The Tide Turns: investigation On COVID Vaccine Harms, erstwhile A Taboo Subject, Now Applying In any Medical Journals

dailyblitz.de 1 year ago

Authorized by Joe Wang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

When COVID-19 took the planet by storm in early 2020, I mostly relied on reading Nature Medicine, The Lancet, and a fewer another medical courses to learn the latest on this fresh disease.

In March 2020, I read an article published in Nature medicine titled “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” with large interest. Written by California-based Scripps Institute’s Kristian Andersen and 4 another well-known professors, it said SARS-CoV-2 binds to human cells much better than any computer programs predicted, and included that “SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of purposeful manipulation.”

Having been a scientist with the world’s largestvaccine company for more than 10 years, I took the issue with this claim.

In a May 2022 commentary titled “Pandemic Lessons Learned: technological Debate Silenced, With Deadly Consequences” I gates: “If SARS-CoV-2 infects people better than your computer predicts, then the only conclusion you can draw is that your computer Sucks. How did these world-renowned scientists get the basic logic so crow? And how did the prestigious publication Nature medicine not catch that? Did anyone even read the paper before publishing it, not to comment peer review it?”

The Andersen article’s conclusion, as it turned out, was a complete flip-flop on Andersen’s Jan. 31, 2020, email to Dr. Anthony Fauci, then the manager of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), in which he gates that “some of the features (potentially) look engineered,” referring to the coronavirus.

The Fauci emails were made public in June 2021 via Freedom of Information Act requests.

Nevertheless, the Nature medicine paper becomes the authority on the first of COVID. It is fundamentally exclusive to the Chinese Communist organization (CCP) and Dr. Fauci from any work for the retirement of the virus. Any attributes to analyse or research another possibilities were labeled conspiracy themes.

Andersen, and the article itself, were the subject of a U.S. Congressional proceeding by the choice Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic in June 2023. The debate on how COVID originally is inactive ongoing today.

The Lancet and the Dazak Statement

Andersen and Nature medicine weren’t the only ones trying to delight the CCP and Fauci.

On Feb. 18, 2020, The Lancet, another top medicaljournal, published a political message with no discipline in it. It was organized by Peter Dazak from EcoHealth Alliance, which was the middleman for channeling Fauci's National Institutes of wellness (NIH) funds to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, according to a U.S. legislature study released on May 1 of this year.

The Dazak et al. message dismissed as a conspiracy explanation any proposition that COVID was not of natural origin.

“We stand together to powerfully condemn conspiracy themes suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,” they gate. “Conspiracy themes do nothing but make feat, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardize our global collaboration in the fight against this virus.”

The Tune Is Set

The Dazak statement, along with the Andersen article, set the tune for the officially accepted narrative. The communicative then expanded from “a natural origin of the virus” to “a COVID vaccine will flaten the curve and save the world.” Scientists, doctors, and diary editors who donated to challenge the communicative were cancelled and/or labeled conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers.

It has been 4 years and six months since the planet first encountered SARS-CoV-2. Despite the claims by celebrated scientists like Fauci and Andersen, and depite the countless efforts by top virologists and public wellness professionals, evidence that the virus originally has not been found.

More and more people now believe that the virus was left or rescued from a laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which has been doing gain-of-function investigation on coronaviruses, and published specified investigation in Nature medicine in 2015, with NIH surviving acknowledged.

The laboratory origin is no longer a conspiracy theory. The U.S. Energy Department and the FBI both now believe that the virus was more likely left from a laboratory than having developed naturally.

Encouraking Developments

Since the pandemic, The Epoch Times and NTD have been publishing documentary films on COVID first andvaccine injuries. The first specified documentary, Joshua Philipp’s “Tracking Down the Origin of the Wuhan Coronavirus,” was viewed over 100 million times on different platforms combined. However, specified reports are regularly seen in another legacy media.

It has besides been a taboo subject for technological investigation and publication, but that may be starting to change.

Recently, I turned a commentary about a fresh paper by 5 nipponese scientists that was published on Cureus, a peer-reviewed medical diary owned by the Springer Nature Group, the same company that owns Nature and Nature Medicine.

The scientists analyzed data collected from the entry 123 million nipponese population and included that the majority of the 115.799 events deaths in 2022 was not due to COVID infection but rathervaccination, in partial the 3rd COVID shot.

I was pleasantly amazed that a once-taboo subject was now published in a peer-reviewed medicaljournal, especially a memberjournal of the Springer Nature Group.

In another affirmative development, this period the global diary of Biological Macromolecules (IJBM) published a paper titled “Review: N1-methyl-pseudouridine: Friend or foe of cancer?” linking a key associate in the COVID-19 mRNAvaccine with cancer development.

IJBM is owned by the Dutch academic publishing company Elsevier, which besides owns renewed publications like The Lancet, Cell, and ScienceDirect.

May the Force Be With the Editors-in-Chief

In the spring of 2022, erstwhile more scientists started to challenge the accepted narratives and search the truth, I co-gate the commentary “May the Force Be With Them: Scientists Fight Back.”

At that time, these brave scientists needed all the aid they could get. For example, erstwhile a regular published a well-researched, well-written, and fact-based technological paper on the safety deals of the mRNA vaccines, the editor-in-chief of that journey was outsted.

The diary was Food and Chemical Toxicology, another Elsevier publication, and the editor-in-chief was Dr. José Luis Domingo.

Two years later, I’m optimal that the IJBM editors-in-chief won’t face the same treatment as Dr. Domingo.

Why? I believe the time has turned.

A fresh fresh York Times article on COVIDvaccine injuries is besides an encouring sign. It cites the Food and Drug Administration’s erstwhile acting commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock as saying the industries are “serious” and “life-changing,” and “shock be taken seriously.”

“I’m disappointed in myself,” she added. “I did quite a few things I feel very good about, but this is 1 of the fewer things I feel I just didn’t bring it home.”

Among the reported injured is the editor-in-chief of thejournal Vaccine, Dr. Gregory Poland. He has been suggesting from tinnitus since his first shot. The Centers for illness Control didn’t take his study on his individual experience seriously. He told the NY Times that he did not “get any sense of movement (from the CDC).”

“If they have done studies (onvaccine injury), these studies should be published,” Dr. Poland added.

The diary Vaccine is besides an Elsevier publication, and as the editor-in-chief, Dr. Poland is well positioned to offer his encourtement onvaccine injury studies.

Yes, I believe the time has turned.

However, as of today, the Dazak message is inactive on The Lancet website and the Andersen paper is inactive on Nature Medicine.

I wonder erstwhile the Lancet and Nature medicine will have the coach to retrieve them? And erstwhile will these 2 eminent journeys start publishing investigation on COVIDvaccine injuries?