vaccine and the unheard of cheerleading in the related New England Journal of Medicine editorial. As IM Doc wrote then:

Unfortunately, this study from Pfizer in the latest NEJM, and indeed this whole vaccine rollout, are case studies in the pathology [Dr. Marcia] Agnell described [in her seminal 2009 article, Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption]. There are more red flags in this paper and related events than present on any May Day in downtown Beijing. Yet all anyone hears from our media, our medical elites, and our politicians are loud hosannas and complete unquestioning acceptance of this new technique. And lately, ridicule and spite for anyone who dares to raise questions.

IM Doc elaborates on his concerns in this and two later posts.

He weighed in on the Berenson article:

Well – it is finally starting to come out. There is indeed an importance to those of us who have been around the block for decades. Who can recognize patterns that are very abnormal.

I have now had 4 midterm miscarriages and possibly one other – since the vaccines have been out. We were very early on, here, strictly a Moderna town. There were zero mid term miscarriages in my practice in the COVID year pre vaccine of 2020.

All of these women had one thing in common – sometime in the previous 3 months before the miscarriage, they had either the initial series or a booster.

4-5 mid-term miscarriages in the past 2 years.

The preceding 30 years of my career – only one – and that was not spontaneous – that was after a car wreck.

It is also interesting to note that I have not had any of these issues for the past 9 months or so – corresponding to the time when en masse, the population quit taking these boosters like they had been. While COVID itself is still raging on.

It is important to realize that IRBs would have caught on to these issues and dealt with them. There is a reason the EUA legislation removes them from the mix.

The more disturbing thing which must be ran down is if the accusations in this article are true – that both Moderna and the FDA have been falsifying data.

That could get nuclear. Especially if the trend holds up with all the barracuda injury lawyers smelling blood in the water.

I find it continually fascinating that the national press continues to ignore every bit of this. As the Ethics professors of the 1990s were so keen to point out – it really does make a difference when 50% of your revenue comes from Big Pharma – Big Pharma will be protected.

Let me stress as IM Doc does that mid-term miscarriages are (normally) exceedingly rare. They nearly always happen in the first trimester when the mother and fetus are working out how to live together. He described longer-form how devastating the loss has been to two generations of one of the affected families, including triggering substance abuse.

And IM Doc again is correct about the press. Berenson’s piece has not gotten much traction on Twitter and only some re-reporting in right-wing outlets. Perversely, the best thing that may have happened to him is Streisand effect by virtue of Instagram banning the piece:

Berenson did solicit comment from Moderna and got no response. One could criticize Berenson’s article for being a bit hard to follow but the facts and timeline are complicated. But it appears to be sound and I hope his story does get attention. Sometimes it takes time….witness the Discord leaks.


1 The reason for a study group 2x as large at the placebo group was that Moderna was testing two different dose levels.

2 The numbers remain confusing. Berenson says 158 of the 200 in the placebo group accepted the later offer to get the vaccine. I assume the disparity of 8 (400 + 158 ≠ 550) is due to dropouts. Also note, as IM Doc said with some ire at the time, that deliberately eliminating the control group so soon after a clinical trial is unheard of.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. Cocomaan

    Whatever it was that the crappy vaccines did will be swept under the rug like other federal government disasters. Afghanistan and Iraq, for instance, or the intel community’s ball dropping regarding 9/11, or the Fed buying mortgage backed securities until inflation blasted off, or…

    1. GM

      Vaccination side effects are right now used as a distraction from the fact that we just made the second most dangerous pathogen circulating in the human population after HIV endemic and widespread, but unlike HIV this one is airborne and extremely highly contagious.

      That was very successfully enforced as a fact of life and the way things should be, with close to zero resistance remaining.

      And now there is a 1000:1 noise about vaccination side effects versus what endemic SARS-CoV-2 means…

        1. Raymond Sim

          Wow, you sound very brave, and also smart.

          FFS, what’s the point of posting this sort of nonsense?

      1. Objective Ace

        Vaccination side effects are right now used as a distraction from the fact that we just made the second most dangerous pathogen circulating in the human population after HIV endemic and widespread

        If this were true you would see major media covering the side effects, it wouldnt fall to Alex Berenson.

      2. britzklieg

        Your point is extremely important, indeed, far more important than the side effects issue. Well said. But I think “distraction” as a descriptive is too dismissive. IMHO, anything that gets people to start questioning the too-often erroneous and on-going received wisdoms about the virus, and the pandemic it has created, even if it has to begin with alarm at the vaccine prevarications and the negative results those lies spawned, is a step in the right direction of waking people up from the “close to zero resistance” you refer to and learn to think rather than to believe.

        That said, I thank you for your fine work.

    2. Piotr Berman

      Personally, I took Pfizer and two boosters, but I am over 65, so increased risk of severe infection, and I take medication for blood clots anyway, decreasing cardiovascular risks and for multiple reasons, I am not afraid of miscarriage.

      However, as you move to lower age cohorts, down to women who want pregnancy, the risk calculus changes. During progression of the epidemic, risks of severe infection (symptoms more severe than a week of common cold) were decreasing, and thus the risk calculus. From other data, benefits for people under 30 were dubious, and for young women, flat counter-indication was warranted.

      Lastly, once the cat was out of the bag, stopping spread was not feasible by vaccination. With all that, public policy was like using sledge hammer instead of a hammer.

      1. LifelongLib

        I had Moderna, initial shots and 3 boosters including bivalent one, 5 shots total. I’m male, over 65. Only possible side effect I noticed was a period of extreme fatigue after one of the boosters (forget which), but this was also after I was exposed to someone who came down with Covid a short time later. Didn’t test (should have)…

  2. GM

    Good luck even maintaining current mandatory vaccinations after this shit show, let alone responding properly to another new pathogen.

    And, for the record, Berenson and the likes are not the good guys in this story, and it does a lot of damage if they become some kind of folk heroes that somehow stood up to the powers that be.

    Also, the fact remains that being vaccinated was overwhelmingly better than not being vaccinated.

    Just compare the outcomes in e.g. Denmark (aging population with median age 42) versus South Africa (median age 27) — in Denmark 0.1% of the population died, or 1/10th to 1/15th what it would have been had everyone gotten infected without vaccination, while in South Africa 0.5% died (which happens to be twice as many as was expected based on the age profile and the initial age/mortality profile of the virus).

    Why? Because most infections in Denmark happened after vaccination, while in South Africa few people got vaccinated, and then eventually everyone had at least two infections.

    And in general there is an extremely strong anti-correlation between excess deaths and vaccination rates.

    So the vaccines saved a lot of lives in the short term.

    But in the long run everyone will converge to the same catastrophic state because:

    1) They were used to enormously harmful ends by politicians and corporations, as a Trojan horse to abandon NPIs and containment, and to make the virus endemic, even though it was clear “vaccine-only” would fail abysmally even before vaccines were rolled out, just based on what was known about these viruses.

    2) Because it had to be “vaccine-only” and no NPIs, everyone involved lied about the side effects. Which are minor in frequency and severity relative to what the virus itself does, but are nevertheless non-zero, so if you lie about them being non-existent, and then of course it turns out they are very much existent, you completely undermine trust.

    That also allowed the GBD mass murdering psychopaths to do a pivot towards anti-vaxx positions. It’s still not 100% clear exactly why, I see two explanations, not mutually exclusive:

    1) They had to finish the job of ensuring public health protocol will never ever be followed again if it interferes with corporate profits, and that meant demonizing the whole COVID “control” effort (pathetically short of what was needed as it was), and weaponizing the public’s mistrust towards vaccines was a good way to do that

    2) The extreme libertarian nutjobs really dream of a return to Victorian England, with the proles living in squalor and dying long before they reach retirement age (if there even is such a thing as retirement in the future they are planning). Dismantling the whole public health infrastructure, including mandatory childhood vaccinations, is a good stepping stone towards that.

    Again, good luck ever having 95% MMR vaccination raters again after these last three years.

    Some of us were warning about this, but nobody wanted to listen…

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      As for your comparison of Denmark and South Africa, come on.

      1. Average younger age of SA entirely if not more than entirely offset by massively immunocompromised adults, with 19% HIV prevalence in ages 15 to 49.

      2. SA is very poor, with lousy public health, while Denmark’s is one of the best

      3. Denmark has a very low level of diabetes, at 5.3% of the population, v. 11.3% in SA. And I would assume quite a few of the SA cases are not well managed.

      As for the vaccines, this is easy for you to say when you had no vaccine injury. I had to have a D&C at the age of 64, which entailed 4 trips to NYC and 2 attempts at the procedure (because stenosis, my MD hoped she could do it in her office but couldn’t and had to do it in an OR with hot and cold running nurses to be able to use heavier-duty equipment). Total cost over $55K in medical, and over $62K with travel and hotels and extra site coverage. Oh, and my insurance is trying to fight paying for the second procedure, so I could potentially be on the hook for >$30,000. At least I can afford that if push comes to shove. But what if that would have pushed me into a medical bankruptcy?

      IM Doc had an even more serious vaccine injury, took the better part of a year of care. His specialist at a tertiary medical center volunteered that it was a vaccine injury and not the first of that type he had seen.

      For most people, IM Doc’s and my outcomes are much less serious that having a second trimester miscarriage.

      We also both took J&J, the supposedly less risky choice because more established technology.

      And all those damned vaccines do is reduce severity of outcomes. They do not prevent infection and each infection is estimated to cost you 1 IQ point. Readers have told of Wall Street money managers and analysts who are still in vigilant anti-Covid mode because they figure preserving their brains will give them a competitive advantage over time.

      I’ll consider a killed virus vaccine with the tradeoff of lower efficacy, or a nasal vaccine.

      Not this crap that was not properly tested and data was never kept properly to parse out if some factors could have contributed to vaccine injuries (like taking a vaccine to close to an actual infection, recall even under wild type many were asymptomatic, or mistaken injection into a blood vessel) which could have been addressed and reduced.

      You are blaming the messengers in shooting at Berenson. The fault lies in our greedy medical system and our captured public health officials. At least pick the right targets. The WHO and CDC with their ignoring aerosols, ENCOURAGING non-mask wearing and ignoring ventilation have done vastly more harm than the GBD libertarians by virtue of having much bigger megaphones. And the main reason the GBD types got any traction was due to the way the public health officials kept discrediting themselves, for instance by imposing mandates based on the lie that the vaccines prevented transmission, as opposed to worst outcomes.

      1. GM

        You can pick plenty of other countries and subnational entities for that comparison.

        There were several towns in Italy with population in the 10-20-30,000 range that lost 1% of their population already during the first wave in 2020.

        The IFR in the US was 1.5% in March 2020 (we know that because they did serosurveys in NYC and in Lousiana, and very few people had been infected).

        You are blaming the messengers in shooting at Berenson

        Berenson is a crank, and associated with the wrong people on this issue. There is no getting around that very objective fact.

        And that is a big problem when it comes to messaging.

        It is also a very objective fact that there has never been absolutely any temporal correlation between vaccination campaigns and excess mortality. And plenty of countries did vaccinate in large synchronous waves well before letting it rip, and/or the vaccination campaign suppressed transmission for quite a while, which allows for separating any putative vaccine effects from those of uncontrolled viral transmission, which comparison is unfortunately no longer possible. Australia, NZ, South Korea, Japan, Singapore, etc.

        Only between infection waves and excess mortality.

        The WHO and CDC with their ignoring aerosols, ENCOURAGING non-mask wearing and ignoring ventilation have done vastly more harm than the GBD libertarians by virtue of having much bigger megaphones

        It is very scary that you of all people are saying this.

        The WHO and the CDC did what they did on the orders of the same people who were also behind GBD. It was a classic good cop/bad cop routine from the start.

        1. Yves Smith Post author

          Oh, come on. No one made Rochelle Walensky say that people who wore masks deserved a scarlet letter, or falsely, along with Biden, depict the vaccines as preventing contagion.

          The entire US public health response was all in on the vaccines, and suppressed any questioning of their efficacy or their side effects. The lockdowns did work (see Australia and South Korea and China’s Zero Covid when it was on) but every government in the end concluded it could not afford the economic cost….even if the long term health costs turn out to be very high (look at the tight labor markets even now in the US). It was all about immediate perceived cost.

          That calculation had zero to do with the GBD. Show me evidence the GBD had any policy impact. They certainly didn’t in China, the last holdout to cave. This was entirely due to the pressure of big business and the perceived-to-be excessive cost of alternatives, like neverending bailouts of airlines. Any overlap with GBD messaging is coincidental.

          Consistent with that, the CDC enabled irresponsible policies like restaurant openings only to patrons who were fully vaccinated…when they knew full well the vaccines did little to prevent transmission even under wild type and less under later variants, and that immunity could be expected to be not durable (as the UK React surveys were showing well before the vaccines were distributed).

          And your “vaccine effects”:

          1. Please provide data. I’ve seen studies reach every conceivable conclusion on excess deaths. The computation of excess deaths, for starters, is sufficiently loose for that to be selected to support any conclusion.

          2. In addition, you are looking only at deaths and not at health impairment. Pray tell how do you calibrate them v. deaths,? The Moderna data shows 14 out of 550 which is 2.5%. If you treat the three miscarriages as deaths, and treat the others as equivalent to 0.3 deaths, you get 1.1 death equivalents. How is that acceptable for a vaccine???

          Your remarks about masks are astonishing. Both the CDC and the WHO initially discouraged mask use, it turns out to prevent the great unwashed from buying surgical masks. They could easily have encouraged the use of cloths masks with filters, or even cloth masks, which were adequate under wild type. The CDC failed to tell people they need to use respirators given the much greater contagiousness of Omicron, and has said absolutely nothing as hospitals eliminate mask requirements.

          Lambert has chronicled in gory detail the CDC’s and WHO’s continued defense of droplet theory and ignoring/suppression of aerosol theory.

          IM Doc, who has relentlessly tracked patient histories and outcomes, and has gotten his hospital to do so, has found that this really now is a pandemic of the vaccinated. His area is heavily vaxxed ad the unvaxxed are now not showing up at all with Covid and were getting less RSV during that big wave too, way under their proportion of the population.

          And your diatribe about Berenson is pure ad hominem. I must note that absolutely nowhere have you denied the validity of Berenson’s finding in the Moderna data.

      2. LilD

        Data are not complete nor reliable nor free of confounding information

        However we can make some plausible inferences. Might rise to the level of stylized facts someday

        Vaccines cause damage at some low but not “rare” rate

        A sars2-cov infection can be really bad, kills some (0.3% to 2% is my wild guess as an unconditional confidence interval), causes some serious long term damage (10% to 100%). Comorbidities matter…. Results conditional on individual age, health, vitamin D levels etc may vary greatly

        mRNA vaccines reduce the damage of COVID and mortality rate, and may also somewhat reduce but not eliminate transmissibility

        Efficacy of the vaccines wanes pretty rapidly

        Given that “we do we”

        It’s rational to refuse the vaccine
        It’s rational to get the vaccine

        I completely agree with your view of the proper enemies and it’s obvious consequence of
        Because markets
        With the corollary of monopoly profits and
        Institutional corruption

        This commentariat knows the technical solution but not anything that appears to be politically implementable

        1. Medbh

          “mRNA vaccines reduce the damage of COVID and mortality rate, and may also somewhat reduce but not eliminate transmissibility”

          I wonder if these benefits will hold true over time. I thought one of the concerns of the mRNA-based vaccines was that they had negative long-term outcomes in previous animal studies (not covid-specific ones)? They’re already reporting increased rates of auto immune disorders, although I don’t know how they account for vaccinated, unvaccinated, and asymptomatic cases.

          It sets the stage for an interesting propaganda fight. They can’t blame everything on lockdowns forever. So are they going to blame the negative health impacts on covid infection or the vaccines?

          I’m immunocompromised and have gotten the shots and boosters, so I’m not anti vac. But I have no trust in the government or Pharma, and believe they’d happily slaughter the population for money or convenience.

          1. BeliTsari

            Well, they sufficiently DELAY mortality, so it’s “natural causes quietly in our sleep,” “poor lifestyle choices” or our PASC indentured “psychosomatic malingering,” resulting in dying in the street or at some uninsured 1099 gig?

            I’m going for another TTE tomorrow morning, to evaluate my VITT. I’d delayed my 2nd mRNA-1273 144 days, after AMPLE (THEN, easily available) research & testing a year after our D614.G & a year before my first heart murmer. I’d a “post retirement” TTE right before COVID (clean). But inflammatory side effects were FAR worse than any of THREE acute infections & it was a pretty damn competent & by then empirically experienced cardiologist who’d provided the diagnosis, both TTE techs recognized immediately. So, how long, before we’re threatened for malinformation thought crimes?

        2. jobs

          Speaking of vitamin D: given the strong negative correlation between vitamin D levels and serious disease / hospitalization outcomes, it’s downright scandalous that the government didn’t push the idea of improving vitamin D levels in especially the older, more vulnerable population, probably the easiest intervention possible.

          Instead, they focused on preventing people from using the “horse paste” drug.

          People should go to prison for this.

      3. Pym of Nantucket

        Well said. Thanks for that, it takes a lot of work to be on top of all the swirling stories. I AM very worried about what has happened to the public perception of vaccination after this. Further, I am worried about the public confidence in physicians as so many were dogmatic with their patients during this disaster.

      4. Carolinian

        As always I’m reluctant to wade in on something so far from my knowledge but I do recall during the early Covid days in my state that African Americans were said to be more likely to succumb–perhaps dues to greater obesity or diabetes or some other reason. Even now it seems to be the black people in SC that I see still wearing masks suggesting that they see themselves as more vulnerable as well. FWIW.

        So yes South Africa and Denmark not at all alike.

        1. Objective Ace

          Given the increasing link between low vitamin D levels and worse outcomes this is what we would expect. Darker skin absorbs more ultraviolet light that would otherwise synthesize vitamin D. Same amount of sun exposure, much less vitmain D for african americans

      5. Raymond Sim

        And all those damned vaccines do is reduce severity of outcomes.

        A crude, and slightly hyperbolic summary of Anthony Leonardi’s increasingly well corroborated hypotheses: The mechanism for the reduction in severity appears to be establishment of competent immune memory, which state appears to exert an important damping effect on the destructive autoimmune processes and immune system overactivation which are otherwise likely to cause a massive decrease in life expectancy, and almost imponderable levels of misery and societal decay.

        So far as I’m aware (admittedly my knowledge may be out of date) the mRNA vaccines are by a significant margin the most effective method for acheiving this. If Leonardi’s right, as it increasingly seems he is, GM is not exaggerating their benefits, potential or realized.

        The harm is significant, lying about it was immoral, and mass use of the vaccines while lying about their harms and not taking the opportunity they presented to end the pandemic was a crime against humanity. That’s all on the powers that be. Where Berenson comes into this picture is the role info operators like him have played in producing the state of public confusion that permitted it to happen.

        Accusing GM of blaming the messenger is unjust. More importantly it mischaracterizes and minimizes the critique GM is making. GM has been quite explicit, for a long time now, as to the ‘bad cop’ role he sees the likes of Berenson as playing, and there’s plenty of evidence in Berenson’s own output to back that up.

        1. Yves Smith Post author

          I beg to differ with your summary. A Google of Anthony Leonardi “competent immune memory” produces only 10 matches on Google, and the main one an irrelevant primate study.

          Leonardi is a T cell expert and has warned repeatedly of the dangers of Covid infection in terms of T-cell disregulation and loss. T cells are not a good line of defense for Covid and I don’t recall Leonardi saying anything of the kind. Antibodies are the first line o defense and T cells swing into action later. Covid progresses so quickly that by the time T cells start acting, it is too late to stop disease or even do much regarding severity.

          Although it is anecdata, I have heard of too many cases of people with autoimmune diseases have their symptoms get worse on a sustained basis to buy the idea that the vaccines themselves are not also a cause of immune system overactivation.

          And the immune memory theory would seem to apply even more to “natural immunity” than to getting vaccinated, when immunity to every coronavirus that has ever existed is short lived.

          1. Raymond Sim

            This is an extremely important topic. Unfortunately, external circumstances compel a very inadequate response from me today, and perhaps the next several days as well.

            You give a nice precis of the usual account of the role of T-cells. This understanding has been significantly fleshed out in recent years, with Leonardi himself making a significant contribution.

            The immune system has memory, and makes decisions. These decisions have to balance threats, resources and collateral damage, among other things. The new understanding I referred to involves the dynamics of these decision-making processes. It seems to be proving predictive in an environment where the older understanding has been unhelpful. It also seems to go right over a lot of wise old gray heads.

            Your account of immune system operation is erroneous inasmuch as the T-cells don’t only swing into action later, they’re active as part of this decision making process from the get-go.

      6. Tinky


        Thank you very much for this rebuttal, Yves.

        Oh, and dollars to doughnuts, as we used to say, as the years unfold the damage from at least some of the vaccines will be revealed to have been worse than is currently understood.

      7. Arizona Slim

        Yves, my heart goes out to you. And, sorry to say, one of my best friends can contribute her own data point.

        Shortly after she got the J&J shot, she started hallucinating. She also had trouble using her legs. Then there was the tinnitus, which persisted for several weeks.

        My friend got that shot in late 2021. Vaccine mandate at work, she didn’t want to lose her job, so off she went to, oh, she’s never told me where.

        A few weeks ago, I asked her how she was doing and she said that her legs still weren’t working the way they once did. And, let me tell you, what she thinks of the COVID shots cannot be repeated on this family blog.

    2. Raymond Sim

      Regarding a return to Victorian England, I recently watched a YouTube video made by a man who went to visit a small urban stream in Norfolk he had played alongside as a boy to see what had become of it.

      It is now literally an open sewer.

  3. Ignacio

    Those percentages of serious adverse effects are well above “rare”, mind you, by orders of magnitude.

      1. Ignacio

        As per de numbers provided in between 1-2,5% in the trial that would count as “common” adverse effects. At odds obviously with the statement saying that “no serious adverse events observed”. Fraud would be a good qualifier if true.

    1. Raymond Sim

      Do you by any chance happen know where I could find the stats for smallpox vaccination and variolation?

      The harms of the interventions should not have been hidden.

      But compulsory application very harmful interventions have been seen as legitimate in the very recent past.

      1. Ignacio

        I regret to say, I don’t know. To my knowledge variolation is not generally recommended because it is difficult to control the severity of disease though it is usually protective.

        The WHO is a source to search though or the CDC even if both institutions have been shown faulty regarding Covid.

        1. Raymond Sim

          Dear me, I hope noone’s recommending it. I’m just curious how scary the thing the vaccine replaced was. And just how nasty the vaccine was/is as well.

  4. zagonostra

    There are many threads on my Twitter feed that address “Serious Adverse Vaccine Effects.” The problem as you indicate is that it is “only some re-reporting in right-wing outlets” that the discussion is reaching the public, small as it may be.

    I knew from the beginning something did not smell right, not as someone with any medical background like the good doctor, IM, rather as a reader of history and an observer of political/social/philosophical phenomena.

    Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. That one may smile and smile and be a villain. There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in our philosophy.

    1. Jason Boxman

      I didn’t know, so I’m very thankful that NC was early reporting on how suspect the Pfizer trial was. Ultimately I felt I had little choice and did the primary series anyway as soon as it was available. I also had a curious side effect that led to an ER visit about 4 weeks after my second dose. Thankfully, I’ve been okay since, as far as I know.

      I know of another instance, where someone was vaccinated while pregnant, and had to have emergency surgery during child birth because the uterus attached to a kidney at some point; Just bad luck? Maybe. Maybe not. Thankfully mother and baby are fine.

  5. Jeff Stantz

    It seems, that now, you are much more likely to die under the care of the medical establishment than outside of it.

    I have a friend who had “Chronic Fatigue Syndrome” for 15 years as diagnosed my her doctors. Doctors could not figure it out. She decided to stop her daily 1000mg Valacyclovir on a whim and now her “Chronic Fatigue Syndrome” is gone.

    15 years and not one doctor thought of this?

    So I feel gross now that I know I have two of the jabs in my body. I had zero reaction to either, but after the second I started hearing stores and that is when I decided to stop.

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      I still think the vaccines were not a bad idea with wild type. The vaccines were tuned to that, and if you got a serious case, you died after your lungs slowly turned to goo as you were coughing them out trying to breathe. Bad way to go.

      But when the virus mutated, the level and duration of protection dropped, with data showing negative efficacy after three months (can’t recall if for a first or second booster).

      And even though getting Covid appears to do permanent, if often subtle damage, serious cases do seem more harmful.

    2. Eustachedesaintpierre

      I took the first 2 AZ’s then discovered the French geneticist Alexandra Henrion Caude who at the time had done extensive work with both RNA & mRNA doing a presentation on the potential risks of the spike protein. After about 5 watches & taking notes I figured that if she was only half correct that we were finished with the jab – much of what she described as potential has since been realised. Another of her worries was that in her opinion if used correctly the above science could do a lot of good, with her fear being that the likes of Pfizer would inevitably discredit the whole thing.

      I am waiting for an English translation of her book Les Apprentis Sorciers.

  6. KidMD

    I was amazed at how little (published) response there was when the trials were stopped early, and control group dropped. To discontinue control group follow-up, of an untested novel class of vaccine, for a novel virus that behaved differently than many and with unknown long term consequences, seems blatantly irrational. BMJ did print some questioning articles, as this was appreciated by some. At that time, data about infection rates in UK and elsewhere suggested potential problems. I had trouble finding the Moderna follow up data – now I understand why. Here are links to some of the original data – often hard to find through FDA link overload. Moderna booster app, only reports mortality for vaccinated (17), not placebo. 8 in Vaers soon after booster. moderna initial eua

    Pfizer does not look so good either: 6 month data, p23 # of deaths, 21 vax, 17 placebo (from dose 1 thru 3/31/21)
    ( shows discrepancy)

    Thank you so much for continuing your coverage of Covid.

    1. Expat2Uruguay


      I was amazed at how little (published) response there was when the trials were stopped early, and control group dropped. To discontinue control group follow-up, of an untested novel class of vaccine, for a novel virus that behaved differently than many and with unknown long term consequences, seems blatantly irrational

      Control group follow up was discontinued because the control group was given the vaccine, and therefore eliminated as a control group. IIRC the reasoning for ending the control group was that it was unethical to not provide vaccines to any control group as it was during the pandemic where many people were dying in many countries. Also, to follow that logic further, if control groups were not allowed to receive medications that were reasonably thought to avert death and suffering, then it would be very difficult to recruit for RCT in the future. I understand that it looks bad with a hindsight 20/20 view screen, but there were rational reasons for eliminating the control groups at the time, yes?

      1. Objective Ace

        IIRC the reasoning for ending the control group was that it was unethical to not provide vaccines to any control group as it was during the pandemic where many people were dying

        That logic only holds when its proven the vaccines actually work with minimal side effects. This was never established–if anything, now that we’re actually seeing the early data the opposite seems to have been the case

      2. IM Doc

        This is simply not how it is done. But I do understand your points completely.

        This is part and parcel of being recruited as a test subject in any kind of trial. It is made clear to the individual subject that they will be in the active arm or the placebo arm. Neither they, nor the health care workers, nor anyone involved know which arm they are in. This is the meaning of double blind.

        It is part and parcel of the entire process that this is so. These subjects are all given documents that are multiple dozens of pages long that they must sign. Any changes to the document, even punctuation errors, require every subject to be re-consented and sign the new documents with the changes.

        It is clearly stated in the documents themselves what double-blind means. It is clearly stated that they may be in a placebo arm. It is clearly stated what meds will be given in each arm, and the proportion of the total subjects in each arm.

        It is absolutely also explained to each patient in person by an RN or MD exactly what is going on. This is done by both the actual research team – AND the IRB nurse. The IRB nurses have no skin in the game other than patient protection and are often much more encyclopedic in their discussions with the patient. (Now that most of the IRBs are no longer local but controlled by 1 or 2 mega corporations and are national, I am not sure of how much the IRB is involved in this step in modern times).

        It is made crystal clear to each patient that there is a length of the trial in days, months, or years. And there will be absolutely no breaking of the arms for any reason during this time. YOU AS A RESEARCHER DO NOT GET TO DECIDE TO CUT THE TIME DOWN TO WEEKS INSTEAD OF YEARS AFTER THE TRIAL HAS STARTED. This would lead to all kinds of problems and questions as to your motivation.

        Every subject in the trial knows this and it is hammered into their heads repeatedly. And yes, this is one of the reasons why it is difficult to recruit for trials. Nevertheless, we must have control groups that are intact to know exactly what safety and efficacy issues arise in the months ahead. There is just simply no other way.

        When this breaking of the control group was made public in 2021, every single person I know in any kind of research monitoring background let out a gasp of horror. This was especially true because these were vaccines that were being given to everyone not just lung cancer patients for example – and furthermore, had been severely rushed through Warp Speed and lacked the years of trials that are normally required for safety issues.

        Add to that – the entire “you will see the data in 75 years” approach – and instant reservations about the whole thing were engendered in so many.

        I do not doubt at all that there was at least some efficacy early on. However, it waned very rapidly. I have not seen much at all in efficacy since the first two shots. It does not seem to be helping at all now. I believe that is clear for all to see at this point. This same phenomenon is exactly what we have seen in coronavirus vaccine attempts in man and beast for time immemorial. Indeed, there have been some problems created that are much worse than just waning efficacy. I will repeat again, our current understanding of the immune system indicates that vaccine technology simply is not going to be any better than what our own immune systems are able to do. The end. If the organism does not produce lasting immunity in a natural infection, it will not produce lasting immunity with a vaccine. All the talk of herd immunity when these came out was at a minimum embarrassing.

        Again, with any medication, whatever efficacy there was, and again, I think there was some at least initially, much be measured against the side effects and harms produced. It is here where we have done a terrible job as a society. What good will it have done to have “some” efficacy in the beginning if over the months and years it causes all kinds of other issues in those who have taken it? This is a very important question – and by its very nature is very complicated. My concern has been all along a complete non-transparency of any data from our agencies. Every shred of raw data should have been public from the beginning. Let our best minds in epidemiology and statistics look it over. Let us have a debate. Let us do this debating in public. After all, this disease involved every human being on this planet. We all have a stake. What our officials have done is the exact opposite of that. This has been a national shame. Maybe sometime in the fullness of time we will all realize as our forebears did before us that CENSORING is not a rational approach. It causes all kinds of negative consequences. And these are often consequences that get completely out of control of those doing the censoring. DEPLATFORMING, DELICENSING, and DE-BOARDING are also a disaster and may be even worse. Any good will effort to figure this out – and this includes asking very tough questions – is a part of the answer and not part of the problem.

        I have stated from the beginning my feeling about Berenson. I am not really into juvenile antics. However, at times, he was the ONLY one with a public bullhorn asking tough questions about these vaccines. The amount of invective he has endured is for the ages. I have been most disappointed with all the “reporters” in the mainstream media who time and time again responded to his legitimate issues with invective, ad hominem, and derision. “He is Berenson. He is a moron, He is undeserving of a response. I would not deign to give him one. Therefore, I do not have to respond to his very important issue.” Time and time again that was the MSM response. And unlike the MSM – he responded instantly when he was found to be wrong about something. I will ask any of you to look at Rachel Maddow’s tweet about the hospitals in Oklahoma being overwhelmed by ivermectin injuries. Still there to this day. What a clown she has turned out to be.

        Guess what? There are those of us old enough to have gone through this in the national trauma that was AIDS…..There were actual reporters back then like Berenson who were not hesitant to ask the hard questions. They were often wrong. I am not sure what has happened to us, but this entire feeling that those in the media have to be “right” all the time – may be the death of our national conversation.

        As I stated yesterday, this has been a disaster on so many levels. It deserves to be and will be dissected for generations.

        1. Expat2uruguay

          Thank you for your response, and for especially making these points:

          “these were vaccines that were being given to everyone not just lung cancer patients for example – and furthermore, had been severely rushed through Warp Speed and lacked the years of trials that are normally required for safety issues.”

          It seems I only remembered the excuse that was given at the time, and not the other facts on the ground that were ignored…

        2. Telee

          Perhaps you are already aware that new pathologies are being uncovered which are solely caused by the mRNA vaccines. In people that have severe vaccine reactions such a myocarditis and other pathologies, spike protein is found in the blood. Histological studies in sick and deceased individuals have shown that all organs in these individuals, including the brain, are making spike proteins. This is accompanied with the destruction of blood vessels and other pathologies. Here is the link which will better describe these findings.

          Meanwhile, it is my understanding that more mRNA vaccines are in the pipeline. If so, then we can expect scientific information of this sort will be suppressed.

          1. Raymond Sim

            The link didn’t work for me.

            Presence of spike protein is unfortunately not the slam-dunk indictment of the vaccines people often take it to be. Verifying absence of prior infection is not a simple matter, something that neither the pro- nor ant-vaxx factions care to acknowledge.

      3. britzklieg

        I’ll start by stating clearly that I don’t know if ivm is a useful treatment, so one should not assume I do when pointing out the irony that it was exactly this procedural mis-step that was used to dismiss, indeed ridicule, many important trials on ivm effectiveness – that positive results motivated the decision to unblind the trials as morally defensible for protecting the placebo group from infection. This fact was used to generate malign antipathy towards the professionals and lay persons who hoped it could be beneficial while used to instill only empathy when the same decision was made about the warp-speed-anything-but-miraculous mrna vaccines.

        I won’t defend the ivm trials that went off course, and no one should defend the manipulated vaccine trials for doing the same.

        1. Skip Intro

          I find the extreme energy put into suppressing IVM to be a highly compelling indicator of its effectiveness.

          1. jobs

            There’s this:

            Statistically significant improvement for mortality, ventilation, ICU, hospitalization, recovery, cases, and viral clearance.
            85%, 62%, 43%

            improvement for prophylaxis, early, and late treatment CI [77-90%], [51-70%], [28-54%]

            56% improvement in 45 RCTs CI [41-68%]
            51% lower mortality from 49 studies CI [37-61%]

            1. lambert strether

              Without having evaluated the aggregated studies, that 85% favorable rating for prophylaxis really jumps out — that’s been the use case for many here from early on.

              1. Skip Intro

                And also the biggest threat to a business model based on selling yearly batches of leaky vaccines to world gov.s which just cause the virus to spread and mutate, while also selling a treatment that causes a secret delayed reinfection period.

  7. Lexx

    Lately I’ve been thinking about the hypothalamus, the master gland over all the other hormone-producing glands. Before Covid and that first shot, the most common complaint I heard was ‘gut problems’. Whatever their ‘normal’ had been was messed up now and they couldn’t seem to get it back… and older women complained of being too cold all the time. Not unusual, that.

    Three shots later plus boosters, the most common complaint I hear is about sleeping too warm, being unable to sleep for long, waking up and unable to get back to sleep. Yes, there’s a lot of answers to those kinds of complaints, subclinical flying under the radar.

    I don’t think ‘anxiety’ is the answer; it sounds hypothalamic. Like something is messing up their ability to regulate their own hormones, including body temperature control and sleep cycle.

    My most recent PT was about six months pregnant when I met her. Early thirties, second child, exhausted from her many roles and the pregnancy. Her first had been a breeze (she said, the first was before Covid). With the second, everything ‘that could go wrong, had gone wrong’ short of miscarriage. She was prescribed progesterone in pill form. The worst was being unable to get enough sleep. But pregnant, not pregnant, I’m hearing the complaints about temperature control and sleeplessness across all demographics.

    Oh, and most of the folks I’ve talked to over the last three years got Pfizer shots. FWIW.

    1. britzklieg

      There is research that suggests hypothalamus dysfunction plays a key role in migraines as well and my experience with migraines is that it’s a condition far more systemic and disruptive than one sided headaches. Indeed there is the vestibular migraine (MAV – migraine associate vertigo) that does not manifest as headache pain but rather as disequilibrium, vertigo, tinnitus and hearing loss. Migraine also disrupts the gut with digestive paresis as a principle symptom. And sleep problems abound with migraine sufferers.

      I’m not a new-ager who thinks crystals can cure cancer or other spiritually inspired remedies (no offense to those who do) but I will say that acupuncture and acupressure have seemed to give positive results to my migraine issues. There is a spot on the middle of the thumb pad (think of the way a yogi meditates with the pointer finger pressed into the thumb creating a circle – the pose is iconic) which is believed to directly effect the hypothalamus as well as a point on the top of the hand between the tendons of the pinky and the ring finger. They are my go to spots when seeking relief through meditation in a quiet, unlit space. The precise locations and process of applying the pressure are easily found on-line.

      Migraine attacks as a result of hypothalamic loss of control:

      1. david

        wow. want to thank both of you for these fascinating insights. THEY RESONATE.
        Wish we could chat.

      2. GF


        Is MAV – (migraine associate vertigo) the new name for Meniere’s Disease? Serious question.

        1. Antagonist Muscles

          No, my mom has Ménière’s disease (MD) and not migraine or its associated symptoms. MD is characterized by tinnitus, sudden and fluctuating hearing loss, and vestibular balance problems. Migraine has a fairly broad symptomology if we include atypical migraine, ocular migraine, and also standard migraine headaches. Migraine associated headaches are typically unilateral, pulsating, and associated with sensory abnormalities like a visual aura. I don’t doubt that migraine sufferers can report vertigo, but MD is markedly different.

          My mom also has autonomic problems associated with the hypothalamus (i.e. blood pressure control, temperature control). Sometimes symptoms from autonomic dysfunction overlaps with MD and can make distinguishing between them difficult.

        2. britzklieg

          No, they are distinct but share many similarities. But not many people know about MAV and don’t know that migraines can cause vertigo as well, most often w/o the headache, along with tinnitus and hearing loss. I believe that one of the big distinctions is that MD affects only one ear. Both are extremely difficult to diagnose conclusively.

  8. paddy

    fda/cdc ‘science’ is suspect! hype!

    berensen is not a decision analyst,

    however, siding with the barrington group fills in that missing skill.

    faith in the fda/cdc ‘science’/hype is justifiably weak. there is scarce knowledge of the logic/tests supporting their hypotheses/hype while they demanded they be accepted as true.

    risk of accepting false cdc hypotheses was far higher than warranted for imposing any mandates.

    the virus is less harmful than the hype, and the vaccines less effective and more dangerous than the hype.

    we do not need the hype in whatever comes in the future….

    mandates deny informed decision, which was hyped away!

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      No, the GBD types are fabulists. Their entire case is based on the idea that getting Covid is no biggie, which is abjectly false. VA data, which is very comprehensive, shows the more often you get Covid, the more likely you are to die in the next six months. Marked rise in all-cause mortality, and cumulative impact.

      But the CDC and the public health officials were willing only to get on the (lucrative) Big Pharma vaccine bandwagon, way way oversold it and were unwilling to change course or admit any error when it didn’t live up to their hype.

      1. paddy

        va data is a for veterans eligible for va health care, that is service disabled, belatedly agent orange cancer victims and indigent honorable discharged, not sure that is representative of the general population, va patients tend to be older with ‘rougher’ life history.

        i am retired reserve, no disability and not in that cadre…..

        there are statisticians tracking excess mortality recognizing post mass vaccination upticks that are “statistically significant”.

        see ethical skeptic:

        cancers seems worrisome since the vaxxes!

        the hypothesis that covid is long term is hard to infer since the massive uptake of the vaccines which were not long term tested.

        besides the vaxxes do not limit transmission!

        the test population for the vaccines is in the 200 million range in the usa!

        and who is tracking the vaers?

        1. Yves Smith Post author

          That is absolutely false. VA is for all veterans, and is based on years of service not disability:

          If you enlisted after September 7, 1980, or entered active duty after October 16, 1981

          You must have served 24 continuous months or the full period for which you were called to active duty, unless any of the descriptions below are true for you.

          You can be eligible with fewer months of service if you were discharged for a disability.

          And only a small proportion were active service in Vietnam. Did you miss the US has 800 bases around the world, as well as bases in the US? Oh, and a big Navy and Air Force?

          As for the excess death increases, particularly cancers, it is impossible to pick apart vaccine effects from Covid effects, particularly given the likely magnitude of asympomatic cases that various analyses have found have long-term health harms…aside from Long Covid. Anyone who says otherwise is intellectually dishonest. Cancer in particularly given the impossibility of establishing onset precisely can’t be attributed to vaccines as opposed to Covid.

          You’ve made shit up twice and doubled down after being called out. Each is a violation of house rules. I trust you will find you happiness elsewhere on the Internet.

        2. Basil Pesto

          va data is a for veterans eligible for va health care, that is service disabled, belatedly agent orange cancer victims and indigent honorable discharged, not sure that is representative of the general population, va patients tend to be older with ‘rougher’ life history.

          The Al-Aly study Yves is referring to controls for the covariates that might be expected from a VA patient cohort. The conclusion is the same.

          the hypothesis that covid is long term is hard to infer since the massive uptake of the vaccines which were not long term tested.

          It’s actually easy to infer based on the reporting of sequelae from SARS1 patients, infected 20 years ago. Sequelae were also being widely reported throughout 2020, before vaccination. It was clear in early 2020 that the major burden of this disease would be morbidity, not short term mortality (which was still alarming). SARS is a nasty multi-system disease and probably always will be. That characteristic of the pathogen was known at the start of 2020.

          Erstwhile “Zero Covid” countries that vaccinated most of their population with little to no disease present showed adverse effects nowhere near the apparently catastrophic scale that “the non-cure is worse than the non-disease” folks are arguing (including in pregnancy), this was shown, in Australia’s case, not just in raw government data but in actuarial analysis of excess deaths comparing the years 2020 through 2022 which I have linked to in the past. This cannot simply be handwaved away (and my pointing this out is not to say that adverse events following vaccination do not happen at all, which would be silly). And there remains no plausible, non-bullshit (Gene Therapy etc) mechanistic explanation as to how the vaccines could be producing worse outcomes epidemiologically than the pathogen, as far as I’m aware. I do not find vague “well we just don’t know what’s going to happen” claims which unduly mystify the vaccines to be terribly persuasive, particularly as the distressingly common “all long term bad public health outcomes will obviously be a result of the vaccine” claim is a very obviously sophist, ratbag covid minimiser position, deliberately designed to mislead, apparently quite effectively.

          If one wants to argue that the USA is the last holdout in the world for rational vaccine scepticism in terms of harms and where that scepticism just happens, broadly speaking, to neatly divide upon that country’s inane partisan political lines, go for it I guess. I find the idea silly, being charitable. Of course one reason the vaccines have to be denigrated out of all proportion in the USA specifically – and setting aside the stupidity of the vaccine mandates in lieu of NPI mandates – is because the vaccine campaign is the closest the USA has come to a real-time mass demonstration of a policy of universal socialised medicine, albeit one taking place in an emergency. This politicised denigration was almost certainly always going to happen, even if these vaccines were demonstrably the Safest Vaccines Evah (which they aren’t). This observation generally aligns with the many near-resuscitations of the welfare state that occurred in 2020 and which had to be rolled back, tout de suite.

  9. Anon

    I wonder how many people who have suffered serious adverse reactions to the vaccines will actually be able to prove that the vaccines caused their medical crisis? I developed Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) after my J&J shot in early 2021. I was hospitalized when the GBS progressed to the point where I was paralyzed from the waist down. It took me many months to be able to walk again. I still struggle with numbness and weakness in my legs, which makes it difficult to do simple everyday tasks. My quality of life now is poor. When I was in the hospital, no doctor even wanted to consider that my paralysis was caused by a Covid vaccine. I was coded as having “neuropathy”, not GBS (which I clearly had). There is no mention in my medical records, from the hospital or my regular doctors, that I had recently received the J&J vaccine prior to being hospitalized, although I repeatedly told them so. I am still being treated for “neuropathy” of unknown origin. Honestly, I am too sick to even want to think about a lawsuit but for people who want to go that route, I predict it will be a long hard road to any kind of justice. Don’t expect help from the medical profession. They have been gas lighting us for the last several years about the vaccines and many other issues surrounding Covid.

    1. JonnyJames

      I am sorry to hear that you suffered because of this criminal negligence. Sadly, I believe the BigPharma corps are above the law, and are immune from lawsuits. I hope I am wrong and something changes

    2. Yeti

      Anon, sorry about your vaccine experience. Unfortunately if Sasha Latypova is correct, you can read her on substack, there will be no recourse for people like yourself. Brooke Jackson’s case against Pfizer has been thrown out of court and according to Sasha it is due to this medical intervention being in her words a “military countermeasure”. If true it doesn’t bode well for any of the potentially thousands of vaccine injured. You can also check out Jessica Rose also on substack as she has lot to lot data on vaccination AE’s. You should be able to see if your vaccine came from a lot with multiple adverse events. Hope you get well.

    1. Questa Nota

      I applaud the ongoing presentation of Berenson and others to bring into the light what should’ve been there all along.
      It will take many years to rebuild what has happened to public trust in the medical establishment, among others.
      At some point, somebody is going to have to apologize, even if their attorneys scream not to.

  10. jefemt

    I am a bit reticent to keep bringing this up, but it does seem important and contextual…
    RFK, Jr. and his book, The Real Anthony Fauci- Bill Gates yada yada.

    Really encourage everyone here to at minimum read the introduction and first 60 pages or so…

    I came away better informed, disheartened, and infuriated… much to ponder with his announcement for a Presidential bid.

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      No, I am not at all a fan of that book. I was furious with RFK, Jr. after the first chapter and a half and could not go further.

      RFK Jr. is a Covid minimizer and anti-mask. The fact that the vaccines fell short of what was promised and have problems that are being buried does not mean Covid is a nothingburger and non-pharmaceutical interventions should be dismissed.

  11. Yeti

    Thanks for this Yves, helps with my confirmation bias issue. As some here may know from previous comments I have gone down this rabbit hole for a year now. Dr. Charles Hoffe of Lytton BC noticed his patients having adverse reactions by April 2021. Here is his letter to our Health Officer Dr? Bonnie Henry.
    Please read it as it is startling. It was written on April 5, 2021. In emails between Bonnie Henry and her staff on April 8, 2021 they were already writing him up to the BC College of Physicians for Covid-19 misinformation. Search “adverse” on this link: There are also numerous newspaper articles demonizing Dr. Hoffe.

    1. lambert strether

      Bonnie Henry dodged a bullet because I had to deal with Zelikow. The mills of Lambert grind slowly….

  12. JonnyJames

    Thank you Yves. The lack of critical thinking, hysteria, blind obedience, and the vicious attacks on anyone who questioned the Unified Hegemonic Narrative was/is truly dystopian and terrifying. For me, more terrifying than the risk of the virus itself.

    (Speaking of risk, over 40,000 people die every year on the road, yet few ever mention it)

    But Moderna, Pfizer and others made a killing, they, like the rest of the Oligarchy are Above the Law. Also, the cynical hypocrisy of our “elected officials” with slogans like “follow the science” was almost unbelievable.

    As others have said, now that overwhelming, indisputable facts are out, many in the public will also have zero trust in our “elected” officials or the oligarchy they represent.

    I think the so-called Border Wall is to keep us gringos from escaping south of the border. Increasing numbers of US denizens are moving out.

    1. Raymond Sim

      Young’un, do you not know how much fighting it took to get the roads as safe as they are?

  13. Hatuxka

    How quickly the vaccine was made available, that it was released under an emergency use authorization, that here at this site immediately after it was released that flaws in the trial data were expressed. All these were causes for concern. BUT was willing to take the risk versus not going anywhere until this blew over (which looked to be possibly never at the time). How rare was that way of thinking, or elements of it, among those considerations about these mRNA vaccines? Thinking not that rare.

  14. QuarterBack

    I am not an attorney, but if this (alleged) fraud proves out, some jurisdictions could argue for murder or manslaughter charges for key actors due to informed willful fraud with disregard of hazards to citizens that caused deaths which would have been foreseeable. The thing about murder charges – no statute of limitations.

    Further, since the Moderna vaccine was promoted and distributed globally, and considering the scale, there could even be jeopardy under crimes against humanity treaties – no statute of limitations + multinational jurisdiction.

    Rome Statute Art. 7(1)(k) Crime against humanity of other inhumane acts

    1. JonnyJames

      I would hope so, but the “law”, prison, and taxes are only for “the little people”

      When we have war criminals, abusers of power, and TBTF financial parasites rewarded for their crimes, it is difficult to have faith in an institutionally corrupt system

  15. Brooklin Bridge

    For things like Chat Bot, where a computer is mimicking human thought with primitive forms of neural networks and value weights, it has taken a long time just to get this far; as Lambert details, a kludgey form of regurgitation, hits and misses being silently indiscriminate. For the time being, that cludgeyness and its visible limitations are our greatest protection even though still dangerously imperfect, but I wonder if that protection, such as it is, will last. Computers are incredibly powerful and more importantly, the financial incentive of eliminating the costly human worker/thinker is simply too great for the effort to stop, no matter how high the hurdles and potential for unreachable goals.

    If it saves money (involves profit), shifts control from buyer to seller, and can be sold to the public with convenience being the hook and massive propaganda bubbles in place of facts being the bait (such as driverless cars); it is a success and the laws of the land can be changed to hide hiccups (lethal ones remain but hiccups as long as profit is involved).

    All that said, in a different society with different values, I think this could be improved to the point of being really useful.

    1. Brooklin Bridge

      Apologies, this comment was intended for Lambert’s post, Why You Should Never Use an AI for Advice about Your Health, Especially Covid. I had two windows open on NC, each to a different post.

      Moderator, please feel free to delete my above comment (including this) again with my apologies. It’s been quite a while since I have made a comment, but even so, getting it in the wrong post is ridiculous, even for me. So sorry.

  16. zagonostra

    Tucker Carlson is leaving Fox News according to AP. I was wondering when this would happen. His audience was too large and his views to countra-neo liberal narrative.

    I guess AOC partly got her wish; as she told Jen Psaki she thought Tucker should be held to account, whatever that means.

    1. JonnyJames

      Sorry, but I could care less about people who are paid 12 million a year to wear makeup and participate in the two-party dictatorship while posing as an “alternative”. Even if they say something that is occasionally factual. But then again, I’m biased, I don’t watch TV or stream Mass Media Cartel BS.

  17. J.

    Note that Covid-19 and especially Delta is thought to cause second trimester stillbirths. This would explain why IM Doc saw a higher rate of stillbirths that then tapered off, without presuming a vaccine injury.

    That said, the spike protein binds an important cellular receptor. The spike might have effects. The antispike antibodies might have effects. I did see a graph posted on Twitter the other day that seems to indicate it does not:

    I think GM’s second comment above is pretty much spot on: pretending there are no side effects at all from the vaccine is eroding public trust, but getting the vaccine is better than getting the disease.

    1. Yeti

      “but getting the vaccine is better than getting the disease.“
      But is getting the vaccine then getting the disease better than just getting the disease.? I think not given the many potential AE’s from getting this vaccine. Studies are now showing as Yves said above a negative efficacy of vaccination after a few months. I have a Health Canada report that was released under a foia request stating that after 240 days vaccine efficacy was down to -16%. At 59 days it was reduced to 6%. I agree that getting Covid-19 is bad for your health but why on earth have we only promoted this treatment over any other ie; IVM, vit D, Zinc along with many other well known drugs that have shown potential in reducing severity and length of this disease. I had a prescription from my doctor for IVM and took it on my third day of sickness, after I received my positive result. I was feeling 100% better after 8 hours, this is after I was bed ridden for 2 1/2 days. My spouse was just starting to get sick when she took her first prescribed dose. Her illness never progressed to the state I was in. We also were taking vitamin D as well as zinc. Even if these treatments did nothing to help me in my recovery they didn’t seem to have done any harm. I was recently exposed to Covid-19 again while visiting my twice vaccinated son when he was testing positive and symptomatic along with his girlfriend. This was second time for both of them, I did not get sick. This is 14 months after my first and only infection. By the way no signs of long Covid in either of us. Did the IVM work? Can’t say. Did it harm me? Definitely not given that the dose prescribed is well known to be tolerated in almost everybody.

        1. Yeti

          best i can do is this. don’t know why but unable to quote or highlight or copy any of the text. Here is the Release Package Document #:
          PHAC-A-2022-000022-2022-08-02.PDF From freedom of information Canada.
          In it you will see my quote on VE on the bottom of page 8, if you choose to do some math you will find that the death rate in the unvaccinated is out by a factor of 10 on table 2. They use that error to claim that the unvaccinated are 10 times more likely to die. I have other data from Health Canada that shows the some thing. Had to take screen shots as the data is now harder to find.

          1. Acacia

            You aren’t using quotation marks to discuss VE, so I don’t know what to search for.

            “PHAC-A-2022-000022” turns up nothing in Google, Brave, Bing, DDG, Yandex, and Baidu.

            Ergo, this is not material that I or anybody else can credibly use. I.e, it’s not a source that can be cited.

            The PDF is probably just image scans, not actual text. It needs to be OCR’d.

            You could upload the PDF to a cyberlocker and paste to URL, or use for a URL.

          2. Acacia

            That’s not a citation. I just posted a comment to explain why and NC ate it.

            Please upload the PDF to a cyberlocker and paste the URL here.

          3. Acacia

            That’s not a proper citation, sorry.

            I searched for the PDF file name with Google, DDG, Bing, Brave, Yandex, and Baidu — nada.

            The PDF is probably just image scans. It needs to be OCR’d.

            1. Acacia

              Thanks, SC. Good find. I put in an order and they sent a confirmation email.

              Dunno if they’ll ever follow up and send me the actual PDF, but if they do, I’ll upload and post a link to it.

              Sorry to be so persistent about this, but as I see it the only chance we have of gaining ground against COVID denialism (starting with our own social circles) is to have hard evidence on tap to back up any claims that we make, and that means proper citations to sources that can be verified. This can be tricky on the Internet, when ‘official’ URLs can suddenly stop working, but there are also plenty of ways to share documents.

    2. BeliTsari

      Problem is: PRETENDING “vax, relax… & UNMASK” was anything BUT a blatant “Everybody, back to the plantation, uppity essentials!” eugenics Catastrophe Capitalism feeding frenzy, is just plain silly? WFH petit bourgeois portfolios rocketed, as workers ARE re-re-reinfected, PASC indentured into uninsured gig-serfdom; serendipitously vacant rent-controlled hovels flipped. PhARMA & FIRE Sector, conglomerate online e-vendors (sero-naive Asian) & “independent contractor” delivery & all services experienced WEF’s Great Reset, as Black, Brown, precariate & refugee gig-serfs… well, when DID we reach our SECOND million excess deaths. Biden stopped testing & counting as our kids were used as “asymptomatic” vectors to let ‘er RIP? Thank HEAVENS President Joe Biden™ ended the COVID Emergency!

      Jeepers, was that all one run-on? Brain-FOG!

    3. Yves Smith Post author

      I don’t mean to sound harsh, but did you read IM Doc’s remarks with any care? All of the second trimester miscarriages in his practice were among recently vaccinated women.

      There are also definitional issues. The Harvard study looked at STILLBIRTHS. You don’t have stillbirth until 20 weeks. Before that, it is a miscarriage. So most of the second trimester would not be covered by this study.

      You explicitly assume that getting vaccinated prevents Covid. IT DOESN”T.

      All they do is prevent worst outcomes. And that may not even be true any more. IM Doc was very very carefully tracking vax status of his patients. The ones who’ve been boosted multiple times have been far more susceptible Covid (and RSV) that the unvaxxed. He chronicled the shift over time.

      Consistent with that, one solid study showed the vaccines had negative efficacy after three months. You were MORE likely to get Covid >3 months after getting a jab (at that point, for most, a booster) than if you had not been (recently) vaccinated>

      The Harvard Med School article its stillbirth study contends vaccines are preventive.

      And he said 2021. Delta didn’t become dominant till late June.

      You are assuming all the miscarriages happened as a result of Delta, when some could have happened too early for that to be plausible. You are going beyond his facts.

        1. Yves Smith Post author

          No, I remember what the charts looked like and this is not that. Pretty big population and fairly recent because shortened protection is an artifact of vaccine escape.

      1. J.

        I think you misunderstand my comment. I am suggesting Delta infection caused IM Doc’s observation rather than the vaccine.

        > did you read IM Doc’s remarks with any care?

        Yes. IM Doc said that he saw 4-5 midterm miscarriages in 2021, to patients that had been vaccinated or boosted within 3 months.

        Vaccines became available for healthy adults in early 2021 but it was difficult to actually find a dose, so most not-risk-grouped people weren’t vaccinated right away. I got vaccinated myself as soon as I possibly could, which turned out to be in mid-March. Three months after that would be mid-June 2021, around the time Delta became dominant. So the timeline is actually spot on.

        I don’t have time to do much of a literature search this evening for Covid effects on pregnant women, but since Covid is a vascular disease it seems likely to affect the placenta, which is a highly vascular organ. The Harvard article specifically mentions Delta as linked to miscarriages. There is also at least some association of Covid infection with first-trimester miscarriage:

        > You explicitly assume that getting vaccinated prevents Covid. IT DOESN”T.

        I did not say that. I am suggesting what actually may have happened is that IM Doc’s patients got Covid, despite being vaccinated, and miscarried as a result of Covid and not as a result of being vaccinated. This would explain why he saw a pattern of miscarriages during Delta that stopped as the principal strains in circulation switched to other variants.

        > Consistent with that, one solid study showed the vaccines had negative efficacy after three months.

        I couldn’t find that study. I did find a recent meta-analysis that indicated a lowered level of protection, but ongoing positive effects.

        Here is a recent study that does not find any vaccine risk to pregnant women, although they weren’t very happy with the data quality that went into the meta-analysis:

        I am sure some people have been harmed by the vaccines, and they are obviously not a cure for the pandemic even though they were pitched as such. However as far as I can tell getting the vaccine even now would still be preferable in terms of risk to catching Covid with a naive immune system. I really hate to see all the anti-vax stuff gaining traction.

        1. Yves Smith Post author

          I am not misunderstanding your comment. You are misunderstanding or worse disingenuously talking over mine.

          I went through the timeline. Delta was not dominant till end of June 2021, as in end of first half of the year. Dominant means over 50%, not exclusive. And IM Doc is in flyoever, so Delta progression to dominance likely was late v. rest of US.

          Health care workers were in the first group to get vaccines. That group skews female due to nurse staffing v. doctors.

          Essential workers in second group. That includes nursing home workers, again heavily female.

          Some states put teachers, a very large and female group, in that bucket.

          All of those were eligible before March 1 and could have had a second trimester miscarriage by end of June/end of July.

        2. tegnost

          I really hate to see all the anti-vax stuff gaining traction.

          anti vax is gaining traction because the covid vaccine doesn’t live up to the hype.
          If you want more trust, ditch the hype.
          If your hype is a lie, expect people to not have faith in it.

          I am sure some people have been harmed by the vaccines,
          certainly a higher number than is acknowledged…
          but hey! we gifted big pharm a massive risk free trial of a substance they’ve been trying to introduce for some 30 years, and you didn’t get the shot if you didn’t sign the eua…
          Imagine 300 million people getting 5 shots (ok, you’re right a lot of us said no, so) 150 million x 5 shots equals lots of data that can be gleaned from public health records…

  18. DG

    Big Pharma eliminated the control group in the studies. Governments tried relentlessly to eliminate the control group in the population with the vaccine mandates. What could possibly go wrong. Now young ppl are dying suddenly in big numbers and many more are facing serious health issues.

  19. Alan F.

    Yves, thank you, thank you for entertaining this topic and this specific article on your site. I believe you and IM Doc are providing valuable insight, from a position clearly separate from the specific biases of certain right-wing types who have been commenting on this issue, to mixed effect, for a while.

    As you’re probably aware, there are a number of people with solid credentials (doctorates in relevant fields and substantial pre-Covid work and publications) who have also tried to provide intelligent commentary without falling into partisan politics, and to varying success without being pigeonholed as politicians. Just two I will highlight for people’s reading are Geert Vanden Bossche and Jessica Rose.

    There are reasons to fear that the vaccines may have as much or more long-term harm as the virus itself. In fact, I anticipate that once this is widely believed in the developing world, whether correctly or incorrectly, it will greatly accelerate the unwinding of the US-EU economic sphere as US, German and British companies will be blamed for the harms.

    In monitoring this area, I note that Israel pushed the Pfizer vaccine very early and strongly. It has already served as something of a “canary” for both waning effectiveness (remember the waves of disease from 2021?) and potential harm, and it will likely continue to be one of the better data sources given the high uptake in a short period of time, all of only one vaccine.

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      I am sorry but Geert Vanden Bossche has greatly exaggerated the relevance of his credentials to Covid and has made hysterical claims that the Covid vaccines will end humanity. Jessica Rose asked that her paper on myocarditis be withdrawn, a very bad look, and has not published a corrected paper. I don’t regard either as a reliable. That does not mean, like Berenson, that they can’t occasionally find a truffle but I would not accept anything any of these three says without furter scrutiny.

    2. Raymond Sim

      Vanden Bossche’s analysis is based on some assumptions which, so far as I’ve ever seen, he presents as universal truths rather than as axioms.

      Unfortunately at least two of them are so unrealistic as to render his analysis moot. Specifically, his treatment of innate immunity doesn’t account for the pathogen’s capacity to attack innate immunity, and more damningly, but harder for laypeople to notice, his assumptions about the interplay of immunity and pathogen apply only if the host species occupies mutiple habitats with limited exchange of individuals between them.

      In models that allow for jet travel mutual extinction becomes a disturbingly likely outcome. Of course before than happened we’d be busted up into isolated populations …. but that’s not the picture he paints. Note also that escape from natural immunity produces the same kind of results as escape from vaccine induced immunity.

  20. David Anthony

    I don’t believe companies but I believe Alex Berenson less.

    Let me know when someone else has evidence.

    1. Raymond Sim

      My gut says the guy’s some kind of narc. That doesn’t mean he can’t also be a guy who finds some bona fide dirt on Moderna.

      I have zero faith in Berenson, but high confidence that Yves et al gave this a very close reading.

    2. Objective Ace

      He’s pointing you to his sources. You shouldnt believe him — you should believe what Moderna says. Thats the story here. Ad hominem fallacies are irrelevant

        1. Yves Smith Post author

          Ad hominem and a violation of site Policies. He shows Moderna records and links to all sources.

          The onus is on you to rebut him.

          I don’t tolerate violations of our written house policies, and I don’t give a rat’s ass about the personal opinion of a lazy handwaver. As Barry Ritholtz says, GYOFB.

  21. Heraclitus

    This afternoon I got into a conversation in a medical waiting room with a man who had a Phd in Pharmacology and was retired from research at a major pharmaceutical manufacturer. I asked him if he thought that Pfizer and Moderna would ever be called to account for their vaccine development problems. He didn’t answer the question I asked, but remarked that mRNA was sold as new technology, when it actually wasn’t. He said they were using it to perform various tasks back in the ’80s.

    This got me to thinking about exactly how the jab was sold to the public. It had to be a whiz bang new thing in order to sell it.

    1. GM

      He didn’t answer the question I asked, but remarked that mRNA was sold as new technology, when it actually wasn’t. He said they were using it to perform various tasks back in the ’80s.

      That’s false.

      It took a very long time to work out delivery and stability.

      But first, what is mRNA?

      Remember that old anecdote about people 20-30 years ago being asked why they are afraid of GMO tomatoes and absolutely seriously answering “because they have DNA in them”?

      I’m afraid it’s the same phenomenon in action here too, but even worse. At least “DNA” is at this point a term that pretty much everyone has some vague idea about. But mRNA? Not so much. Yeah, everyone supposedly should have learned this in high school, but in practice they don’t.

      Of course every organism has mRNA — it’s a central component of the information processing pathway, which is DNA -> RNA -> proteins (with DNA not even being strictly necessary; case in point — SARS-CoV-2 is an RNA virus).

      And yet I definitely see people whose words leave no doubt that they sincerely think that “mRNA” is something sinister developed by the WEF to microchip everyone.

      The ignorance is indeed that appalling and that deep.

      But even among the people who do know what mRNA is, there is clearly very little understanding what exactly these vaccines are. Two problems had to be solved to make this a working tool:

      1) Delivery. You can’t just inject RNA into people, it will do nothing. It will not get inside cells and will be quickly degraded (plus the immune system does not like seeing free floating RNA either, because so many of our pathogens are RNA viruses). The solution is lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), which can maintain stability outside cells and then, because they are lipid soluble, merge with cell membranes and deliver their cargo inside cells.

      These are made of synthetic lipids that are not too dissimilar from the lipids that make up our own cell membranes. They are indeed synthetic, but they don’t have magical evil properties that will make people sick or anything.

      They are also not “nanotechnology” in the sense that the ignorant masses are lied about, i.e. some kind of tiny robots that will do unspeakably evil things once inside the body.

      Also not at all understood is that our own membranes are not made up of only one kind of lipid. There is very wide chemical variety of phospholipids that make up our membranes, and that is vastly exceeded by what we eat every day that is of plant origin. And on top of this, there are many trillions of bacterial cells inside and all over our body, with an even vaster array of lipids.

      Thus those synthetic lipids do not represent some kind of novel “unnatural” substance, outside of the chemical space that is already a normal part of our bodies, that we are injecting into ourselves with no knowledge about the effects. First, it is hard to imagine them having negative effects, it’s just another lipid. Second, there are decades of research on this before COVID came, these things have been injected into countless mice, rats and monkeys to check for any potential side effects.

      The rest of the whole vaccine formulation is harmless too — cholesterol, PEG, DSPC phosphatidylcholine (natural component of our own membranes), Tris buffer, sucrose, a little bit of sodium acetate, potassium and sodium chlorides and phosphates.

      And of course, that most evil and harmful substance known as dihydrogen monoxide (a.k.a. H2O)

      The only thing among that list that can possibly trigger some kind of reaction is PEG — some people are allergic to it, but mostly mildly. But that certainly does not encompass all the fantastical horrors that are ascribed to the vaccines.

      2) The second problem that had to be solved is that even if you get the mRNA inside the cells, it will be in fairly low copies and mRNAs tend to turn over quite fast. So it will synthesize a few protein molecules and then disappear.

      The solution is to chemically modify the RNA so that it is more stable, and this is done in this particular case by replacing all uridines with N1-methylpseudouridine. Which is a natural modification found in some prokaryotes, it’s not an evil invention of Big Pharma. It just happens to make the mRNA more resistant to degradation and thus help with stability. There is a ton of N1-methylpseudouridine in your gut in the tRNAs of the commensal prokaryotes that inhabit it, from where it gets into your bloodstream all the time, and nothing bad happens.

      Note that there was another mRNA vaccine (CureVac) that didn’t involve modified RNA, and it failed abysmally because it just didn’t elicit a sufficiently strong immune response.

      And that’s it in terms of chemistry.

      It is quite clear at this point that the side effects are caused not by the chemical formulation, but by the spike protein.

      How do we know that?

      Because all COVID vaccines show the same side effects even though they are very different in terms of chemical formulations and mechanism of action. In fact it wasn’t even mRNA where they were first noticed — it was the adenoviral vector vaccines.

      So we have:

      1) Two different mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) that use different lipids from each other (SM-102 for Moderna, ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 for Pfizer)
      2) Three different adenoviral DNA vector vaccines (AstraZeneca, J&J and Sputnik), with no mRNA in them
      3) Novavax, which is a protein nanoparticle vaccine with no DNA or RNA in it

      All causing clotting at some rate.

      And, of course, the virus itself being well known to cause rather dramatic clotting issues (which is why so many limbs were amputated in the last three years and so many people suffered strokes and heart attacks).

      What is the only common thread between all these? It’s the spike protein.

      So how does it follow that the vaccines are uniquely evil, but the virus is good for you? The vaccine is injected into your arm and produces a little bit of spike protein (again, the big problem has been to get it to produce barely enough of it to trigger an immune response), while the virus replicates uncontrollably all over the body.

      Of course it does not follow.

      But this isn’t a rational discussion at this point, and we are dealing with huge masses of deeply ignorant and not very smart people, who are very easily manipulated into believing anything…

      1. Late Introvert

        Excellent explanation, thank you.

        Are you at all concerned with the fact that nobody masks or filters the air? Spikes and vaccines aside.

        And that the BCC.1.5 is not covered by any vaccine?

      2. Raymond Sim

        GM, I’d be interested in your take on this study:

        To the extent I understand it, the authors appear to believe they showed that expressing the SARS-1 spike protein induced potentially pathogenic processes.

        If that’s so then it seems plausible to me that different means of inducing expression of the SARS-2 spike might be associated with different degrees of pathogenesis.

  22. flora

    The then US’s old school nascent US’s pamphleteer Thomas Paine was easily dismissed as as nothing more than a simple rabble rouser. Back then. / ymmv

      1. tegnost

        I googled david anthony history podcast thomas paine and nothing came up, do you have a link?

  23. Savita

    Can anyone help clarify the following?

    Preparation of a Chimeric Armored RNA as a Versatile Calibrator for Multiple Virus Assays
    This paper is published 2006. See my quote below taken from introduction.
    Why is SARS-CoV2 being explicitly named back in 2006?

    As proof of this principle, we tried to directly package a 1200-nucleotide–long foreign RNA sequence containing gene fragments of hepatitis C virus (HCV), HIV-1, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 (SARS-CoV1), and SARS-CoV2 into the original armored RNA production vector pAR-1 (8).

    1. GM

      It’s not spelled “SARS-CoV2”, but “SARS-CoV-2”. Just as they spell “SARS-CoV-1” in that paper.

      It’s horribly written so it’s not at all clear what they are referring to as “SARS-CoV2”, but there are three possibilities:

      1) There were two SARS-CoV-1 main lineages during the original outbreak back in 2003, so maybe they used both and referred to one of them as “2”
      2) It’s some artificial thing they put together
      3) It’s some stupid typo.

      Again, this is so horribly written that there is no need to pay attention to it.

      There was no SARS-CoV-2 in 2006.

  24. Savita

    News Corp owns the Australian

    It had a ‘page 3’ story a few months ago naming and shaming,directly quoting every Australian politician who stated the covid vaccine was mandatory because it kept people safe by preventing transmission. I was speechless! Mainstream media.

    Do you recall the US court ordering the FDA to release all the Pfizer documents last year?
    I can’t find a download link presently but I have a copy of some relevant extracts, actual Pfizer branded documentation. Largely, trial data Pfizer had in its possession prior to releasing the vaccine to the public. A large number of people died and a large number had serious adverse reactions. Pfizer absolutely knew this.
    There is also a long list of symptoms and reactions. covid positive, HIV positive, covid false positive, HIV false positive, are 4 such reactions I recall reading in said copy of Pfizers own literature.

      1. Savita

        Hi Acacia. I can only guess you are replying to me, and I can only guess you are referring to my comment about
        The intro is about Pfizer CEO allegations.

        I’m so glad for the prompt because it’s a heavyweight read thats for sure. It even names Biden and his fellows

        Here it is:

        Out of interest, in searching I came across the following. The former, right-wing fundamentalist premier of New South Wales ( the most populous state of Australia, with Sydney as the capital) just made the statement there is no evidence vaccines stop transmission.

        Now, that’s the absolute opposite of everything his party and former government stood for. But he’s getting ahead of the curve (cough) as NC starts publishing articles such as this one :-)

  25. Tom Stone

    This is very timely for two reasons, I spoke with an old friend yesterday who informed me that her grandchildren will be required to take a Covid Vaccine if they attend public school.
    Age 5 and 6.
    She’s deeply concerned.
    It is two years to the day since my second Moderna Jab and pain in my once fully healed elbows woke me at 4 AM today.
    With heat and careful breathing i was able to straighten my arms fully after only 20 minutes and post breakfast when the flexeril and gabapentin hit I’ll have more functionality.
    On good days I can walk normally for a few hours in the morning, which is really nice.

Comments are closed.