Tag: Vaccine injury

How To Make A Changeling Child

Photo by Ivan Siarbolin on Pexels.com

The changeling child is always blamed on the fairies, the trolls, the supernatural. The pretty, wide-eyed, fussed over child becomes the monstrous covered in caul and sprawled in the cot. To take the sacred and replace it with the profane, to take the loved and replace it with the feared, to take the beatific and replace it with the demonic.

So goes the story.

Let’s talk about the reality.

Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

The changeling child was conjured – not by the hands of the fairies – but by the hands of the white coat, not by the messy beyond but by the sterilised room. It was not created by the ritual and mythology of the troll, representatives of the uncontrollable, but the ritual and mythology of the needle – the controlled, precise mechanics of modern science. And it was not created by the supernatural but by the unnatural, not man’s inability to control the beyond but man’s hubris that he can tame the wild – bend it to his whims and syringes. Instead of the haphazard, the unknown, the temperamental swap, we have the conveyor belt of changeling children – an assembly line of those that scream.

In the uncontrollable world, parents warned of the changeling child. In the sterile world, the changeling child is unspeakable. Those who point to its existence are simply told not to be so superstitious. After all, there can be no such things as changelings.

The Problem With Autism Acceptance Week

This week is ‘Autism Acceptance Week’, and this is being promoted all over Twitter. Despite not following any irritating autism promotion, neurodiversity, etc accounts, such as the National Autistic Society (who I can’t stick for a number of reasons), I have been seeing ‘Autism Acceptance’ tweets all over the platform. So it seems Elon Musk, despite unbanning some good accounts, is helping to promote the normalisation and glamorisation of autism via ‘Autism Acceptance Week’.

The premise of autism acceptance week is very simple: it is that autism is a natural human variation and actually there’s nothing wrong with it, the only problem is society doesn’t accept it. As readers of this page will probably know by now the author has an autism diagnosis. It’s always very funny to me that woke people in general will say ‘listen to autistic people’ as part of promoting the neurodiversity narrative but the moment I say that I believe it’s vaccine-injury and that it’s miserable they try to shut me up (not going to happen). Or they accuse me of not being autistic, despite the fact I have a diagnosis so I am an actual genuine gold star autist. Honestly I got my diagnosis a year ago and the best thing about it is being able to tell the wokie dope neurodiversity fuckers that I have one so I am a real autist and I still think that they talk shit. But I digress.

Let’s start by looking at some of the examples of autism promotion on Twitter on the #AutismAcceptanceWeek hashtag on Twitter that serve as examples of autism glamorisation.

Response: How can severely ill children & adults with seizures, non verbal and with severe gastroenterological symptoms be ‘ambitious and creative’?

Response: I picked this one as I find it interesting that they appropriated the ‘Authentic Self’ language from transgenderism. And if transgenderism is created by big pharma (it is) what does that say about autism?

Response: I don’t even know how to respond to this, other than to say the Greeks and the Romans did a lot of medical shit, where’s their descriptions of regressive autism? If it’s perfectly normal, I’m sure some upper class Greek or Roman would have had it happen to their child at some point.

Response: I can’t even respond to this except by throwing things. Do I even need to explain how this is grossly offensive to those of us suffering?

Response: There seems to an aversion to talking about those people who have to live in care homes because their autism is so bad. For some reason. Perhaps because it doesn’t fit the narrative?

And finally, someone accused me of not being autistic because I disagree with their glamourisation narrative, which is the only argument these people actually have. I then got blocked. If I wasn’t autistic I’d probably be skipping in the fields blissfully unaware of all this neurodiversity nonsense, because it wouldn’t affect my life. And I probably wouldn’t be arguing on Twitter because I would have things like an actual sex life. So there you go.

Here’s the screenshot from my notifications for posterity:

(Twitter brings out the worst in me. I swear.)

Now for the serious bit. Neurodiversity is extremely easy to debunk. Everyone agrees that severe anxiety, sensory issues and gastroenterological symptoms are a bad thing. Yet when you put the label ‘autism’ on those things, they are magically good? Blatant nonsense. Some neurodiversity promoters (who are not always autistic themselves, by the way) like to talk about the ‘special talents’ of autistic people, or what I call the ‘autistic savant’ trope. Some of the neurodiversity brigade then object to this and claim that autistic people aren’t actually savants.

But the whole concept of neurodiversity is based upon the ‘autistic savant’ trope, whether they admit it or not. In order to make the case that autism is actually a good thing, you need to be able to point to something objective that makes autism actually good. As I said, you can’t point to, say, gastroenterological symptoms and try to glamourise those, because everyone would (rightly) think you were insane. So you have to pick something else. Which means the only fall back is the autistic savant trope – that autistic people have some sort of unique intelligence due to their special interests.

Claiming neurodiversity is good on this basis is also a catastrophic failure, of course. The most obvious reason it is a failure is it ignores the vast majority of autistic people, 78% of whom don’t work, many of whom are non-verbal in care homes because their autism is so severe. These people’s suffering is never mentioned by the neurodiversity activists. They clearly are not contributing to humanity with their special talents. When you have to erase 80% of a thing to make the other 20% of a thing look good, you are clearly off to a non starter.

But even in the case of high-functioning autism, this argument is nonsense, because absolutely everything an autistic person has done in their lives would be easier if they didn’t have autism. For example, if an autistic person lucks out and gets offered a job, it would have been much easier to get a job without autism. Even something as simple as holding eye contact in a job interview has to be forced and managed if you are autistic whereas a normal person would do it automatically. And that is very simple, straightforward, and easy to understand example. If I had to explain how many times sensory issues and anxiety have prevented me from doing things that I could have achieved, or destroyed my enjoyment of things, we would be here all day.

Unfortunately, for psychological reasons, the ‘neurodiversity’ narrative is appealing to some people with autism. This is because it allows them to psychologically compensate for what they cannot have because of autism (healthy sexual relationships, for example, or peace of mind due to horrific anxiety and sensory issues) by flipping the script and claiming that their autism actually gives them a deeper understanding of the world or makes them special.

Non-autistic people often promote it on the level of ‘be kind’, or naively believe it’s just about ‘diversity’. In some cases, they have been misled by propaganda, and believe in the ‘autistic savant’ trope. This is why stuff like The Big Bang Theory is so destructive as it portrays this very narrow view of autism as being ‘savant with a PhD who is maybe just a bit weird and has problems getting laid, and oh by the way is extremely witty and cutting’. (I have a pet conspiracy theory that TBBT is actually some form of big pharma propaganda.)

Or perhaps, people believe that autistic people may as well believe neurodiversity than see the truth of how bad we have it. They don’t believe our lives are actually good, and there is no way in hell they would be us, but they will let us blather on about how special we are and nod along because they think it may ease our psychological burdens. Clayton Atreus, a paraplegic who later committed suicide, highlights this phenomena.

You’ll notice that I haven’t mentioned the vaccine-autism link in this argument. That’s because everything above does not require the vaccine-autism link. Autism could be 100% genetic, and neurodiversity would still be nonsense.

Here’s the antivaxxer bit.

We need some antivaxxer counter propaganda, to oppose this godawful narrative that is glamourising the horrors of autism. I propose ‘Autism is Unacceptable Week’, where we highlight the facts that the neurodiversity brigade want you to ignore.

For example:

Exploring Deaths from Kilkenny, Ireland

Introduction

A dataset of deaths and sudden deaths provided by Patrick E. Walsh from Kilkenny, Ireland has been under-utilised by researchers investigating the surge in sudden death. However, this is a very useful dataset for researchers to examine to demonstrate a significant rise in all-cause mortality, as well as deaths classified as ‘sudden’ in a small region of Ireland. I have written this article to draw more attention to this dataset, as I have personally not seen it reported among the staples of statistical analysis in the Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ sceptic space.

What is the Kilkenny Dataset?

Recently, in response to British Parliamentarian Andrew Bridgen (who has recently become a fierce critic of the Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ in Parliament, demanding that the jabs be stopped) twitter user @_Richard_JG posted an extremely valuable article from Kilkenny, Ireland.

(The source for the 89.9% ‘vaccination’ rate in Kilkenny is here. As an aside, that makes it a relatively low ‘vaccine’ uptake in comparison with other counties in Ireland!)

The article itself states:

A CONCERNED local man has emailed a group of what he terms ‘people who hold positions of influence and trust in Kilkenny’, bringing to their attention what he describes as important facts on deaths in Kilkenny, particularly sudden deaths.

Patrick Walsh has gone through the RIP.IE obituaries, to find both deaths and deaths which he classifies as ‘sudden’. He determined a sudden death by the criteria below:

Any explicit accidents or suicides are not included in ‘Suddenlys’.‘Suddenlys’ are identified by narrative or in condolences.

A similar thing that we would do when identifying sudden deaths for the In Memoriam project for Mark Crispin Miller, essentially.

The Total Death Data

This follow up article contains data from Kilkenny for 6 months of the year, July to December, and compares 2018 to 2022. I have produced some graphs showing this data below.

The below chart shows the deaths by month for 2019-2022. (I excluded 2018 so the graph didn’t get too messy).

Here is the same data, in a different format, with each month rather than each year:

Here is the total deaths for the 6 month period, plotted on a chart, 2018-2022:

The Sudden Death Data

Here are the equivalent data for the sudden deaths only, as defined above.

The same data by month:

Graph Plot:

What’s Valuable About This Data?

The fact that all the obituaries are publicly posted on RIP.IE and can be searched by any individuals who are willing to do so. The critics of this kind of approach may say the data is fabricated, but this is very unlikely given that anyone can check it. For example, I checked the number of deaths for December 2022 and got the same amount as Walsh (128). As for sudden deaths, there are 11 obituaries that use the term ‘suddenly’ or ‘unexpectedly’, and several more that use the term ‘after a short/brief illness’ which can also sometimes be a code for ‘vaccine’ death. So 3 more cases from these or from comments left on the obituaries (which I did not check) means the 14 number given is reasonable, possibly slightly conservative.

This data is also good as it isn’t subject to too many biases. The deaths classified as sudden are done so in the obituaries themselves or condolences, which means they are not subject to the bias of the ‘vaccine’ sceptic who may possibly be over-eager (or be accused of being over-eager) to blame deaths on the ‘vaccine’. And it would be impossible to game obituary notices, after all, someone is either deceased or not. It is also valuable as it has a control group of ‘non-sudden deaths’ for comparison, that allows us to figure out if there is a comparative increase in death classified as ‘sudden’.

Breaking Down the Data

The graphs above clearly demonstrate that for 2022, both deaths and sudden deaths are showing a significant increase. Although there is a spike in death for November and December 2022, it is not possible to conclude from this that the number of deaths will continue to increase as this could be a seasonal spike.

I calculated the percentages of deaths for each month classified as sudden, and plotted them on a graph, seen below. As the sample size for each month is not that large (lowest = 55, highest = 128), caution is advised on that basis. Nevertheless, we see in increase in the percentage of deaths classified as sudden in 2022:

This is despite the fact that overall deaths also increased in 2022!

What is most striking about this data is there is no evidence of an increase in sudden deaths in 2021. This supports the integrity of the research itself, as anyone simply looking to manufacture data to vilify the ‘vaccine’ would start their ‘sudden death’ counting in mid-2021. This suggests that while some young and healthy people are dying immediately from the ‘vaccine’ (not shown by this data, but it is present in other datasets), significantly more relatively young and healthy people are ‘dying suddenly’ a long time after initial ‘vaccination’ (either because a booster tips the ‘vaccine’ damage calculus to fatal, or because of damage sustained by previous ‘vaccination’ doses does not immediately result in death).

That the sudden death problem is increasing is supported by evidence from the Mark Crispin Miller reports, as well as statistical analysis from sources such as Igor Chudov, who reports that the correlation between excess deaths and ‘vaccination’ rates is strengthening:

The linear regression above shows that the vaccination rate explains 49% of excess mortality and that the relationship is highly statistically significant (P < 0.0001 is extremely significant).

What is worse, compared to a similar analysis two months before, the relationship has gotten STRONGER in terms of explanatory power (R squared), as well as steepness of the slope.

Igor Chudov (Chudov’s graph above).

This can be plausibly explained by at least three mechanisms. The first of these is the ‘subclinical myocarditis theory‘ put forward by Dr. Peter McCullough. McCullough argues that the spike proteins that are produced after an mRNA shot damage the heart in ways that may not be immediately obvious (e.g. the individual does not experience typical symptoms like chest pain). The heart damage in the presence of adrenaline (when playing sport, or when waking up) then tips the individual over the edge into cardiac arrest and sudden death. The second of these is ‘turbo cancer’, where the immune system’s ability to fight cancer is compromised, leading to rapid diagnosis of stage 4 cancer and death. The third mechanism is Ig4 immune tolerance to spike protein, which causes sudden death as it allows the spike to run rampant in the body, and the immune system does not fight the disease when exposed to Sars-Cov-2. This leads to a mild illness followed by sudden death.

How does this fit in with data showing a large number of deaths for 2021 from the ‘vaccine’, for example, VAERS? There are more overall deaths in 2021 than 2019, those deaths were simply no more likely to be classified as ‘sudden’. It’s likely some of this excess is ‘vaccine’ induced (as demonstrated by other sources), it is just not considered ‘sudden’ by the obituary writers. There may be multiple reasons for this, perhaps middle-aged and older people died more often early on from the ‘vaccine’ and their deaths were not considered ‘sudden’, while young people weathered initial ‘vaccine’ damage better, only to ‘die suddenly’ in 2022. Perhaps it is the booster – rather than dose one and two – that is the critical trigger for sudden death in a large number of cases, with the late 2021/early 2022 booster campaign proving the fatal factor.

Conclusion

Data from obituary analysis from Kilkenny, Ireland, shows a significant increase in sudden death for 2022 as opposed to previous years. This supports other sources of data that we have a significant sudden death problem in heavily ‘vaccinated’ countries. Patrick Walsh deserves credit for compiling this dataset for Kilkenny that provides yet another arrow in the bow of the ‘vaccine’ sceptic.

Circuit Boards and Hammers: Thoughts on Vaccination Abolition

Introduction

Vaccination is touted as the biggest success of modern medicine. Fundamentally, it it seen as a victory over nature, where the powers of man’s inventiveness have conquered the evils of disease. Unfortunately, such ‘victories’ over nature are more hubris than reality.

Vaccination as Victory over Nature?

“Let us not, however, flatter ourselves overmuch on account of our human victories over nature. For each such victory nature takes its revenge on us. Each victory, it is true, in the first place brings about the results we expected, but in the second and third places it has quite different, unforeseen effects which only too often cancel the first.”

Friedrich Engels

The official narrative on vaccination is as follows.

In the past, human beings died of preventable diseases because the pathogens that they were exposed to were inherently extremely deadly. This mass death could not have been significantly prevented by factors such as better living conditions or diet, even if those would have had a positive effect. It wasn’t until the introduction of vaccination, starting with Edward Jenner’s smallpox vaccine, that the mass death caused by disease began to subside. The introduction of mass vaccination for diseases like polio, measles, etc. in the 20th century saved millions of lives. The further development of vaccination to encompass influenza, rotavirus, etc., are a positive development for humanity and we should try to develop vaccines for all human diseases. This includes things like HIV and RSV. mRNA vaccines, as developed for Covid-19, are a new and highly promising step forward in the development of the technology. Vaccines are safe and effective outside of very rare cases of anaphylaxis. Taking any vaccine that you are offered is the best thing that you can do for your health.

So, what are the problems of this official narrative? There is data from alternative sources demonstrating that at least some of these claims are clearly false. For example: measles vaccination was only introduced after measles mortality had massively declined and thus vaccination could not have been responsible for the decline. Newer vaccinations, such as the Gardasil vaccine, have clearly unfavourable risk-benefit profiles, to the extent that some countries have stopped using it, or do not include it on official vaccine schedules.

However, I would like to go beyond this and state that there is a problem with the whole concept of vaccination. I use an analogy to illustrate the point. As it is a Computer Age analogy, hopefully, it should be understood by those most technology obsessed invokers of the Cult of Vaccination:

Vaccination is like trying to fix a circuit board with a hammer.

The reality is the human immune system is extremely complex and multifaceted. It has been developed by millions of years of Mother Nature to protect us from disease. It does that job superbly well, so long as the environment supports it, that is, that it is not undermined through poor living conditions, exposure to toxic chemicals, and poor diet.

To give an idea of how complex the immune system actually is, we can look at the scientific literature. This article gives this description of immune response:

Immune cells sense infection and other environmental cues through a variety of extracellular and intracellular receptors. Ligation of these receptors leads to signaling cascades consisting of many dynamic processes including signal‐induced protein binding, phosphorylation, degradation, and nuclear localization. These signaling events lead to changes in gene expression, and subsequently to the production of both effector proteins required to combat infection and proteins involved in regulation of the ensuing, potentially host‐damaging, response. The number of molecular players or variables involved in any such activity can vary from hundreds to thousands, making immune responses immensely complex. This complexity is amplified by the multiscalar nature of the immune system, as these signaling and transcriptional responses occur in the context of diverse and dynamic cell–cell interactions.

Vaccination is essentially trying to ‘hack’ this extremely complex system through the extremely crude method of antigen and adjuvant injection. Vaccination sees the natural immune system as ‘insert A = get B’ or ‘insert needle = get antibodies = protection against disease’. The complex cascades of multiple interlinking factors are not present in this equation. Nor are factors such as route of exposure, and that injection of a dead/attenuated pathogen is a fundamentally different mechanism to the natural exposure which would be through, for example, aerosol. And here I am talking only of what we know or can surmise, because there is a large number of things about the immune response that we probably do not know.

There are certainly some individuals who are pushing vaccination for sinister motivations. An excellent example is Bill Gates, who is interested in vaccination as a means of depopulation. But the system of vaccination could not have gained such success in society without a massive degree of hubris on the part of scientists, governments, and everyone else in society who is going along with the vaccination narrative. Instead of being driven by the specific desire to do evil, they are blinded by the hubris of a victory that is impossible.

This hubris, of course, comes back around to us when we see massive levels of vaccination injury in our population. It is difficult to estimate how much vaccine injury there is in our population, given that all information about vaccine injury is suppressed. But there is enough evidence to link vaccination to a large number of health problems including autism, anxiety and mental health problems, autoimmune diseases, heart problems, brain inflammation, narcolepsy, and multiple other conditions.

A Note on the mRNA ‘Vaccines’

I trust nature more than I trust scientists like Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield

In some respects, the mRNA ‘vaccines’ do not belong here, as they are not vaccines by the actual definition of the term, however they are promoted as vaccines by the establishment.

The hubris discussion, however, is even more relevant when it comes to the mRNA concoctions. The hubris of traditional vaccination was bad enough, with the direct injection of an antigen and adjuvant, expecting the ‘hacking’ of the immune system to function effectively to create the antigen and not to have adverse long term reactions. The mRNA injections, on the other hand, mess with this system in an even deeper and more intrusive – and more dangerous – way by making the body produce the spike protein itself. This kind of immune hacking has caused disastrous consequences, with spike protein running rampant in the body and causing myocarditis, pericarditis, blood clots, and neurological injury, along with a massive amount of ‘sudden death‘ that is otherwise unexplained. The mRNA experiment is portrayed as, and considered to be by insane scientists, a ‘way cool’ experiment where they get to play God.

Conclusion

The concept of vaccination has always been a fundamentally flawed method to prevent disease. Instead of having to endure natural exposure to the pathogen, vaccination allows human beings to ‘cheat’ the process of gaining natural immunity through infection. In this way, ‘victory’ over disease can be declared. The price of this hubris is a skyrocketing of chronic illness.

Note: I was inspired to write this article by Toby Rogers and his piece on ‘Why I’m an Abolitionist’. This article is a massive expansion of something I dropped in the comments over at the uTobian substack.

Birmingham ‘Truth Be Told’ Protest 14th January 2023

Sign with a man stating he was vaccine injured by the Covid 19 AstraZeneca vaccine, diagnosed with Vaccine Induced Thrombosis Thrombocytopenia.

The Truth Be Told protests are focused on drawing attention to the horrific injuries some people have suffered after taking the Covid 19 ‘vaccine’.

Multiple people holding a large banner saying 'Truth be Told: Giving a Voice to the Injured and Bereaved'

The speakers were people who had been injured by these experimental injections, but most of them were unable to attend in person due to the severity of their injuries.

Image of a woman with the text My mum died 4 days after AstraZeneca: Anthea Kelly 28/01/2021

Listening to the speakers it was more than obvious that these ‘vaccines’ are a horror beyond comprehension. They are capable of the complete destruction of a human being not just via physical death.

Sign with a picture of an older man with text "My dad died 7 days after AstraZeneca: Bill Robertson 21/4/2021"

The AstraZeneca Covid ‘vaccine’ was the culprit in the injuries outlined in the videos – all four speakers specified that they had AstraZeneca. The story behind the AstraZeneca jab is an interesting one in itself given that it has essentially disappeared from the market. While all of the Covid ‘vaccines’ are dangerous, all of the dangers were pinned on AstraZeneca (and in the US, J&J) despite Pfizer and Moderna causing the same effects. But there is no explicit acknowledgement that this product has been de facto pulled, and therefore no explicit acknowledgement that these individuals harmed were given a dangerous product.

Woman holding sign reading "Thank You Andrew Bridgen"

After the speakers there was a march around town with leaflets being given out. There were other protests, a stall run by supporters of the official narrative on Ukraine and people who oppose the Iranian government. There was leafleting and handing out The Light Paper, not that many people wanted a leaflet unfortunately.

Crowd of protesters in city centre outside JD sports shop

You can listen to the stories of the ‘vaccine’ injured on my Odysee channel.

New Year Reflections

So, let’s reflect on 2022.

The Good News

I stated at the end of 2021, that:

2021 has been the year in which human beings have been subjected to the most intensive, most obsessive, and most outright nonsensical propaganda campaign in human history.

Cassandra’s Christmas Extravaganza

So how has that propaganda campaign held up in 2022? Fortunately, it has has been forced onto the back foot, at least to a degree. There have been victories against the narrative here in the UK, such as the NHS ‘vaccine’ mandate being rejected, the care home worker mandate being repealed, and no more lockdowns. Over here at least, there is only a small percentage of people still wearing a mask, and although the media does its best to fearmonger about Covid, people aren’t buying it any more.

On December 19, the most recent date for which reliable figures are available, just 14 Stoke-on-Trent residents were vaccinated – with one person receiving a first dose, three getting second doses and 10 booster or third doses.

Article on Covid Vaccine Centres in Stoke

There are, of course, still covid fanatics out there but they are becoming a minority.

The Bad News

There are however, new threats on the horizon. As I have said before, the point of the Official Covid Narrative is not the narrative itself. The point is to use the narrative to drive in an authoritarian, technocratic, transhumanist mass surveillance dystopia via digital IDs, Smart Cities, and Central Bank Digital Currencies. They can do this without Covid, for example, through narratives of ‘saving the planet’ or terrorism (the main narrative used to push mass surveillance prior to the Covid scam).

One of these threats is currently being pushed in Oxford:

Road blocks stopping most motorists from driving through Oxford city centre will divide the city into six “15-minute” neighbourhoods, a county council travel chief has said.

Swindon Advertiser

While this will be promoted as ‘saving the planet’ it is actually a form of controlling people’s movements, and will be used to normalise checkpoints through which you cannot pass if you are not the ‘right’ kind of person (whether that’s to do with ‘carbon credits’, ‘vaccination’ status, or political opinion) no doubt connected to one’s digital identity.

But there is something even more important that is worthy of discussion. The horror from this year can be summed up in two words:

Died Suddenly.

Those two words used to normalise mass deaths from the mRNA injections.

So let’s talk about died suddenly. ‘Died Suddenly’ is, in a large percentage of cases, a media euphemism for mRNA injection induced death. This largely but not entirely replaces its previous role as a euphemism for the manner of death for those that have killed themselves.

All the sources of evidence that we have match up on this. The first source of evidence we have is the excess death data from multiple countries, as analysed by Joel Smalley on his substack page. Those deaths strongly correlate with the jab rollout in multiple countries. Igor Chudov has run regressions and found booster uptake strongly correlates with excess death, he has done this analysis for both different regions of Germany and for different countries, achieving the same result.

Linear regression of boosters vs excess mortality showing a 0.0002 significant P value

A more recent analysis by Chudov showed that more excess death can be explained by ‘vaccination’ over time, showing the ‘slow kill’ effects of these injections.

Linear regression showing booster uptake vs excess mortality, with a P value of 0.0001 (significant)

We have plausible mechanisms of mRNA ‘vaccine’ induced death. Even governments have admitted that these injections can damage the heart. Blood clots are another harm admitted by the establishment. There is significant evidence of myocarditis, pericarditis, stroke, blood clots, cardiac arrest, and heart attacks being caused by the injections – and these can lead to death.

So we have our deaths, our correlations, our mechanisms. But what I wanted to get to was the tsunami of news stories about those who ‘died suddenly’.

For the last few months, I have been working on the ‘In Memoriam of those who ‘died suddenly” project as started by Mark Crispin Miller. The project is a long compilation of deaths all around the world, posted every week, of those who ‘died suddenly’, often with no cause of death listed, or from the above listed causes that often indicate that ‘vaccination’ was involved in the death. As a result, every day I am searching for evidence of people who ‘died suddenly’ for this project.

I have my reasons for taking on this burden of death – to document this crime-in-progress of mRNA ‘vaccine’ mass murder, and other reasons and motivations I won’t get into. My experience doing this project is that it is everywhere. I focus mainly on countries with Russian-language media and Asian countries as well as the UK to a degree, but cases of people dying suddenly pop up from all over the world – either with no cause of death, or the telltale ‘cardiac arrest’, ‘blood clots’ or ‘stroke’ listed.

While the cases of young people dying of these conditions – which rarely affect them normally – are the most striking evidence of mRNA murder – we should not lose sight of the fact that this is a truly universal phenomenon. Male, female, black, white, Asian, old, young, middle aged, Western, Eastern – none of this matters. There are people in all these categories who have been killed.

People who aren’t watching this as closely as I am may not grasp the full implications of what we are witnessing. I’d like to offer some observations based on the reports I have found over the last four months:

  • Heart Attacks and Cardiac Arrest seem to be rampant in the 40-65 age demographic. Perhaps a slightly overlooked fact, given the more shocking cases among under 30s and sometimes teenagers.
  • There are a large amount of videos of people just dropping dead. Particularly from India. They are doing a normal activity like dancing and just drop.
  • There’s also a large amount of testimony of people just collapsing, having been fine the moment before, for example, I have found Russians dropping dead at bus stops.
  • I don’t believe we are getting anywhere near close to the death toll with the ‘Died Suddenly’ project. Obviously, a large number of cases are never reported anywhere. But even on top of that, there must be news articles that are never found that belong in the project. Most of the Russian ones are reported on local news media websites, for example. If one had the time to check Russian-language local news media across the whole country I reckon a lot more deaths would crop up. But no-one can feasibly manage that. Plus there’s cases excluded from the project due to ambiguity about the cause of death that may have been ‘vaccine’ related.
  • None of the media in any of the countries I have researched acknowledge there is even a problem, with the exception of India. Indian articles will sometimes state ‘There have been a large number of heart attacks recently’, or, ‘There have been a lot of people dying suddenly dancing at weddings, etc.’ In most cases they don’t blame the ‘vaccine’ but I have seen a couple of examples where the journalist, or who the journalist is quoting, question the ‘vaccine’.
  • The media is trying to blame anything but the ‘vaccine’ for these deaths, when it does acknowledge that the death was unusual more specifically. Blaming Covid is one strategy, blaming cold weather (or other random factors) for heart attacks instead of the ‘vaccine’ is another strategy. The nebulous ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ is another one.
  • When this fails the media accuses ‘anti-vaxxers’ of ‘weaponising’ the deaths of famous people by asking questions. I remember reading one comment that referred to us as ‘grave robbers’, showing disrespect to the deceased. Of course the true disrespect to the deceased is to refuse to ask these questions about what may have killed them.

Being honest, I don’t think this situation is going to improve, I think it will continue or get worse. Even if all ‘vaccination’ stops now, too many people have been damaged, as Dr. Peter McCullough has outlined, with subclinical heart damage that will lead to sudden death. This is where they have led us, where they watch the people that trusted them die. Us dissenters who did not take the injections – unless they resort to more extreme methods – are going to live, but what are we going to live with?

Infertility and Toxins (Part 1): The Inculcation of Infertility

Image of Michael Yeadon with the quote "I am not saying that if you take these vaccines that it will cause infertility, but I will say that none of the manufacturers should give you any assurances whatsoever that it won't."

Introduction

Infertility is a significant issue in Western societies. This two part article will explore the issue of how modern life causes infertility among both men and women, and then how actors concerned with profit, such as Big Pharma, seek to exploit this inculcated infertility. It will also discuss how this increased reliance on Pharma for a natural function drives into other agendas such as transhumanism.

The Decline In Human Fertility

In this article I will be focusing on the Western world as people there would be the main consumers of fertility based big pharma products, such as IVF or surrogacy. This should not be construed as believing that the fertility issues faced by women in developing countries – such as those deliberately invoked by the WHO – are unimportant.

There is significant evidence of birth rate decline in the Western world. Some of this can be put down to social factors (access to contraception for example). However, there are also physical factors at work. According to the CDC, 12% of women in America have issues conceiving. Sperm counts have also been on the decline for years with a total decline of 50-60% since 1973.

Does Aluminium Cause Infertility?

Aluminium has no productive role within the human body, and because the aluminium on Earth was bound up with silica compounds for our entire history, the human body does not have defense mechanisms against it. Human activity as unleashed aluminium on the environment, and so we suffer from every day exposures from air, food, water, cosmetics, and vaccination. Any amount of aluminium harms the body. Aluminium has inflammatory effects as well as causing neurological injury and cancer. But can it also cause infertility?

Aluminium is present in high quantities in human sperm. A study ‘Aluminium Content of Human Semen‘ found that the levels of aluminium in the sperm were on average 339 μg/L. Men with a low sperm count in the study also had higher levels of aluminium suggesting possible causation.

The aluminium in DNA-rich sperm heads is stained blue by lumogallion.

Do Phthalates Cause Infertility?

Phthalates are a product that are in a large number of plastics:

Phthalates are a group of chemicals used to make plastics more durable. Phthalates are in hundreds of products, such as vinyl flooring, lubricating oils, and personal-care products (soaps, shampoos, hair sprays).

CDC

Their effects on fertility come from the fact that they can mimic estrogen in the human body. In terms of fertility, this can negatively affect men and there have been several studies on this topic. The below review lists some of these studies.

Recent studies have showed that exposure to some phthalates results in profound and irreversible changes in the development of reproductive tract (Foster et al., 2001, Sharpe, 2001) especially in males, rising the possibility that phthalate exposures could be the leading cause of the reproductive disorders in humans (Ablake et al., 2004, Ema et al., 2003, Foster et al., 2000, Latini et al., 2004a, Latini et al., 2004b, Moore et al., 2001, Mylchreest et al., 1998, Parks et al., 2000, Wilson et al., 2004). In particular, prenatal exposure to these environmental chemicals, by interfering with the androgen signaling pathway seems to cause permanent adverse effects on reproductive development in male rats (Carruthers and Foster, 2005, Kai et al., 2005, Lehmann et al., 2004, Thompson et al., 2004).

Phthalate Exposure and Male Infertility

Regarding women’s fertility, a study looked at the effects of phthalates on success of IVF, and found to was less likely to be successful if the woman had a higher concentration of phthalates in the body.

Is Infertility Linked to Vaccination?

There is evidence that vaccination can negatively affect fertility. One vaccine where this issue has been examined is Gardasil, sold as a preventative for cervical cancer. There is a strong correlation between the introduction of the Gardasil vaccine and a decline in the fertility of the age groups exposed to that vaccine.

Graph showing a decline in birthrate in the US per 1000 after the introduction of Gardasil: 19% drop in birthrate between 2007 and 2018.

Clinical trial researchers for Merck, Gardasil’s manufacturer, reported an explosion of reproductive injuries among the 20,000 trial volunteers. An astronomical 15% – 17% of trial participants experienced a range of reproductive harms, including premature ovarian failure.

Is Gardasil Vaccine linked to Record Birth Rate Declines?

Gardasil contains extremely high levels of aluminium, but also many other ingredients that are negative for human health, such as L-histidine, polysorbate 80 and sodium borate. These substances are listed as possible causes of female infertility. There is also evidence that the Gardasil vaccine can cause anti-phospholipid syndrome, an autoimmune disease that can affect the reproductive organs.

Is Infertility Linked to Covid-19 ‘Vaccination’?

There have been many speculations early on in the Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ rollout that the jab would cause infertility. For example, Dr. Judy Mikovits was one of the first people to draw attention to this, especially the issue of possible autoimmune to a protein crucial in pregnancy, Syncytin-1. Unfortunately, more and more evidence is stacking up that the Covid-19 ‘vaccinations’ do indeed cause infertility.

Steve Kirsch’s analysis of VAERS shows that one of the most elevated adverse events after ‘vaccination’ in comparison with other injections is menstrual problems.

Table showing that heavy menstrual bleeding, shortened menstrual cycle, menstrual disorder, painful periods, irregular menstruation are highly escalated adverse events.

If a medical intervention can affect a woman’s menstruation, it can obviously affect the ability to conceive.

There have also been reports of an extremely high number of miscarriages, spontaneous abortion, and fetal demise post roll out of this experimental ‘vaccination’. Dr. Jessica Rose has pointed to the fact that there have been over 4,000 miscarriages reported to VAERS as of June 2022.

Meanwhile, an Israeli study showed some issues with male fertility after ‘vaccination’.

Post day 150, sperm concentration was -15.9% vs baseline, lower even than in the 75-120 day period. Average time post vaxx for T3 collection was 174 +/- 26.8 days so we’re talking about 6 months post vaxx with NO recovery in sperm concentration.

Pfizer Vaccine Effects on Total Motile Count in Sperm Donors

More recently, birth statistics have shown a significant decline in a large number of Western countries, and that decline is holding firm and not rebounding to pre-Covid levels. A good visual example is this decline in Sweden, from the El Gato Malo substack:

Graph showing Sweden's live births in 2022 are around 100 lower on average than previous years.

Synthetic Sex Identities and Sterilisation

No discussion of infertility would be complete without the discussion of the deliberate infliction of infertility via the use of puberty blockers, wrong-sex hormone dosage, and ‘transgender’ surgery. This inculcation of infertility affects a small but growing number of the population.

‘Puberty blockers’, medically known as GnRH agonists, stop the production of sex hormones. Since the ‘Dutch protocol’ began in 1996, the drugs have increasingly been used to facilitate ‘gender transition’ of children. The drugs prevent the child from going through puberty, meaning that there is no development of the gonads. This leads to infertility for obvious reasons, as the correct sex hormone is never present to lead to fertility. Incorrect hormones can also cause reproductive harms, for example, testosterone dosage in women who identify as men causes atrophy in the female reproductive organs. ‘Transgender’ surgery, such as hysterectomy, oophorectomy, and orchiectomy (castration) also create permanent sterilisation in those that receive these surgeries.

Conclusion

Multiple toxins, that are created by modern industrial society, reduce human fertility to a significant extent. This article merely covers some of the ways in which this happens. This opens up new markets for Big Pharma and other actors, which will be explored in Part 2.

‘Vaccine’ Side Effect Narrative Management and the Mainstream Media

Introduction

Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ side effects are extremely common. According to Pfizer’s own documentation, there is a 9-page list of possible side effects of the mRNA jabs. The state, media, and international actors, however, were determined to get the entire population jabbed. Some of this involved direct coercion, such as sacking care home workers and threatening to sack NHS staff. However, a large part of convincing people to get ‘vaccinated’ for Covid relied on the mainstream media, and in particular how that media dealt with claims of side effects from the Covid jabs.

The Function of the Media

Despite various protestations from the media that their job is to present the truth and hold the establishment to account, in reality they act as a crucial part of that establishment. Their role is to present narratives that support the establishment in a palatable way, and to keep any debate within very narrow grounds (the territory of what Ryan Cristian has dubbed the ‘two party illusion’). The mainstream media’s compliance with government narratives is ensured in multiple ways, including overlap of interests, financial incentives via advertising, cultural commonality and plain laziness (such as it being easy to spout government press releases as ‘news’). In the last analysis, it can also be maintained through state force – witness what happened to Julian Assange when he released information about US war crimes.

The Beginning of the Jab Rollout

The UK mainstream media – with very few exceptions (Peter Hitchens is the only example that comes to mind) – backed lockdowns from Day 1, and in fact pushed for harder and longer lockdowns. Lockdown sceptics were smeared as conspiracy theorists and mocked. But this was only a taste of what was to come with the miracle jab.

The idea of a vaccine has always been promoted by some people as the ultimate way out of lockdowns. Initially, the government itself did not put as much emphasis on ‘vaccination’ as the way out of lockdowns, given that they were still pretending lockdown would be only short term. This narrative became more and more important as lockdowns dragged on, with the government and media trying to encourage compliance with the lockdowns by urging that we would soon have the ‘vaccine’ and give it to enough people and that the nightmare would then be over.

The media portrayed the ‘race for the vaccine’ in a positive way, as the hero pharmaceutical companies that were going to save us from the deadly plague. Any problems, such as a case of transverse myelitis during the Oxford/AstraZeneca ‘vaccine’ trial, were quickly smoothed over and forgotten about. The media was happy to repeat claims from the manufacturers of the injections. This BBC article, while it does suggest in a mealy-mouthed way that the data is limited further down the article, it does say that it is safe and likely to be highly effective (referring to the Pfizer product).

With the availability of the jab, this started to go into overdrive. The first man to be given the jab in the UK outside of clinical trials was called William Shakespeare. This was manufactured and used in order to give a positive view of the ‘vaccine’. While a BBC article contained many puns on Shakespeare works, the actual purpose of this propaganda was to associate the ‘vaccine’ with one of the greatest British figures in history. The respect that a large number of British people have for Shakespeare is subconsciously transferred to the jab by this manipulation (or at least, that is the intention). There are also further attempts to use patriotic ideas as a means to promote the jab, in particular by bragging about the British ‘vaccine success’ compared to the continent, as Britain had given the vaccine to many more people early on in the rollout.

Drips and Drabs: The Beginning of the Catastrophe

Despite the constant praise for the jabs, the extreme danger of these injections was clear to anyone paying attention very quickly. Testimony quickly popped up online alleging mass death in care homes after the jabs. Vaccine injury stories began to pop up on TikTok, Facebook and Twitter from January 2021, for example testimony from Shawn Skelton, Angelia Desselle and Kristi Simmonds, interviewed by Del Bigtree back in April 2021. Death and injury reports in the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) began to skyrocket early on in the rollout. In other words, anyone paying attention could figure out these jabs were extremely dangerous by February 2021.

How did the media deal with these reports of side effects from these novel mRNA injections? The most obvious response is to stonewall all cases of major negative side effects, and indeed we do see aspects of this. If I search on google (as this is what non-conspiracy theorists are likely to be using) for ‘covid 19 vaccine side effects’, I find standard pages from the NHS downplaying the risks of the jab.

Holding Back the Flood?: The Case of the Astra Zeneca Blood Clots

However, a strategy of denying all side effects (other than the minor ones like a sore arm) was not credible. Instead, the mainstream media employed a strategy well known in the media: to acknowledge the critique but focus down on a very small aspect in order to whitewash the whole.

This technique of narrative management was identified by Chomsky and Herman in their famous work, Manufacturing Consent. They give an example from the Vietnam War. When criticism of the war in 1960s America began to become more prominent, the media could not completely ignore the crimes being committed against the Vietnamese people. So, the media focused in on one atrocity that took place during the war, the massacre carried out at My Lai by American soldiers. The point of the media drawing so much attention to this crime was to isolate it from the rest of the war, to make it into an exceptional event. This served to whitewash the fact that the complete destruction of Vietnamese villages and murder and rape of civilians were standard American practice.

It is this form of narrative management that we first observe when the reports of adverse events start to drip out over the first few months of the rollout. They picked one specific side effect – the blood clots reported after the AstraZeneca jab – and used that to obscure all of the other side effects being reported after both types of ‘vaccine’ (the beginning of the rollout in the UK was AstraZeneca and Pfizer, with some Moderna added later). They looked only at the risk of this one side effect, declared it to be rare, and then claimed based on this that the ‘vaccines’ were safe. Simply ignoring all claims of side effects would cause them to lose credibility, while acknowledgement of this one point allowed them to maintain credibility and make it look as if they are allowing some degree of criticism and debate. We must remember that this period in time was crucial, as it was important to the establishment to get as many people to take the jab as possible, and at this point, only older age groups had taken the ‘vaccine’.

As such, reports such as the following cropped up in the mainstream media:

Unusual blood clots in the brain have been detected in a handful of people after they were injected with the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. […]

The organisation [European Medicines Agency] has to figure out whether the reported clots are a side-effect or a coincidence that would have happened naturally. This is incredibly hard when dealing with rare events. If, on the other hand, one in every 10,000 people was having serious blood clots then the answer would be obvious.

BBC

The British Government’s website contains a statement addressing the AstraZeneca jab from the 7th April 2021:

There have been reports of an extremely rare adverse event of concurrent thrombosis (blood clots) and thrombocytopenia (low platelet count) following vaccination with the first dose of AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222). There has been no signal for thrombosis/thrombocytopenia following receipt of other COVID-19 vaccines approved for use in the UK (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna).

Note the declaration that this side effect has not been observed with the Pfizer or Moderna ‘vaccines’ – which is false. It is however convenient, as it allows the establishment to scapegoat the AstraZeneca jab for all problems, while pushing the Pfizer and Moderna.

The media also went as far as to publish testimonies of those injured by Vaccine Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia, while stressing the rarity of such a side effect:

Osteopath Joseph Robinson, 32, suffered brain damage from a rare blood clot after his first AstraZeneca dose in February.

He had to quit work after VITT – vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia – left him with memory loss and speech and language impairments.

Today’s Reality: Sudden Adult Death Syndrome

The media strategies worked on the vast majority of people. Official data on the number of people in the UK who took a Covid jab can be debated, with conflicting numbers from different sources, as well as some exaggeration of numbers jabbed for propaganda purposes. However, it is clear that the majority of people took at least the first 2 doses of the covid jabs.

Nowadays, we have a different type of media propaganda, focusing on reassuring the minds of people who have taken the jabs that it was the right decision. No one is trying to convince the unvaccinated with rational argument at this point – if they ever were. Meanwhile, a massive amount of unexplained death is happening all across the world. Mark Crispin Miller on Substack has been chronicling the masses of people who are now ‘dying suddenly’, often with no cause of death mentioned in the news coverage. These include people of all ages, races and a large number of different countries.

The media, on the other hand, is trying to ignore this mass death as much as possible, while also trying to normalise random heart attacks and dropping dead. The ‘health story’ has been a long-term fixture of the British media – with the fact that the Daily Mail always runs stories about everything causing cancer being a running joke. (That said, in retrospect, given how toxic everything is perhaps they had a point). Now, these often-bizarre health stories are focusing on heart attacks, with a number complied here by Naked Emperor:

BBC – Devoted football fans experience ‘dangerous’ levels of stress

Express – Heart attack: Does skipping breakfast increase your risk?

Daily Mail – Expert warns that shovelling snow can be a deadly way to discover underlying cardiovascular conditions as straining the heart with physical activity could cause sudden death

Of course, none of these articles mention the ‘vaccine’ even though the British government admit that the jabs can cause heart issues.

Most likely these stories are being published because more heart attacks are being observed by ordinary people in their lives and it serves to associate the heart attack with anything other than the jab. Even if the reader thinks these stories are stupid, they may still have a subconscious effect somewhere. (Though, sometimes, these stories are so idiotic that I wonder if they almost want you to know subconsciously what has been done to you – if you took the jab – and for you to live in terror of dropping dead any minute.)

The media are also playing a role in normalising ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ (SADS) meaning when an adult suddenly dies with no clear cause of death. A large number of these deaths are most likely jab induced. As Mark Crispin Miller has observed in his series, no cause of death being listed is becoming much more common in death articles in the mainstream media. The media is currently running generic articles on SADS, claiming that people should get their heart looked at if they are at risk:

People aged under 40 are being urged to have their hearts checked because they may potentially be at risk of Sudden Adult Death Syndrome. 

The syndrome, known as SADS, has been fatal for all kinds of people regardless of whether they maintain a fit and healthy lifestyle.

Daily Mail

Conclusion

The media serves as an important way to manage the narrative around the Covid-19 ‘vaccines’: both in order to encourage uptake, deflect from side effects and normalise the carnage being caused by these extremely dangerous products.