Latest UK Data: Vaccinated People 3-times More Likely To Die From Delta Variant Than Unvaccinated

 Thursday  December 16, 2021  NewsRescue.com  by Helen McBreen

​

A report published last Friday by the UK government agency Public Health England :  A briefing titled, “SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England,” which examined all currently known variants of COVID-19 and published the statistical outcome.

​

Regarding the most dangerous variant, the Delta, the UK government admits vaccinated people are 3.25 times more likely to die than those who did not take the experimental shot.

Out of 117 total deaths occurring within 28 days of infection, 44 of them were unvaccinated individuals. Charts show one of the deceased had received their first vaccine dose within 21 days of dying and 19 of them received one vaccine dose more than 21 days before passing away.

 

[Go to NewsRescue.com to see this full article and display of all graph information charts showing all of confirmed Delta and Delta variant vaccination deaths in England.] 

 

The following data and charts cover this report period from February 1, 2021 to June 21, 2021:

​

50 people who died from the Delta variant took both doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. In total, 70 out of the 27,192 vaccinated individuals in the study died, which is a 0.26% mortality rate. Meanwhile, 44 out of the 53,822 unvaccinated people in the paper died, resulting in a 0.08% mortality.

The Relative Risk to die after taking the shot, vs not taking it is calculated as shown in the Relative Risk Chart below:     (Chart shown only on website)

 

A Wall Street Journal article published Friday showing preliminary findings by Israeli health officials revealed more than half of adults infected in an outbreak of the Delta variant in Israel received the vaccine. “About half of adults infected in an outbreak of the Delta variant of Covid-19 in Israel were fully inoculated with the Pfizer Inc. vaccine,” WSJ writes.

 

Using the UK government charts above for reference, one can infer Israeli adults infected with the Delta variant who received one dose of the COVID-19 shot would put the number over half. So, once again, the Delta variant is more dangerous for vaccinated people.

​

Of course, mainstream media is ignoring this data and instead, they’re claiming the Delta variant is a threat to unvaccinated people and that COVID-19 vaccines protect against it.

​

In fact, on Thursday, Joe Biden used the Delta variant to urge Americans to get vaccinated! “Six hundred thousand-plus Americans have died, and with this delta variant you know there’s going to be others as well. You know it’s going to happen. We’ve got to get young people vaccinated,” Biden said at a community center in Raleigh, North Carolina. “The data couldn’t be clearer: If you’re vaccinated, you’re safe,” he added. “You are still at risk of getting seriously ill or dying if you in fact have not been vaccinated, that’s just the fact.”

                                                            End of this News Article

​

​

​

​

​

Gilead Announces New England Journal of Medicine Publication of Data Demonstrating Veklury® (Remdesivir) Significantly Reduced Risk of Hospitalization in High-Risk Patients With COVID-19

Partially reprinted from Biospace.com.  Published December 22, 2021. 

 

  Gilead Sciences, Inc.  (Nasdaq: GILD) today announced full results from a Phase 3 investigational study evaluating the efficacy and safety of a three-day course of Veklury® (the generic is remdesivir) for intravenous (IV) use for the treatment of COVID-19 in non-hospitalized patients at high risk for disease progression. The results have been published today in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and have been submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the potential use of Veklury in earlier stages of disease, including prior to hospitalization. Presently, The only antiviral drug approved for use in the U.S. by the FDA is remdesivir, and it is only approved for people hospitalized with COVID-19.

​

About Veklury (the generic is remdesivir)

Veklury (remdesivir) is a nucleotide analog invented by Gilead, building on more than a decade of the company’s antiviral research. Veklury is the antiviral standard of care for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. At this time, more than half of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in the United States are treated with Veklury. It can help reduce disease progression across the spectrum of disease severity and enable hospitalized patients to recover faster, freeing up limited hospital resources and saving healthcare systems money. Veklury directly inhibits viral replication inside of the cell by targeting the SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA polymerase.

 

On entering the body Veklury is transformed into the active metabolite remdesivir triphosphate, which is then incorporated into the viral RNA and stops replication of the virus within the host cell. As new SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern emerge around the world, Gilead continuously evaluates the effectiveness of Veklury against viral variants. An initial analysis of genetic information from the Omicron variant suggests that Veklury will continue to be active against this variant. Gilead will conduct laboratory testing to confirm this analysis. To date, no major genetic changes have been identified in any of the known variants of concern that would significantly alter the viral RNA polymerase targeted by Veklury. Veklury’s antiviral activity has been tested in vitro against isolates of variants of SARS-CoV-2, including Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Epsilon. As the viral polymerase in the Omicron variant is similar to these variants, these laboratory findings suggest that Veklury will continue to be active against the currently identified variations in the SARS-CoV-2 virus, including the Omicron variant.

​

Veklury is approved or authorized for temporary use in approximately 50 countries worldwide. To date, Veklury and generic remdesivir have been made available to 9 million patients around the world, including 6.5 million people in 127 middle- and low-income countries through Gilead’s voluntary licensing program. These licenses currently remain royalty-free, reflecting Gilead’s existing commitment to enabling broad patient access to remdesivir.

​

Veklury® (remdesivir 100 mg for injection) is indicated for adults and pediatric patients (12 years of age and older and weighing at least 40 kg) for the treatment of COVID-19 requiring hospitalization. Veklury should only be administered in a hospital or in a healthcare setting capable of providing acute care comparable to inpatient hospital care. Veklury is contraindicated in patients who are allergic to Veklury or any of its components. For more information, please see the U.S. full Prescribing Information available at www.gilead.com

​

About the IV Outpatient Study (GS-US-540-9012)

Study GS-US-540-9012 (PINETREE) was a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy and safety of a three-day course of Veklury IV [eye-vee] in reducing the rate of hospitalization or all-cause death among non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients at high risk for disease progression. The primary study endpoint was the composite of COVID-19 hospitalization or all-cause death by Day 28. The composite endpoint of medical visits due to COVID-19 or all-cause death by Day 28 was a secondary outcome measure.

​

The study was designed to enroll 1,264 participants, randomized in a double-blind fashion so that half of enrolled participants would receive Veklury and the other half would receive a matched placebo. Gilead stopped the study in April 2021 for administrative reasons associated with the reduction of COVID-19 prevalence and patient enrollment. At the time that enrollment was terminated, 584 participants were enrolled. The study remained blinded and participants already enrolled in the study were followed according to the protocol until the last patient visit occurred, and at that point the study was closed.

This trial was designed to evaluate the potential role of Veklury in helping patients diagnosed with COVID-19 who were considered high-risk for disease progression based on comorbidities and age but had not recently been hospitalized due to the infection.

​

Participants receiving Veklury treatment in the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial had an 87% reduction in risk for the composite primary endpoint of COVID-19-related hospitalization or all-cause death by Day 28 and an 81% reduction in the risk for the composite secondary endpoint of COVID-19-related medical visits due to COVID-19 or all-cause death by Day 28 compared to placebo. There was no difference observed in nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 viral load up to Day 7 between groups, indicating that upper respiratory viral loads do not reliably predict treatment outcomes in COVID-19. In the study, no deaths were observed in either arm by Day 28.

​

The study includes new subgroup analyses which showed consistent efficacy of Veklury for patients irrespective of their key risk factors for severe COVID-19. Participants with comorbidities such as diabetes, obesity, and hypertension had reduced risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization by Day 28 with Veklury treatment. Additional subgroup analyses showed among participants with cancer, chronic lung disease, and cardiovascular disease all instances of COVID-19-related hospitalization occurred in the placebo group. In a post-hoc analysis of participants who completed a baseline influenza patient reported outcome (FLU-PRO Plus) questionnaire any time prior to or on the first day of treatment, those receiving Veklury had a 92% greater probability of symptom alleviation by Day 14 compared to those receiving placebo.

​

These data provide evidence that a three-day course of remdesivir could play a critical role in helping COVID-19 patients stay out of the hospital. While our hospitals are ready to assist patients in need, prevention and early intervention are preferable to reduce the risk of disease progression and allow patients not requiring oxygen to recover from home when appropriate,” said Robert L. Gottlieb, MD, PhD, Cardiologist at Baylor University Medical Center and Baylor Scott & White Research Institute, and primary author of the NEJM article. “Remdesivir is one of the tools frontline healthcare workers can rely on to effectively treat hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and early antiviral therapy with remdesivir would be a natural extension of the continuum of care that begins with primary prevention efforts centered on remdesivir vaccination.

 

Antivirals, like remdesivir, are routinely administered as a combination of therapies to help target a virus at multiple steps in its replication process. With this in mind, as additional treatment options become available, short-course IV therapy could potentially be a complementary option in settings where outpatient infusions are available. The use of Veklury (or remdesivir) for the treatment of non-hospitalized patients in the United States with three days of dosing is investigational, and the safety and efficacy for this use and dosing duration [although have recently been submitted for approval] have not yet been established or approved by the FDA. 

​

In the U.S., Veklury (the generic version is remdesivir) is indicated for adults and pediatric patients (12 years of age and older and weighing at least 40 kg) for the treatment of COVID-19 requiring hospitalization. Veklury is contraindicated in patients who are allergic to Veklury or any of its components. U.S. full Prescribing and other information for Veklury is available at www.gilead.com. Gilead Sciences, Inc., is an American biopharmaceutical company headquartered in Foster City, California, that focuses on researching and developing antiviral drugs.

​

​

​

​

New study adds more evidence for omicron immune evasion

Published by ScienceDaily 23 December 2021. A study by: Columbia University Irving Medical Center. "New study adds more evidence for omicron immune evasion."       

    For full unedited version visit: www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/12/211223151542.htm

​

​

A new study from Columbia researchers, in collaboration with scientists at the University of Hong Kong, adds more evidence that the omicron variant can evade the immune protection conferred by vaccines and natural infection, and suggests the need for new vaccines and treatments that anticipate how the virus may soon evolve.

​

The study was led by David Ho, MD, director of the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center and the Clyde'56 and Helen Wu Professor of Medicine at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons. The findings were published in Nature.

 

A striking feature of the omicron variant is the alarming number of changes in the virus's spike protein that could pose a threat to the effectiveness of current vaccines and therapeutic antibodies.

 

Large drop in omicron neutralization by antibodies from vaccines

The new study tested the ability of antibodies generated by vaccination to neutralize the omicron variant in laboratory assays that pitted antibodies against live viruses and against pseudoviruses constructed in the lab to mimic omicron.

 

Antibodies from people double-vaccinated with any of the four most widely used vaccines -- Moderna, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson -- were significantly less effective at neutralizing the omicron variant compared to the ancestral virus. Antibodies from previously infected individuals were even less likely to neutralize omicron. Individuals who received a booster shot of either of the two mRNA vaccines are likely to be better protected, although even their antibodies exhibited diminished neutralizing activity against omicron.

​

"The new results suggest that previously infected individuals and fully vaccinated individuals are at risk for infection with the omicron variant," says Ho. "Even a third booster shot may not adequately protect against omicron infection." The results are consistent with other neutralization studies, as well as early epidemiological data from South Africa and the U.K., which show efficacy of two doses of the vaccines against symptomatic disease is significantly reduced against the omicron variant.

​

Most monoclonal antibodies are unable to neutralize omicron

When administered early in the course of infection, monoclonal antibodies can prevent many individuals from developing severe COVID. However, the new study suggests that all of the therapies currently in use and most in development are much less effective against omicron, if they work at all.

 

In neutralization studies with monoclonal antibodies, only one (Brii198 approved in China) maintained notable activity against omicron. A minor form of omicron is completely resistant to all antibodies in clinical use today. The authors note that omicron is now the most complete "escapee" from neutralization that scientists have seen.

 

In this study Ho's lab also identified four new spike mutations in omicron that help the virus evade antibodies. This information should help to inform the design of new approaches to combat the new variant.

​

Ho suggests that scientists will need to develop vaccines and treatments that can better anticipate how the virus is evolving. Ho explains, "It is not too far-fetched to think that SARS-CoV-2 is now only a mutation or two away from being completely resistant to current antibodies, either the monoclonal antibodies used as therapies or the antibodies generated by vaccination or infection with previous variants." 

​

​

​

6 important data points that destroy the prevailing [Covid] narrative

              by Daniel Horowitz   Blaze Media (TheBlaze.com)  January 3, 2022

​

“Negative efficacy.” Get used to that term, because every day more data suggests we are already in the vaccination twilight zone of all pain and no gain – just as with the lockdowns.

It is tearing humanity apart. COVID fascism is the most serious human rights threat we’ve faced in our lifetimes, and the latest science and data demonstrate that it’s all built upon a false premise.

 

While people tuned out the news over the holiday week, many have missed the growing evidence that not only is there risk and zero benefit derived from taking any of the COVID shots, but there is actually negative efficacy against the virus. In other words, not only does it put you on the hook for known and unknown short-term and long-term injury (remember, it is still classified as an experimental drug) without stopping COVID, it now actually makes you more vulnerable to COVID.

​

As you read these latest points, just remember that this is the injection for which police in Europe are now using dogs and batons against those people that are protesting the shots. All these human rights abuses for a shot that, especially with the new variant, has become moot (of no valid applicable value).

​

1) 96% of all Omicron cases in Germany are among the vaccinated: The respected Robert Koch Institute reported last week that among the 4,206 Germans infected with Omicron whose vaccination status was known, 95.58% were fully vaccinated. More than a quarter of them had booster shots. Given that the overall background rate for vaccination in Germany is 70%, this means that the shots now have a  minus 87% effectiveness rate against Omicron!

​

Data from Robert Koch Institute shows only 4% of Omicron cases are occurring among the 30% of the country (Germany) which is unvaccinated. In other words, not being vaccinated has 87% efficacy against infection in Germany, using the same calculation that vaccine advocates have employed.

​

2) Omicron among the vaccinated is outpacing the unvaccinated by 28% in Ontario, Canada: The government in Ontario posts continuous data on case rates by vaccination status. The fact that the vaccinated have rapidly overtaken the unvaccinated in new infections demonstrates a clear negative effect of the shots against Omicron.

​

3) In Denmark, 89.7% of all Omicron cases were among people who were fully vaccinated: As of Dec. 31, just 8.5% of all cases in Denmark were unvaccinated, according to Denmark's Statens Serum Institut. Overall, 77.9% of Denmark is fully vaccinated, and statistics show that Omicron seems to be hitting younger people for whom there is a greater unvaccinated pool, which also indicates a clear negative efficacy. Even for non-Omicron variants, the un-injected composed only 23.7% of the cases.

​

4) Just 25% of the Omicron hospitalizations in the U.K. (United Kingdom of Britain) are unvaccinated: Not only are the vaccinated more likely to contract Omicron, but they are likely more at risk to be hospitalized. While American hospitals put out unverifiable information about “nearly everyone seriously ill with COVID being unvaccinated,” the U.K. continues to put out quality continuous data that shows the opposite.

 

According to the U.K.’s Health Security Agency’s latest “Omicron daily overview,” just 25% of those in the hospital with suspected Omicron cases are unvaccinated.

​

Although that is roughly in line with the percentage of unvaccinated overall in the U.K., we know that Omicron cases are overwhelmingly among younger people who have a greater share of the unvaccinated. Dr. Abdi Mahamud, the WHO’s incident manager for COVID, said last week that Omicron has not hit most of the elderly yet.

​

According to the latest U.K. vaccine surveillance report, between 32% and 40% of the age groups under 40 are unvaccinated. Which means that, with a 25% hospitalization rate, the unvaccinated are very possibly underrepresented in the Omicron hospitalized population, which again indicates negative efficacy to the shots.

​

5) 33 of 34 hospitalizations in a Delhi hospital (India) were vaccinated: The Indian Express reported that 33 of the 34 people hospitalized for Omicron in Delhi’s Lok Nayak hospital were fully vaccinated. Two of them received the booster shot. While some of them were international travelers, it’s important to remember that India has a much lower vaccination rate than the West. This is another small indication that not only might one be more likely to get Omicron after having gotten the shots, but possibly could be more vulnerable to hospitalizations, very likely due to some form of antibody dependent disease enhancement (ADE).

​

6) Vaccinated exponentially more likely to get re-infected with COVID: A new preprint study from Bangladesh found that among 404 people re-infected with COVID, having been previously vaccinated made someone 2.45 times more likely to get re-infected with a mild infection; 16.1 times more likely to get a moderate infection; and 3.9 times more likely to be re-infected severely, relative to someone with prior infection who was not vaccinated. Although overall re-infections were rare, vaccination was a greater risk factor of re-infection than co-morbidities!

​

Hence, the findings of this first-in-its-kind study harmonize with what a Public Health England survey found in October; namely, that the vaccines seem to erase a degree of N (nucleocapsid) antibodies generated by prior infection in favor of narrower S (spike) antibodies. "Recent observations from UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) surveillance data that N antibody levels appear to be lower in individuals who acquire infection following 2 doses of vaccination,” stated the week 42 report from the U.K. (p. 23).

​

This finding also correlates with what researchers from Mount Sinai in New York and Hospital La Paz in Madrid found last year – that the second dose of the vaccine “determines a contraction of the spike-specific T cell response." In that report, researchers already observed that other research has shown "the second vaccination dose appears to exert a detrimental effect in the overall magnitude of the spike-specific humoral response in COVID-19 recovered individuals."

 

At this point, how is there any benefit, much less a net benefit, from the shots? There are currently 21,000 deaths reported to VAERS, along with 110,000 hospitalizations and over 1 million total adverse events. Most deaths and injuries are never reported to VAERS. Now that the efficacy is, at best, a wash and at worst negative, why are we not discussing the short-term and long-term liabilities of the shots?

​

Remember, the VAERS numbers don’t even begin to quantify the long-term concerns, such as cancer and auto-immune diseases. A heavily redacted analysis of the Pfizer shot (p. 16) from the Australian Therapeutic Goods Agency (TGA) flatly conceded, “Neither genotoxicity nor carcinogenicity studies were performed.”

​

Consider the fact that the CEO of Indiana-based life insurance company OneAmerica, which has been around since 1877, revealed last week that the death rate among 18- to 64-year-old Hoosiers is up 40% from pre-pandemic levels. That is four times above what risk assessors consider catastrophic. Yes, some of this has been due to the virus, but given the age group, OneAmerica CEO Scott Davidson said that most of the claims for deaths being filed are not classified as COVID-19 deaths. Brian Tabor, the president of the Indiana Hospital Association, who spoke at the same news conference as Davidson, said that Indiana hospitals are flooded with patients “with many different conditions.” Anybody wonder what those ailments are if not from COVID itself?

​

​

​

Letter to FAA warns that federal law prohibits commercial pilots from flying after taking experimental shots

                         by Daniel Horowitz   Blaze Media (TheBlaze.com)  December 29, 2021

 

Just how far have we devolved from typical medical protocols when it comes to mandating experimental shots on everyone? According to a group of lawyers along with doctors familiar with health care protocols in civilian and military aviation, pilots are actually prohibited from flying after taking a non-FDA-approved treatment or one that was approved less than 12 months ago.

​

Lawyers for Children’s Health Defense, along with several doctors including Lt. Col. Theresa Long, Peter McCullough, and Ryan Cole, recently sent a letter to the FAA and the CEOs of all the major airlines warning that anyone who got the shots, under current regulations, should be subject to a 12-month do-not-fly status. The relevant statute, Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations §61.53, states, “No person who holds a medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter may act as pilot in command, or in any other capacity as a required pilot flight crewmember, while that person ... [is] receiving treatment for a medical condition that results in the person being unable to meet the requirements for the medical certificate necessary for the pilot operation.”

​

While this statute is wide open, the prevailing regulation under the Guide for Aviation Medical Examiners states that examiners should “advise airmen to not fly (DNF) and provide additional safety information to the applicant if they are taking several types of medical therapeutics, including anything approved by the FDA within 12 months.”

​

“FAA generally requires at least one-year of post-marketing experience with a new drug before consideration for aeromedical certification purposes,” the authors warn in the letter. “This observation period allows time for uncommon, but aeromedically significant, adverse effects to manifest themselves ...” (emphasis added).

 

Isn’t that interesting – that we’d actually want to follow up on uncommon adverse events? Well, here we are with the most rushed vaccine in history, for which none of the commercially available versions have even gotten full FDA approval (Comirnaty (the similar European version) is not yet available in the USA) and the numerous side effects are common and ubiquitous beyond belief, yet Biden is mandating the vaccine on pilots! Every commercially available vaccine is still under Emergency Use Authorization status. A federal judge in Florida recently found the government’s argument that Pfizer is interchangeable with Comirnaty to be “unconvincing.”

​

Thus, not a single “vaccinated” pilot who has been flying has received an FDA-approved vaccine and most certainly has not waited the required 12 months post-approval. Just how far has the aviation industry deviated from the law? Commercial pilots only wait 48 hours after having the shots, while military pilots can fly again after just 12 hours. Studies have shown that the average time it takes for myocarditis to present in injected patients is seven days after the shot, but it could take as long as 40 days to become apparent.

 

Typically, the aviation industry uses the most stringent protocols accounting for the worst-case scenarios for risk assessment of the pilot’s safety after undergoing a medical treatment. “Ordinary military aviation has more stringent medical standards than the FAA,” said one of the authors, Dr. Peter Chambers, in an interview with TheBlaze. “However, both failed to adhere to long-standing risk mitigation and aeromedical safety measures critical to safety of flight, especially with regard to widespread use of an experimental drug with the least long- and short-term safety data ever used by pilots in the history of modern aviation.”

 

Chambers is a rare gem in the military. He is a flight surgeon and a lieutenant colonel Green Beret, making him one of the few members of the Special Forces with a medical degree. He is currently in the Texas National Guard doing border missions after having served in the Texas COVID response missions last year.

​

The Special Forces doctor believes he himself was severely injured by the Moderna shot and now suffers from a brain bleed. “After serving 38 years in the military and getting every vaccine known to man, I trusted my government on this one,” said Chambers in describing his initial overcoming of concerns. “After the second shot in March, I developed pretty serious vertigo, brain fog, and unsteadiness of gait. I started taking ivermectin to counter the spike protein. I eventually got an MRI several weeks ago, and changes on it were commensurate with others who had cerebral vascular accidents following the mRNA vaccine.”

 

Chambers is convinced the shots caused the brain bleed because he had six other soldiers who experienced “the same symptoms and MRI findings around six months after the shot.” Two men in their 40s had to undergo surgery, and one had to learn to speak again. Chambers said that he is having a secondary neurological follow-up to deal with his own injury.

​

The experience with vaccine injury has harmed Chambers’ work on the ground, which makes him all the more fearful of the consequences for pilots flying in the air. Chambers and the signing attorneys attached a list of 10 known cases of otherwise healthy pilots who reported adverse events to the VAERS. The ailments included myocardial infarction (heart attack), atrial fibrillation, pericarditis, brain swelling, elevated intra-cranial pressure affecting spinal cord and brain stem, sub-arachnoid hemorrhages (brain bleed), blindness. Needless to say, these are not the sorts of injuries you want when flying a commercial plane. We’ve all seen the hundreds of cases of young athletes suddenly dropping on the playing field. Imagine if we are to see that in a pilot mid-flight. Vertigo, which is a particularly menacing ailment for pilots, is a known common side effect of the COVID shots.

​

“In sum, neither the law nor common sense countenances that federal agencies charged with ensuring public safety ignore concerning data and thereby jeopardize public safety,” concludes the letter. “Nor do law and common sense countenance ignoring information that evinces that both pilots and the passengers they serve are at risk of severe injury and possibly death. Finally, neither precept countenances killing a plane full of hundreds of Americans because a commercial pilot loses control of their aircraft after suffering a major blood clot, seizure, or myocarditis-related event, which in turn causes his jet to be involved in a fatal catastrophic crash ... before regulators decide to finally act.”

 

The doctors who signed the letter recommended that every pilot who got the shot be “immediately flagged and medically re-certified only after showing aeromedically acceptable D-Dimer, Troponin, ECGs, cardiac MRIs and PULS tests, and otherwise clean bills of health.”

D-dimer tests would easily show who is suffering micro-clotting, and troponin tests measure for the protein that is released when heart muscle is damaged. A recent study showed that PULS tests were critical in surveilling comprehensive cardiac damage done by the shots. Numerous heart health markers from the PULS testing showed that the risk of acute coronary syndrome more than doubled in patients who got the shots, from 11% to 25%.

​

This letter raises some serious concerns as to how far our government is willing to go in covering up safety concerns about the shots. We have safety regulations for a reason. Shouting “emergency” for a pandemic that is no longer acute and for which the shots no longer work should not drown out the voices of those raising concerns about an industry that relies upon optimal levels of safety at all times.

​

​​

​                                                                            END