Tag Archives: mRNA

Did Nathan Templeton Die From mRNA Vaccine SADS?!

Did former Channel 7 Sunrise reporter Nathan Templeton die suddenly from mRNA vaccine SADS?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Nathan Templeton Died Suddenly From mRNA Vaccine!

Right after news broke that Nathan Templeton was found dead in a park, some people immediately claimed or suggested the former Channel 7 Sunrise reporter died suddenly from the mRNA vaccine!

William Makis MD : Australia – 44 year old Channel 7 News reporter Nathan Templeton died while on a dog walk.

“On 9 April 2024, Templeton was found dead near Barwon River in Geelong after suffering a medical episode while out walking the dog”

As far as COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine sudden deaths go, walking the dog may not be such a bad way to go. #DiedSuddenly

Recommended : Did Kate Middleton Get Cancer From COVID-19 Vaccine?!

 

No Evidence Nathan Templeton Died Suddenly From mRNA Vaccine!

This appears to be yet another example of fake news created by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Nathan Templeton Died From A Medical Episode

On Tuesday afternoon, 9 April 2024, Nathan Templeton (born 9 May 1979) suffered a medical episode while walking his dog in the Zillah Crawcour Park, in the Geelong suburb of Newtown. According to the Victoria Police:

Emergency services were called to a park in Newtown about 2.30pm where the man was located deceased. The death is not being treated as suspicious at this stage.

There is no evidence he died from the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and unsurprisingly, none of those who made those claims ever provided any evidence to back up their baseless claims.

Even his family did not claim that Nathan Templeton died from any vaccination, stating simply that:

Our hearts are broken for an adoring father and a wonderful friend, who’ll be missed by many.

Nathan Templeton was just one month short of his 45th birthday, and leaves behind his wife, Kate, and two young sons.

Fact #2 : Cause of Death + Autopsy Report Not Revealed Yet

The Victoria Police is preparing a report for the coroner, but stated that “the death is not being treated as suspicious at this stage“.

Until and unless the coroner or his family announces his cause of death, or releases his autopsy report, anyone who claims that Nathan Templeton died suddenly from the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is likely lying to you.

Recommended : Did Japan Study Prove Vaccinated Blood Is Dangerous?!

Fact #3 : Nathan Templeton Was Suffering From Personal Issues

Although his cause of death has not been determined or revealed, suicide appears to be a possibility. Nathan Templeton was said to be grappling with long-standing personal issues, including depression.

He stopped being on-air for Channel 7 Sunrise since late 2022, and had been working behind-the-scenes instead last year. He has been receiving support for his personal issues, including depression.

Now, that does not mean Nathan Templeton committed suicide. He could easily have died from a cardiac arrest, a heart attack, a stroke – common medical episodes that have been killing people long before COVID-19 vaccines were invented.

Again, we should wait for the autopsy report, and his official cause of death, and not speculate!

Fact #4 : Nathan Templeton Was Vaccinated Almost 3 Years Ago!

From his social media posts, it appears that Nathan Templeton was vaccinated sometime in May 2021. However, it is unknown if he received an mRNA vaccine, as Australia used a mix of COVID-19 vaccines.

In any case, Nathan Templeton would have been fully-vaccinated almost 3 years ago. He cannot possibly be suffering from a vaccine side effect, because they appear within hours or days, not years later!

Mild side effects like injection site pain, fever, muscle ache, headache, lethargy develop within minutes to hours of the vaccination. Anaphylaxis develops within minutes, while other severe adverse reactions like myocarditis and VITT develop within days or weeks.

The spike proteins produced by the COVID-19 vaccines also do not stick around for months. If these spike proteins are permanent (as antivaxxers claim), we would have lifelong immunity.

Your own immune system will identify the spike proteins as foreign, and destroy them within a matter of days, although some may last for up to a few weeks. This is part of how vaccines teach your immune system to identify the enemy and destroy it.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did German Gov’t Just Admit There Was No Pandemic?!

Did the German government just admit that there was no COVID-19 pandemic?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : German Government Admits There Was No Pandemic!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claims that the German government just admitted that there was no COVID-19 pandemic!

Here is an excerpt of that long and (intentionally???) confusing article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

German Gov’t Admits There Was No Pandemic

Recommended : Is WEF Planning Cyber Attack To Disrupt 2024 Election?!

 

Truth : German Government Did Not Admit There Was No Pandemic!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : German Government Did Not Admit There Was No Pandemic

Let me start by pointing out that the German government did not admit that there was no COVID-19 pandemic.

If the German government really admitted that there was no COVID-19 pandemic, it would have reported by the worldwide media. Yet, there was no such report by any legitimate media outlet. That’s because it never happened.

Unsurprisingly, The People’s Voice article provided no evidence to back up its ridiculous claim.

Fact #2 : RKI Documents Do Not Show Pandemic Did Not Exist

The People’s Voice article is referring to documents from the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) released in the midst of a lawsuit, which purportedly show that the COVID-19 pandemic was “all fraud”, and was “a political decision”:

New: #RKIFiles are out!
Over 2,000 pages showing that the ‘pandemic’ was all fraud. Highlights:

1. ‘High health risk’ was not derived from data, but a political decision.
2. ‘Herd immunity’ was seen as a mere narrative.

Well, that’s not accurate as German TV channel Tagesschau explained (English):

One of the main reasons for the alleged explosiveness is the RKI’s decision on March 17, 2020 to rate the risk assessment of Corona for the health of the population in Germany from moderate to high. The minutes therefore show that this decision was not based on the RKI’s professional assessment, but rather on the political instructions of an external actor. However, this cannot be seen from the logs.

The minutes from March 16, 2020 state that a new risk assessment was prepared over the weekend. “It will be scaled up this week,” they say. The risk assessment will be published as soon as a person blacked out in the documents gives a signal. According to the Ministry of Health, “an internal RKI employee” is behind the redaction.

The RKI had already carried out a new risk assessment, which, however, had not yet been published. The claim that this decision was not based on professional judgment is therefore misleading. All that was needed was the consent of a specific person to publish this risk assessment.

In other words, the German government’s decision to hike the COVID-19 health risk from moderate to high was possibly based on the “scaled-up” risk assessment that was not revealed in those minutes.

More importantly, none of these documents show that the COVID-19 pandemic was “all fraud” and was just “a political decision”.

Recommended : Did Insider Reveal WEF Global Famine False Flag Op?!

Fact #3 : COVID-19 Cases Were Exploding Globally

The claim that the COVID-19 pandemic was “all fraud” is also nonsensical because cases were exploding globally. Any decision on whether the risk of COVID-19 was high would not be based solely on cases inside Germany, but globally.

In addition, it is questionable to present this increased risk assessment as if there had been no evidence of it at the time, says Hajo Zeeb, Professor of Epidemiology at the University of Bremen. The number of corona infections rose rapidly in March 2020. On March 4th, only 262 cases were reported in Germany; on March 16th , almost two weeks later, there were already 6,012 cumulative cases.

“Not only from a small, narrow German perspective, but also from a global perspective, you have to say very clearly that the numbers have exploded,” says Zeeb. Although more tests were carried out from mid-March onwards, the positive rate in Germany also rose by a good percentage point within a week. “Such an increase in such a short period of time is substantial, even if it doesn’t sound like much,” says Zeeb. At the time, the tests only provided a small excerpt of the infection process.

Fact #4 : Olaf Scholz Screenshot Is Fake

The cover image used by The People’s Voice article and video has a screenshot which purportedly shows the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz posting on X (formerly Twitter) that:

Covid was a psy-op to test compliance with mRNA and lockdowns. There was no pandemic.

That is most definitely a fake screenshot, because there is no such post on X by the Olaf Scholz.

If the German Chancellor actually posted such a shocking tweet, it would have been reported by the worldwide media. But of course, that didn’t happen, because Olaf Scholz never posted it!

His official Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz account on X also has a grey checkmark, not a blue checkmark. In addition, he mostly posts in German, not English.

Yet again, and unsurprisingly, The People’s Voice article provided no evidence that such a post ever existed!

Recommended : Did WEF Pass Law To Criminalise Criticism Of mRNA?!

Fact #5 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Pope Francis Declare “God Hates Antivaxxers”?!

Did Pope Francis just declare that God hates antivaxxers?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Pope Francis Declares God Hates Antivaxxers!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claims that Pope Francis just declared that God hates antivaxxers!

Here is an excerpt of that long and (intentionally???) confusing article:

Pope Francis Declares ‘God Hates Antivaxxers’

Recommended : Did Pope Francis Order Christians To Pray To Satan?!

 

Truth : Pope Francis Did Not Declare God Hates Antivaxxers!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Pope Francis Did Not Declare God Hates Antivaxxers!

Let me start by simply pointing out that Pope Francis never once declared that God hates antivaxxers.

If Pope Francis actually said that, it would have been reported all over the world. Yet, there no legitimate news report that Pope Francis ever made such remarks.

Pope Francis clearly said that people had the “choice” of whether to get vaccinated or not. He merely stated, in his opinion, that being against the vaccine was “an almost suicidal act of denial“.

Deciding whether to get vaccinated is always an ethical choice, but I know that many people signed up to movements opposed to the administration of the medication. This distressed me because in my view, being against the antidote is an almost suicidal act of denial.

Pope Francis also never labelled people who refused to take the COVID-19 vaccines as “heretics”.

Unsurprisingly, The People’s Voice article provided no evidence to back up its “fact checked” claim.

Fact #2 : Vatican Visitors No Longer Need Green Pass

The People’s Voice article claimed that Vatican visitors must show a “Super Green Pass” in order to enter. That’s not accurate.

On 2 June 2022, the Vatican issued a decree allowing most employees and visitors to enter without a vaccination certificate, or proof of recovery.

Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican secretary of state, said that “entry to the dicasteries, bodies and offices that make up the Roman Curia and the institutions connected with the Holy See is permitted without the obligation” of having the vaccine certificate known as a “super green pass.”

Therefore, visitors have been permitted to visit the Vatican without any Super Green Pass since 2 June 2022 – over 1.5 years ago!

Recommended : Did Insider Reveal WEF Global Famine False Flag Op?!

Fact #3 : Vatican Visitors Do Not Need Face Masks

The People’s Voice article also claimed that Pope Francis required visitors to wear “FFP2 and N95 masks in all enclosed spaces on Vatican territory, and he does not permit religious exemption to vaccination or masks“. That is also not accurate.

The same 2 June 2022 decree removed the face mask requirement at the Vatican City – wearing face masks indoors, or at large gatherings were no longer required. It only “strongly recommended” that employees and visitors wear a face mask indoors, or at large gatherings.

Cardinal Parolin also eased the Vatican’s mask requirements, decreeing that wearing masks indoors or in large gatherings, while no longer required, “is strongly recommended.”

Nevertheless, “the obligation to comply with health requirements regarding hand sanitation and the frequent ventilation and periodic sanitization of rooms remains,” the decree said.

The only face mask mandate that appears to be in effect is for vaccinated employees who become close contacts of COVID-19 positive people. They can continue working, but are required to wear FFP2 face masks indoors:

… vaccinated employees who have had contact with someone who is positive can go to work immediately but they are required to wear high-filtering FFP2 masks indoors

Recommended : Is Google Shutting Down Gmail For Good?!

Fact #4 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Is Japan going to ban vaccinated blood donation?!

Is Japan proposing to ban vaccinated people from donating their ‘tainted blood’?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Japan Is Going To Ban Vaccinated Blood Donation!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed that Japan is proposing to ban vaccinated people from donating their ‘tainted blood’!

Japan To Ban Vaccinated People From Donating ‘Tainted Blood’

Recommended : Are COVID-19 Vaccinated Blood Transfusions Dangerous?!

 

Truth : Japan Is Not Going To Ban Vaccinated Blood Donation!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Japan Is Not Going To Ban Vaccinated Blood Donation

Let me start by pointing out that Japan has not proposed banning vaccinated people from donating their blood, because it’s apparently ‘tainted’. There was no such announcement by the Japanese government.

If that actually occurred, it would have been reported worldwide. Yet there has been no legitimate news report of such a proposal. That’s because it never happened.

Fact #2 : The People’s Voice Provided No Evidence

Not surprisingly, The People’s Voice article never provided any evidence that Japan is proposing to ban vaccinated people from donating their blood, or that the Japanese government considers the blood of vaccinated people to be dangerous.

Fact #3 : Pre-Print Paper Offers No Actual Evidence

These claims are based on a pre-print paper by Ueda et. al. that has not even undergone the most basic, first step of the scientific review process – peer-review.

It is also a literature review that appears to heavily feature debunked articles like the infamous Spikeopathy paper by Peter Parry et. al., and the equally infamous AESI paper by Joseph Fraiman et. al., as well as papers by Stephanie Seneff and Peter McCullough, amongst other controversial people.

As far as I can tell – the paper provided no actual evidence that COVID-19 vaccinated blood is dangerous, especially when it relies on debunked articles (example | example). Even its title suggests that it was only listing “concerns” and not actual “proof”.

Recommended : Does COVID Vaccinated Blood Clot In Just 3 Minutes?!

Fact #4 : Blood Of Vaccinated People Is Safe For Transfusion

After people baselessly claimed that vaccinated blood is dangerous, the American Red Cross, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies, and America’s Blood Centers, issued a joint statement to refute those claims:

Amid ongoing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccinations and blood donation, America’s Blood Centers, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies (AABB), and the American Red Cross reiterate the safety of America’s blood supply and assure the public that vaccines do not pose a risk to patients receiving blood transfusions.

Blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine approved or authorized for use in the U.S. are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as those for measles, mumps or influenza, COVID-19 vaccines are designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness, but vaccine components themselves do not replicate through blood transfusions or alter a blood recipients’ DNA.

In summary, there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates adverse outcomes from the transfusions of blood products collected from vaccinated donors and, therefore, no medical reason to distinguish or separate blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccination.

On multiple occasions, the Food and Drug Administration has confirmed that there is no evidence to support concerns related to the safety of blood donated by vaccinated individuals.

All Americans, including both blood donors and blood recipients, should feel confident that receiving a blood transfusion is safe. COVID-19 vaccines do not replicate, and all blood donations offer the same life-saving therapeutic benefits, regardless of the vaccination status of the donor.

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

Fact #5 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Kate Middleton Get Cancer From COVID-19 Vaccine?!

Did Kate Middleton get her cancer from the COVID-19 vaccine?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Kate Middleton Got Cancer From COVID-19 Vaccine!

After Kate Middleton revealed that she was diagnosed with cancer, some people are claiming or suggesting that the Princess of Wales developed her cancer because of the COVID-19 vaccine!

William Makis MD : I’ve been very concerned about Kate Middleton being COVID-19 Vaccine Injured. I may have been correct.

If The Princess of Wales @KensingtonRoyal had COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines and then developed cancer, this could indeed be COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancer.

Because Turbo Cancer is being covered up by the medical establishment and media, her doctors, good as they may be, will NOT provide her adequate or appropriate cancer treatment.

Recommended : Is Kate Middleton Planning To Retire From Royal Duties?!

 

No Evidence Kate Middleton Got Cancer From COVID-19 Vaccine!

This appears to be yet another example of fake news about COVID-19 vaccines, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : No One Knows What Cancer Kate Middleton Has

Let me start with a quick summary of Kate Middleton’s shocking revelation that she has cancer.

After months of speculation, Kensington Palace released a video on Friday, 22 March 2024, in which Princess Catherine revealed that she was diagnosed with cancer. She did not specify the type of cancer she had, only that it was diagnosed after her abdominal surgery, and she was now undergoing “preventative chemotherapy”.

In January, I underwent major abdominal surgery in London, and at the time it was thought that my condition was non-cancerous. The surgery was successful. However, tests after the operation found cancer had been present.

My medical team therefore advised that I should undergo a course of preventative chemotherapy, and I am now in the early stages of that treatment.

Kate Middleton never revealed what cancer she has. Does she have ovarian cancer? Colorectal cancer? Endometrial cancer? She never so much as hint at what it was.

So how on Earth can anyone determine what cancer she has, never mind prove that her cancer was caused by her COVID-19 vaccination??? Using a crystal ball???

Fact #2 : Turbo Cancer Does Not Exist

I should also point out that there is no such thing as “turbo cancer”, and after billions of doses have been administered worldwide in the past 3 years – there is still no evidence that any COVID-19 vaccine can cause cancer, or make cancer go “turbo”.

What Kate Middleton has described is similar to what many women have undergone. There is nothing to suggest that her cancer was caused by any COVID-19 vaccine, or went turbo because of it.

Needless to say, anti-vaccine activists provide no evidence to back their claims that vaccinated people are dying from turbo cancer. Ironically, they even accused unvaccinated people (and fellow anti-vaxxers) like Kirstie Alley of dying from turbo cancer!

Recommended : Are COVID-19 Vaccinated Blood Transfusions Dangerous?!

Fact #3 : Kate Middleton Was Vaccinated Almost 3 Years Ago!

Kate Middleton, who was the Duchess of Cambridge then, received her first COVID-19 vaccination on Friday, 28 May 2021.

Yesterday I received my first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine at London’s Science Museum. I’m hugely grateful to everyone who is playing a part in the rollout – thank you for everything you are doing.

It is unknown what vaccine she received, but she would have been fully-vaccinated by April if she received the Pfizer vaccine, or May if she received the AstraZeneca vaccine.

In other words – Kate Middleton was fully-vaccinated against COVID-19 almost 3 years ago! She cannot possibly be suffering from a vaccine side effect, because they appear within hours or days, not years later!

Mild side effects like injection site pain, fever, muscle ache, headache, lethargy develop within minutes to hours of the vaccination. Anaphylaxis develops within minutes, while other severe adverse reactions like myocarditis and VITT develop within days or weeks.

The spike proteins produced by the COVID-19 vaccines also do not stick around for months. If these spike proteins are permanent (as antivaxxers claim), we would have lifelong immunity.

Your own immune system will identify the spike proteins as foreign, and destroy them within a matter of days, although some may last for up to a few weeks. This is part of how vaccines teach your immune system to identify the enemy and destroy it.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Are COVID-19 Vaccinated Blood Transfusions Dangerous?!

Did Japanese researchers warn that COVID-19 vaccinated blood transfusions are dangerous?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : COVID-19 Vaccinated Blood Transfusions Are Dangerous!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The Expose (formerly Daily Expose), which claims that an official study just showed that COVID-19 vaccines cause VAIDS (Vaccine-Induced Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) in children! Here is an excerpt:

Japanese researchers warn about the risks of blood transfusions from covid vaccinated people

Recommended : Did Japan Study Prove Vaccinated Blood Is Dangerous?!

 

Truth : COVID-19 Vaccinated Blood Transfusions Are Not Dangerous!

This is yet another example of fake news created or promoted by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : It’s A Pre-Print Article That Was Not Peer-Reviewed

Let me start by pointing out that the paper (PDF) by Ueda et. al. is a pre-print that has not been peer-reviewed – the first step in any scientific review process!

In other words – no one should draw any conclusion from this paper, when it has not even passed pre-publication peer review, never mind post-publication verification and criticism by other scientists.

Fact #2 : Ueda Et. Al. Is A Narrative Review Paper

I should also point out that the Ueda et. al. paper is just a “narrative review” or a “literature review”, which basically offers an overview of existing research, and its quality would be highly dependent on the research papers it features.

Unfortunately, it appears to feature even debunked articles like the infamous Spikeopathy paper by Peter Parry et. al., and the equally infamous AESI paper by Joseph Fraiman et. al., as well as papers by Stephanie Seneff and Peter McCullough, amongst other controversial people.

Fact #3 : Paper Does Not Prove Vaccinated Blood Transfusion Is Dangerous

As far as I can tell – the paper provided no actual evidence that the transfusion of COVID-19 vaccinated blood is dangerous, especially when it relies on debunked articles (example | example). Even its title suggests that it is only listing “concerns” and not actual “proof”.

The article’s emphasis on the spike protein appears to ignore the fact that vaccine spike proteins are created on cell surfaces and vaccines do not multiply, while COVID-19 infections produce far more spike proteins because the virus multiplies, and those viral particles (and their spike proteins) can freely travel in the blood!

In addition – the spike protein isn’t exclusive to COVID-19, and is a feature of all coronaviruses, including that that cause the common flu! If such spike proteins are toxic, then practically blood from every human being (who has ever had the common flu or other coronavirus infections) would be toxic.

Recommended : Does COVID Vaccinated Blood Clot In Just 3 Minutes?!

Fact #4 : Red Cross Says Vaccinated Blood Safe For Transfusion

After recent claims that blood donors were being rejected or deferred because they were COVID-vaccinated, the American Red Cross responded that it follows FDA regulations and protocols, and that vaccinated blood are safe for transfusions.

Donations from those who have been vaccinated for COVID-19 are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as measles, mumps or influenza, the COVID-19 vaccine is designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness. The vaccine components themselves are not found within the blood stream.

Fact #5 : Blood Of Vaccinated People Is Safe For Transfusion

It isn’t just the Red Cross that claims that the blood of COVID-19 vaccinated people are safe for transfusions. Other organisations like the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies and America’s Blood Centers issued a joint statement with the American Red Cross on this very issue:

Amid ongoing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccinations and blood donation, America’s Blood Centers, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies (AABB), and the American Red Cross reiterate the safety of America’s blood supply and assure the public that vaccines do not pose a risk to patients receiving blood transfusions.

Blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine approved or authorized for use in the U.S. are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as those for measles, mumps or influenza, COVID-19 vaccines are designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness, but vaccine components themselves do not replicate through blood transfusions or alter a blood recipients’ DNA.

In summary, there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates adverse outcomes from the transfusions of blood products collected from vaccinated donors and, therefore, no medical reason to distinguish or separate blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccination.

On multiple occasions, the Food and Drug Administration has confirmed that there is no evidence to support concerns related to the safety of blood donated by vaccinated individuals.

All Americans, including both blood donors and blood recipients, should feel confident that receiving a blood transfusion is safe. COVID-19 vaccines do not replicate, and all blood donations offer the same life-saving therapeutic benefits, regardless of the vaccination status of the donor.

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

Fact #6 : The Expose Is A Notorious Fake News Website

Like Real Raw News and NewsPunch, Daily Expose is a website that capitalises on making shocking but fake or misleading stories to generate page views and money. It was later rebranded as The Expose.

Founded in November 2020 by Jonathan Allen-Walker – a mechanic from Lincolnshire, The Expose / Daily Expose is infamous for publishing COVID-19 and vaccine misinformation.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news or misinformation, so you should NEVER share anything from Daily Expose / The Expose. Here are some of its stories that I personally debunked earlier:

Everything posted by The Expose / Daily Expose must be considered fake news, until proven otherwise.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did CDC redact all 148 pages of its mRNA myocarditis study?!

Did the CDC redact all 148 pages of its MOVING study on myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : CDC Redacted All 148 Pages Of mRNA Myocarditis Study!

People are claiming or suggesting that the CDC released its 148-page MOVING vaccine myocarditis study with 100% of its pages redacted!

The Vigilant Fox / Vigilant News : CDC Releases Paper on Myocarditis After COVID Vaccination, and EVERY WORD Is Redacted

“148 pages. The entire thing is redacted. What good does a study do if there’s nothing there?”

There’s obviously something very damning that they’re trying to hide.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr : The level of arrogance and contempt for the public in releasing a 100% redacted document is staggering. The CDC is thumbing their nose at the Freedom of Information Act.

Without transparency, there is no such thing as democracy. When I’m President, the CDC won’t get to decide what the public can see. Everything will be out in the open, and you won’t need a FOIA request to read any taxpayer-funded data.

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

 

Truth : CDC Did Not Redact Its mRNA Myocarditis Study!

This is yet another example of fake news created or promoted by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : It Was CDC Document, Not Study

Let me start by pointing out that the 148-page “study” was not a study, but a document released by the CDC to The Epoch Times after its Freedom of Information Act request for “information about the CDC’s MOVING project”.

Even Zachary Stieber of The Epoch Times, who posted the document (PDF), did not label it as a study. He stated that it was a FOIA-released document on the CDC’s long-term study on myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination:

Seeing some confusion about this document: It’s a CDC document sent to us in response to a Freedom of Information Act request and is fully redacted. The request asked for information about the CDC’s MOVING project.

There is no indication that the documents contained any actual CDC study. So why would anyone claim that this 148-page document was a CDC myocarditis study???

Fact #2 : Document Was Redacted Under (b)(5) Privilege

Whenever a US government agency redacts a document, it has to label the redaction so the recipient has an idea why the information was redacted.

I went through the entire 148-page CDC document, and noticed that they were all redacted under the (b)(5) privilege. The (b)(5) redaction applies only to “inter-agency” or “intra-agency” letters or memorandums that “would not be available by law” to anyone except those that are “in litigation” with the agencies.

Exemption 5, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5), applies to “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency,” which has been interpreted to incorporate civil litigation privileges.

(A privilege is a legal rule that protects communications within certain relationships from compelled disclosure in a court proceeding.) 

In other words – there is nothing nefarious about the redactions, and they do not conceal any study.

The redacted pages were simply letters or memorandum that would not be made available by law, except to those who have sued the CDC, or the agency / agencies involved in those letters or memorandums.

They may, for example, contain personal information of the study participants, or other confidential information that the CDC is not permitted to release by law, except in cases of litigation.

Recommended : Is FDA Refusing To Release Vaccine Myocarditis Results?!

Fact #3 : CDC Study Was Already Published Publicly!

There is also no indication that the CDC is attempting to cover up the findings of its MOVING (Myocarditis outcomes after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination) study. After all, the CDC already published its initial study in The Lancet, on 21 September 2022more than 1.5 years ago!

Even Zachary Stieber acknowledged that, and provided the same link to the MOVING study in The Lancet. He also pointed out that the CDC told The Epoch Times in January 2024 that it planned to submit another paper with updated findings for peer review.

The CDC plans to submit another paper on updated findings from the project for peer review, a spokesperson told us in January.

To be clear – the CDC published its first study more than 1.5 years ago on the results from its MOVING project on monitoring myocarditis outcomes after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

And when its updated MOVING study paper is peer-reviewed and published, it will also be available for public consumption. What exactly is being covered up here???

Fact #4 : Most mRNA Myocarditis Cases Recovered After 90 Days

According to the CDC study that was published in September 2022, its MOVING project collected data on 519 young people who developed myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

It found that most individuals recovered from myocarditis after 90 days, with normal or back-to-baseline:

  • troponin levels : 91%
  • echocardiograms : 94%
  • electrocardiograms : 77%
  • exercise stress testing : 90%
  • ambulatory rhythm monitoring : 90%

On top of that, the study concluded that “the quality of life measures were comparable to those in pre-pandemic and early pandemic populations of a similar age“.

Recommended : SAFECOVAC : Ultra-Low Myocarditis Risk From Vaccines!

Fact #5 : There Are Many Studies On Post-Vaccination Myocarditis

Claims that the CDC is attempting to hide its data by redacting documents is also not logical, because other organisations and research teams have already published multiple studies on post-vaccination myocarditis and/or pericarditis. For example:

  • Myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination and non-COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis (link) by Ryan Ruiyang Ling et. al.
  • Myocarditis and Pericarditis after COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines (PDF) by Public Health Ontario
  • Systematic review and meta-analysis of myocarditis and pericarditis in adolescents following COVID-19 BNT162b2 vaccination (link) by Patrick D.M.C. Katoto et. al.
  • SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and Myocarditis in a Nordic Cohort Study of 23 Million Residents (link) by Øystein Karlstad et. al.
  • Clinical outcomes of myocarditis after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in four Nordic countries: population based cohort study (link) by Anders Busby et. al.

Not only are these studies publicly available, they confirm CDC findings that post-vaccination myocarditis is rare, and most patients recovered within 90 days.

Fact #6 : COVID-19 Myocarditis Is More Common

What anti-vaccine activists may not tell you is that COVID-19 is known to cause myocarditis. In fact, the CDC reported in September 2021 that COVID-19 patients have nearly 16X the risk of developing myocarditis:

During March 2020–January 2021, patients with COVID-19 had nearly 16 times the risk for myocarditis compared with patients who did not have COVID-19, and risk varied by sex and age.

The findings in this report underscore the importance of implementing evidence-based COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination, to reduce the public health impact of COVID-19 and its associated complications.

The risk of dying from COVID-19 myocarditis (13.54% of cases) is also almost 5X higher than non-COVID-19 myocarditis (2.88% of cases), according to a 2022 German study.

If you are worried about dying from myocarditis, well, you should certainly want to avoid getting a COVID-19 infection!

Recommended : Did study find Long COVID patients all received mRNA vaccine?!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Japan Study Prove Vaccinated Blood Is Dangerous?!

Did a new study from Japan prove that vaccinated blood is dangerous?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Japan Study Proves mRNA Vaccinated Blood Is Dangerous!

People are sharing links to a new study from Japan, while claiming / suggesting that it proves that mRNA vaccinated blood is dangerous, and mRNA vaccination should be stopped!

Adam Gaertner : Vaccinated blood is poisonous and contaminated.

New study from Japan 🇯🇵:

“… we call the attention of medical professionals to the various risks associated with blood transfusions using blood products derived from […] genetic vaccine recipients.”

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

 

Truth : Japan Study Did Not Prove Vaccinated Blood Is Dangerous!

This is yet another example of fake news created or promoted by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : It’s A Pre-Print Article That Was Not Peer-Reviewed

Let me start by pointing out that the paper in question is a pre-print that has not been peer-reviewed – the first step in any scientific review process!

In other words – no one should draw any conclusion from this paper, when it has not even passed pre-publication peer review, never mind post-publication verification and criticism by other scientists.

You can download and read the paper by Ueda et. al. called Concerns regarding Transfusions of Blood Products Derived from Genetic Vaccine Recipients and Proposals for Specific Measures here – PDF.

Fact #2 : It Was A Narrative Review Paper

I should also point out that the Ueda et. al. paper is just a “narrative review” or a “literature review”, which basically offers an overview of existing research, and its quality would be highly dependent on the research papers it features.

Unfortunately, it appears to feature even debunked articles like the infamous Spikeopathy paper by Peter Parry et. al., and the equally infamous AESI paper by Joseph Fraiman et. al., as well as papers by Stephanie Seneff and Peter McCullough, amongst other controversial people.

Fact #3 : Paper Does Not Prove Vaccinated Blood Is Dangerous

As far as I can tell – the paper provided no actual evidence that vaccinated blood is dangerous, especially when it relies on debunked articles (example | example). Even its title suggests that it is only listing “concerns” and not actual “proof”.

The article’s emphasis on the spike protein appears to ignore the fact that vaccine spike proteins are created on cell surfaces and vaccines do not multiply, while COVID-19 infections produce far more spike proteins because the virus multiplies, and those viral particles (and their spike proteins) can freely travel in the blood!

In addition – the spike protein isn’t exclusive to COVID-19, and is a feature of all coronaviruses, including that that cause the common flu! If such spike proteins are toxic, then practically blood from every human being (who has ever had the common flu or other coronavirus infections) would be toxic.

Recommended : Does COVID Vaccinated Blood Clot In Just 3 Minutes?!

Fact #4 : Red Cross Says Vaccinated Blood Safe For Transfusion

After recent claims that blood donors were being rejected or deferred because they were COVID-vaccinated, the American Red Cross responded that it follows FDA regulations and protocols, and that vaccinated blood are safe for transfusions.

Donations from those who have been vaccinated for COVID-19 are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as measles, mumps or influenza, the COVID-19 vaccine is designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness. The vaccine components themselves are not found within the blood stream.

Fact #5 : Blood Of Vaccinated People Is Safe For Transfusion

It isn’t just the Red Cross that claims that the blood of COVID-19 vaccinated people are safe for transfusions. Other organisations like the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies and America’s Blood Centers issued a joint statement with the American Red Cross on this very issue:

Amid ongoing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccinations and blood donation, America’s Blood Centers, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies (AABB), and the American Red Cross reiterate the safety of America’s blood supply and assure the public that vaccines do not pose a risk to patients receiving blood transfusions.

Blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine approved or authorized for use in the U.S. are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as those for measles, mumps or influenza, COVID-19 vaccines are designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness, but vaccine components themselves do not replicate through blood transfusions or alter a blood recipients’ DNA.

In summary, there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates adverse outcomes from the transfusions of blood products collected from vaccinated donors and, therefore, no medical reason to distinguish or separate blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccination.

On multiple occasions, the Food and Drug Administration has confirmed that there is no evidence to support concerns related to the safety of blood donated by vaccinated individuals.

All Americans, including both blood donors and blood recipients, should feel confident that receiving a blood transfusion is safe. COVID-19 vaccines do not replicate, and all blood donations offer the same life-saving therapeutic benefits, regardless of the vaccination status of the donor.

Recommended : Did study find Long COVID patients all received mRNA vaccine?!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Scientists Discover Alien DNA In mRNA Vaccines?!

Did Spanish scientists discover alien DNA in the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Scientists Discovered Alien DNA In mRNA Vaccines!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that Spanish scientists discovered alien DNA in the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19!

Scientists Discover ‘Alien DNA’ Hidden in Blood of Vaccinated People

Recommended : Blood Smear Video Proves Vaccinated Have Mutated?!

 

Truth : Scientists Did Not Discover Alien DNA In mRNA Vaccines!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : They Are Old Claims From 2021/2022

Let me start by pointing out that The People’s Voice did not provide any link to shocking study by Ricardo Delgado from Project La Quinta in Spain. However, we know this isn’t new, because the Project La Quinta report only has two reports on the mRNA vaccines.

  • an interim report that Professor Dr. Campra Madrid issued on 28 June 2021, while the final report was issued on 2 November 2021.
  • a report by Ricardo Delgado Martín posted on 14 January 2022.

So why is The People’s Voice promoting a story that appears to be more than 2 years old??? Why didn’t it point out that this is a really old story???

Fact #2 : Reports Said Nothing About Alien DNA / Eggs

The People’s Voice article claimed that Ricardo Delgado and his team found alien DNA hidden in the blood of vaccinated people and/or eggs hatching when the Pfizer mRNA vaccine is placed in a reptile incubator.

That’s utter nonsense, because both reports did not mention anything about alien DNA and/or eggs hatching. They only claimed to have found graphene and/or possible microtechnology in the Pfizer vaccine.

Fact #3 : Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Don’t Contain Alien DNA / Eggs

To be clear – there is no evidence the Pfizer mRNA vaccine contains alien DNA or eggs of any kind, unless they were somehow introduced as contaminants, or sabotage.

In fact, neither Ricardo Delgado Martin, not Professor Dr. Pablo Campra Madrid, found alien DNA in the blood of vaccinated people, or alien or reptilian eggs hatching in the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

They appeared to have only performed optical microscopy of what they claimed were Pfizer mRNA vaccine samples, with or without a Raman spectrometer. Such methods cannot prove the existence of graphene oxide, alien DNA, or alien eggs.

Even Campra Madrid himself acknowledged in his report that the “microscope doesn’t provide conclusive evidence” and that the analysis was based on “a single, limited sample” of unknown origin and traceability.

Recommended : Does COVID Vaccinated Blood Clot In Just 3 Minutes?!

Fact #4 : University of Almería Disavowed Report

The People’s Voice article claimed that “scientists at an elite research unit in Spain” made the discovery. Well, it appears to be only one scientist – Pablo Campra Madrid, a professor of the University of Almería (UAL).

However, Campra Madrid stated that the report was not issued on behalf of the University of Almería (UAL) – in Page 23 of the interim report. Fortunately too, because his university disavowed his report.

On 2 July 2021 – more than 2.5 years ago! – the University of Almería issued a statement on X (formerly Twitter), describing it as an “unofficial report by a university professor about an analysis of a sample of unknown origin with a total lack of traceability“. It also said that it was a “report that this university neither subscribes to nor shares, as the report itself warns.

Fact #5 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Why Dr. Vicky Jennings Did Not Die Suddenly From Vaccine!

Find out why Dr. Vicky Jennings – a fully-vaccinated trauma surgeon, did not die suddenly from the COVID-19 vaccine!

 

Claim : Dr. Vicky Jennings Died Suddenly From Vaccine Heart Attack!

Right after news broke that Dr. Vicky Jennings died suddenly, some people immediately claimed or suggested that the South African trauma surgeon suffered a heart attack caused by the COVID-19 vaccine!

Erin Elizabeth Health Nut News : Vicki was a trauma surgeon & bikini model who mocked “anti vaxxers” liked us. She was extremely young and reportedly healthy when she #DiedSuddenly of a reported #HeartAttack

Recommended : Does COVID Vaccinated Blood Clot In Just 3 Minutes?!

 

Truth : Dr. Vicky Jennings Did Not Die From Vaccine / Heart Attack!

This is yet another example of fake news created or promoted by anti-vaccine activists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Dr. Vicky Jennings Died After Celebrating Her Birthday

Let me start by giving you a summary of what led to Dr. Vicky Jennings’ sudden death on Sunday, 3 March 2024.

The night earlier, Dr. Vicky Jennings and her boyfriend went out to celebrate her 45th birthday. They had dinner and stayed overnight at a hotel. At 2 AM, when her boyfriend wanted to give her his birthday present, he could not wake her up.

Dr. Vicky Jennings’ death was officially announced by Netcare Limited – the South African hospital network at where she worked.

Dr Vicky Jennings was the embodiment of selfless, caring and committed service, dedicating her life as a surgeon to her patients in the public and private sector.

Dr Jennings was the clinical lead in trauma surgery at Netcare Milpark Hospital and the Netcare Milpark Academic Trauma Centre. She also worked as the Deputy Head of Trauma Surgery at Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital.

She loved her work and what she described as her privileged life, often praising her colleagues, patients, friends and loved ones for making her journey an extraordinary one. She will forever hold a place in our hearts and memories.

Dr. Vicky Jennings was 45 years old when she died. Not 43 years old, as claimed by some people.

Recommended : Did British Study Confirm 1 Billion People Now Have VAIDS?!

Fact #2 : Dr. Vicky Jennings’ Cause Of Death Was Not Publicly Revealed

Netcare never revealed her cause of death as a heart attack. So it is odd that so many people are claiming that Dr. Vicky Jennings died from a heart attack, with some even attributing it to Netcare!

Dr. Jennings’ family also did not publicly reveal her cause of death. Even her mother-in-law, Geraldine Gilbert, only stated what a shock it was. She too did not reveal her cause of death, never mind blame it on the COVID-19 vaccines!

Thank you Val for those sweet words.💔 Such a shock to the system!

So why would anyone claim that she died from a heart attack caused by the COVID-19 vaccine??? Where is the evidence???

Fact #3 : Dr. Vicky Jennings Did Not Die From Vaccine / Heart Attack

Dr. Vicky Jennings was fully-vaccinated against COVID-19, like most responsible doctors and healthcare workers. However, she did not die from the COVID-19 vaccine, or even a normal heart attack.

I know this because I reached out to a close family friend who revealed that an autopsy was conducted on Dr. Vicky Jennings. The autopsy and toxicology test reports have determined that Dr. Vicky Jennings did not die from a heart attack, and her death was not vaccine-related.

Her grieving family does not wish to publicly reveal her official cause of death, and I can understand why. All I can publicly confirm, with the help of this close family friend, is that Dr. Vicky Jennings died from an unrelated cause of death that had nothing to do with a heart attack, or the COVID-19 vaccine.

I should point out that none of those who claimed that Dr. Vicky Jennings died from a heart attack caused by the COVID-19 vaccine have ever offered any evidence, or even bothered to find out what really happened.

If, and when, her family decides to publicly reveal her cause of death, you will see that Dr. Vicky Jennings indeed did not die suddenly from a heart attack, or the COVID-19 vaccines. Until then, please respect their wish for privacy.

Recommended : Thomas Kingston : Cause Of Death Was Not Vaccine SADS!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did British Study Confirm 1 Billion People Now Have VAIDS?!

Did a British study confirm that over 1 billion people now have VAIDS from the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : British Study Confirmed 1 Billion People Now Have VAIDS!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed that a British study confirmed that over 1 billion people now have VAIDS (Vaccine Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) from the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine!

British Gov’t Bombshell: ‘One Billion Vaccinated People Now Have VAIDS’

Recommended : Did Study Show COVID Vaccines Cause VAIDS In Children?!

 

Truth : British Study Did Not Confirm 1 Billion People Have VAIDS!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Vaccine AIDS Does Not Exist

Let me start by pointing out that there is no medical disease called Vaccine AIDS or VAIDS – Vaccine-Induced Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome. It appears to be something made-up by anti-vaccination activists to scare people.

AIDS is caused by the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). Nothing else causes AIDS. Certainly no vaccine, not even the COVID-19 vaccine, causes AIDS.

Robert Charles Gallo – one of the two scientists who independently discovered that the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) was responsible for AIDS, said in response to the 2021 claim by Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro that COVID-19 vaccines cause AIDS:

[I]t’s hard to believe anyone would claim that the covid-19 vaccine causes AIDS. We know what causes AIDS.

I don’t know what your president said. So I don’t want to be too critical. But it is obvious that neither the covid-19 vaccine nor any other vaccine causes AIDS.

Fact #2 : British Study Does Not Even Mention VAIDS!

Curiously, The People’s Voice article does not link to the British study (N1-methylpseudouridylation of mRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting), which you can read here.

Perhaps it’s because anyone who even skims through the study will quickly realise that it does not mention anything about VAIDS (Vaccine-Induced Acquired Immunity Deficiency Syndrome). That’s not a surprise because VAIDS does not even exist!

So why would anyone claim that this study showed that mRNA vaccines cause Vaccine AIDS or VAIDS?!

Recommended : Majority Of Long COVID Patients Were Vaccinated?!

Fact #3 : Study Did Not Say 25% Of Vaccinated Are Now Suffering

The People’s Voice article claimed that the British scientists said that “at least 25% of the fully vaxxed population are now suffering extreme immune responses to the toxic chemicals found in the Covid shots”.

That’s not true – the British researchers did not say that 25% of vaccinated people are now suffering from extreme immune responses to the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

For one thing – it was ⅓, not 25% of the 21 vaccinated people in the study who developed “off-target proteins” caused by ‘slips’ along the mRNA sequence. On top of that, the researchers clearly pointed out that those “off-target proteins” did not produce any ill effects:

In collaboration with researchers at the Universities of Kent, Oxford and Liverpool, the MRC Toxicology Unit team tested for evidence of the production of ‘off-target’ proteins in people who received the mRNA Pfizer vaccine against COVID-19.

They found an unintended immune response occurred in one third of the 21 patients in the study who were vaccinated – but with no ill-effects, in keeping with the extensive safety data available on these COVID-19 vaccines.

To be clear – the British study did not conclude that any vaccinated person was harmed by the “off-target proteins” that can be produced by the current Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

Fact #4 : No Evidence mRNA Vaccines Cause Altered Cytokine Response

The People’s Voice article referred to another study which supposedly showed that a “sharp decrease in immunity following vaccination is caused by altered cytokine response“. That is not true either.

I actually wrote about that study, and what anti-vaccine activists have been writing about it in a separate article, Did Study Show COVID Vaccines Cause VAIDS In Children?!

Here’s the gist – the study also did not mention anything about VAIDS, and was only conducted on blood samples. The children participating in that study did not report any side effect or disease from their COVID-19 vaccinations.

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

Fact #5 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did study find Long COVID patients all received mRNA vaccine?!

Did a new study find that Long COVID patients all received the mRNA vaccine for COVID-19?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Study Found Long COVID Patients All Received mRNA Vaccine!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that a new study found that Long COVID patients all received the mRNA vaccine for COVID-19!

Official Study Finds All Patients With Long COVID Had Received mRNA Vaccine

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Increase Risk Of Long COVID?!

 

Truth : Study Did Not Find Long COVID Patients All Received mRNA Vaccine!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : mRNA Vaccines Were Not Mentioned In Study

Let me start by pointing out that the study in question never even mentioned mRNA vaccines. In fact, the word “mRNA” does not appear in the paper at all!

You can read the paper in full, and look for yourself – Long-COVID Prevalence and Its Association with Health Outcomes in the Post-Vaccine and Antiviral-Availability Era by Ramida Jangnin et. al.

So why would anyone claim that this study showed that all patients with Long COVID received the mRNA vaccine???

Fact #2 : Thailand Used A Mix Of Vaccines

On top of that, Thailand uses a mix of COVID-19 vaccines – a majority of which were the Oxford-AstraZeneca, and CoronaVac vaccines, both of which are not mRNA vaccines.

So it is more likely that not that the majority of patients in that study did not receive the mRNA vaccine.

Fact #3 : It Was An Observational Study By Telephone

I should also point out that it was an observational study. Observational studies like this cannot prove causality. Perhaps that’s why the study authors themselves pointed out that further prospective research is needed to establish any causality.

However, given the observational nature of our study, further prospective research is needed to establish causal relationships, and longitudinal studies are advised to track the evolution of long-COVID symptoms over time. 

To be clear – you cannot use observational studies like this as evidence of causality. This study does not show that COVID-19 vaccines cannot prevent Long COVID. Neither does it show that COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of Long COVID.

You can read more about this in my earlier fact checking of The Epoch Health’s article on the same study.

Recommended : Majority Of Long COVID Patients Were Vaccinated?!

Fact #4 : Study Did Not Look At Vaccine Effect On Long COVID

I should also point out that this Thai study was not actually designed to look at the effect of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination on Long COVID.

Not only did it not have a control group of unvaccinated people, almost all of its participants received both COVID-19 vaccinations and antiviral treatment!

In fact, the study did not mention whether anyone was unvaccinated. So it is highly likely that all its participants were at least either fully-vaccinated, or had antiviral treatment!

The cohort consisted of 390 participants… Among them, 96.7% (n = 377) were vaccinated, and 98.2% (n = 383) underwent antiviral treatment.

So how do we know if the Long COVID was caused by the COVID-19 infection itself, the COVID-19 vaccines, or the antiviral treatment? We don’t, because this observational study was never designed to elicit such information in the first place!

Fact #5 : Almost All Study Participants Were Vaccinated!

I should stress yet again, that almost all of the participants (94.8%) in this Thai study were fully vaccinated:

  • 40.5% received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, while
  • 54.3% received two doses, and a booster dose.

This is important because such a study would inevitably show that people who were vaccinated can suffer from Long COVID. That doesn’t mean that the vaccines cause Long COVID.

If the same study was conducted on only male patients, it would show that only men had Long COVID. Would that mean that only men get Long COVID? Of course, not. That is only the perception that you may get if the study was conducted on only men.

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

Fact #6 : Studies Do Not Link Long COVID To Vaccines

The People’s Voice article included a list of studies it claimed or suggested show a link between Long COVID and mRNA (or other types of COVID-19) vaccines. That’s not accurate:

The February 2024 report by the CDC did not link Long COVID to vaccination. In fact, the CDC report pointed out that “information about COVID-19 vaccination … is not included in this report“.

The February 2023 study published in the Journal of Medical Virology only looked at levels of spike proteins and viral RNA in COVID-19 patients. It did not mention anything about vaccines, or link Long COVID to vaccination.

The August 2023 study published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases only showed that that the risk of Long COVID was higher with the wild-type SARS-CoV-2, compared to the Alpha, Delta and Omicron variants. It did not show a link between COVID-19 vaccines and Long COVID.

The 2023 study in the European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences only identified viral spike protein in one COVID-19 patient, and vaccine spike protein in two patients after COVID-19 vaccination, out of 81 Long COVID patients. It did not show a link between the Long COVID and vaccination.

The December 2022 study in PLoS One did not conclude that receiving COVID-19 vaccines was a predictor of long COVID, calling it “an observational paradox” and a “collider bias” due to their study only looking at patients who received hospital care. I wrote an extensive article on this earlier, after The Epoch Times (again?!) covered it as “a new study“.

Recommended : Are Vaccinated People Developing Full Blown AIDS?!

Fact #7 : Studies Have Shown Vaccines Reduce Long COVID Risk

Many prior studies, involving millions of people – both vaccinated and unvaccinated, have concluded that COVID-19 vaccines reduce the risk of Long COVID.

A March 2024 study published in The Lancet, involving over 20 million people in the UK, Spain and Estonia, concluded that “vaccination against COVID-19 consistently reduced the risk of long COVID symptoms, which highlights the importance of vaccination to prevent persistent COVID-19 symptoms, particularly in adults“.

A February 2024 study published in Nature Communications, involving 1.1 million patients in Hong Kong, provided “real-world evidence supporting the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in reducing the risk of long-term health consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its persistence following infection“.

A March 2023 meta-analysis of 17 different studies on the effects of vaccines on Long COVID concluded that:

The evidence presented herein recommends SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for the prevention of long COVID in breakthrough cases. Furthermore, evidence does not support that SARS-CoV-2 vaccination exacerbates long COVID symptoms. Thus, most patients with long COVID should be vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2.

As you can see – much larger studies have already shown that COVID-19 vaccines not only do not increase the risk of Long COVID, getting vaccinated will actually reduce your risk of getting Long COVID should you get infected.

Hence, it is no surprise that the US CDC has pointed out that “Vaccination offers protection against the prolonged effects of #COVID19“.

Recommended : Did France Pass Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines?!

Fact #8 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Does FDA Document Prove COVID Vaccine Shedding Is Real?!

Did an FDA document just prove that COVID-19 vaccine shedding is real?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : FDA Doc Proves COVID Vaccine Shedding Is Real!

People are sharing articles (archive | archive) by Natural News and Infowars, which claimed or suggested that an FDA document just proved that COVID-19 vaccine shedding is real!

Here is an excerpt from those articles. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

PROOF: Documents from FDA, Pfizer show that COVID “vaccine” shedding is REAL

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

Truth : FDA Doc Does Not Prove COVID Vaccine Shedding Is Real!

This is yet another example of anti-vaccine fake news, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : The FDA Document Is From 2015

Let me start by pointing out that the FDA document in question is almost 9 years old, being originally published in August 2015.

In other words –  it was published 4 years before the COVID-19 pandemic, and 5 years before the first COVID-19 vaccines were approved.

Fact #2 : FDA Document Does Not Apply To COVID-19 Vaccines!

The FDA document was an industry guidance paper (PDF) called Design and Analysis of Shedding Studies for Virus or Bacteria-based Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products.

The title itself is clear – it only refers to “Virus or Bacteria-based Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products“.

COVID-19 vaccines are not gene therapy (gene modification) products, and they are not oncolytic (cancer killing) products either. So the FDA document does not apply to them!

Fact #3 : Shedding Only Occurs With Live Attenuated Virus Vaccines

Vaccine shedding actually refers to viral shedding, which can only (potentially) occur with live attenuated virus vaccines. Such vaccines alters the virus to make it weakened or even harmless, but still “live”.

There are no COVID-19 vaccines that are based on the live attenuated SARS-CoV-2 virus. Therefore, vaccine shedding cannot possibly occur with any COVID-19 vaccine currently-approved by the WHO.

All currently-approved COVID-19 vaccines are based on other vaccine technologies like inactivated virus (killed virus), viral vector (using a different virus), mRNA (using mRNA instructions), or subunit vaccines (using isolated viral proteins).

To be clear – mRNA vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, highlighted in the Natural News and Infowars articles, do not cause vaccine shedding.

Recommended : Did McDonald’s Lose Toxic Meat Legal Battle With Jamie Oliver?!

Fact #4 : Viruses Multiply, Vaccines Won’t

I should also point out that if the spike protein is so dangerous, then it is even more important to get vaccinated against COVID-19. After all, viruses multiply, while the vaccines won’t!

Even if we simply look at the mRNA vaccines alone, they contain a limited number of mRNA instructions that encode for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The mRNA instructions enter a limited number of cells, which then produce and display those spike proteins on their surfaces, to trigger our immune system.

If you are infected by the actual SARS-CoV-2 virus though, it quickly hijacks your cells to produce millions of copies – each covered with spike proteins, which then infect even more cells, in an ever-expanding chain reaction.

Until your immune system learns to stop and defeat the SARS-CoV-2 virus, it will keep producing millions and millions of viruses that will circulate through your body, delivering those nasty spike proteins everywhere.

So if you are really worried about the spike protein, you should really get vaccinated against COVID-19!

Fact #5 : Natural News Is Known For Fake News

Natural News is a far-right, anti-vaccination conspiracy theory and fake news website that is known for publishing / promoting pseudoscience, disinformation, and far-right extremism.

Writing in the journal Vaccine, Anna Kata identified Natural News as one of numerous websites spreading “irresponsible health information”. According to John Banks, Natural News founder Mike Adams uses “pseudoscience to sell his lies” and is “seen as generally a quack and a shill by science bloggers.”

Dr. David Gorski called Natural News “one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery on the Internet,” and the most “blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery and paranoid anti-physician and anti-medicine conspiracy theories anywhere on the Internet”.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from Natural News.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Cureus Retracts “Peer-Reviewed” COVID-19 Vaccines Paper!

It took them a while, but Cureus finally retracted the controversial “peer-reviewed” article on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines!

Take a look at the controversial article, and find out what Cureus decided to retract it!

 

Cureus Publishes Controversial COVID-19 Vaccines Paper!

Anti-vaccine activists have been excitedly sharing what they call a “peer-reviewed” paper on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, while calling for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to be removed.

The paper in question is called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. which includes anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Unfortunately, it received a patina of legitimacy when it was published in the journal Cureus, with anti-vaccine activists gleefully pointing out that it was a “peer-reviewed” paper.

What many people don’t realise is that Cureus uses “an unusually fast” peer-review process of just “a few days”, and relies heavily on “post-publication peer review”, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication. All that “post-publication” criticism appear to have resulted in its decision to (finally) retract this controversial article.

Recommended : COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned Fact Check!

 

Cureus Finally Retracts “Peer-Reviewed” COVID-19 Vaccines Paper!

On 19 February 2024, one of the article’s co-authors – Steve Kirsch, revealed (archive) that Cureus has decided to retract the article, citing a number of concerns.

Dear authors, 

I hope this email finds you well. I write regarding your article recently published in Cureus entitled, ‘COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign’.

The list of concerns in the Cureus letter is frankly, too short. In my earlier article, I already listed a number of other concerns with the article:

  • unsubstantiated claims that the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials were too short
  • unsubstantiated claims that mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 were not proven safe or effective
  • misleading emphasis on absolute risk (AR) versus relative risk (RR) in understanding vaccine efficacy
  • misleading emphasis on unverified adverse events that were reported after vaccination.
  • unsubstantiated claims that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”

In any case, Cureus officially retracted this “peer-reviewed” article on 26 February 2024, with this statement:

The Editors-in-Chief have retracted this article. Following publication, concerns were raised regarding a number of claims made in this article. Upon further review, the Editors-in-Chief found that the conclusions of this narrative review are considered to be unreliable due to the concerns with the validity of some of the cited references that support the conclusions and a misrepresentation of the cited references and available data.

The authors disagree with this retraction.

One can’t help but wonder if this incident might persuade Cureus to spend a wee bit more time and effort on its peer-review process… or better still, don’t allow such articles to be labelled as “peer-reviewed” until they have at least passed proper, legitimate peer-review.

You can read more about those claims in my fact check article – COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned Fact Check!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Why Red Cross Don’t Separate COVID Vaccinated Blood!

Some people are now making a fuss about the Red Cross not separating COVID-19 vaccinated blood, from unvaccinated blood.

Find out why the Red Cross is not separating donated blood based on the donor’s COVID-19 vaccination status!

 

Red Cross Does Not Separate COVID Vaccinated Blood!

People are sharing an audio clip of a Red Cross official telling an “undercover journalist” that they do not separate donated blood based on the donor’s COVID-19 vaccination status.

Cue the (feigned?) shock, horror and outrage on social media…

Steven Crowder : BREAKING: @RedCross official tells undercover journalist they DO NOT SEPARATE donated blood based on COVID-19 vaccination status; ADMITS unvaccinated recipients can UNWITTINGLY RECEIVE blood from vaccinated donors

THIS. IS. INSANE.

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

 

Why Red Cross Don’t Separate COVID Vaccinated Blood!

This is yet another example of fake news circulating on X (formerly Twitter), and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : This Is Old News

Let me start by pointing out that the fact that the Red Cross does not separate donated blood based on the donor’s COVID-19 vaccination status is not “breaking news”. It’s actually old news.

The Red Cross has stated that it does not label or separate blood products according to the donor’s COVID-19 vaccination status since September 2022, if not earlier.

14 September 2022 : We don’t label blood products as containing vaccinated or unvaccinated blood as the COVID-19 vaccine does not enter the bloodstream & poses no safety risks to the recipient. If you have safety concerns about potential blood transfusions, please speak with your medical care team

4 January 2023 : Blood products aren’t labeled with the donor’s vaccination status & there’s no scientific evidence that the vaccine enters the bloodstream.

You don’t need to be an “undercover journalist”, or even attempt to “trick” any Red Cross official into revealing what has already been openly stated for more than 1.5 years now.

Just because someone is ignorant about old news does not make this breaking news. What next will these Johnnys-come-lately reveal next? That vaccines must evolve to adapt to new COVID-19 variants???

Recommended : Did WEF Pass Law To Criminalise Criticism Of mRNA?!

Fact #2 : Red Cross Says Vaccinated Blood Safe For Transfusion

After recent claims that blood donors were being rejected or deferred because they were COVID-vaccinated, the American Red Cross responded that it follows FDA regulations and protocols, and that vaccinated blood are safe for transfusions.

The safety of blood donors and the recipients who receive donated blood is our top priority. The Red Cross, like all blood collectors in the U.S., follows FDA regulations and protocols. This includes guidance related to those who receive vaccinations such as the COVID-19 vaccine.

Individuals can donate blood after getting an FDA approved COVID-19 vaccine as long as they are feeling well and symptom free at the time of donation. Those who have received a COVID-19 vaccine are asked to provide the name of the manufacturer to ensure it is an FDA approved vaccine. If the donor can not remember the name of the manufacturer, they are asked to wait two weeks from their vaccination to give blood.

Donations from those who have been vaccinated for COVID-19 are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as measles, mumps or influenza, the COVID-19 vaccine is designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness. The vaccine components themselves are not found within the blood stream.

Let me just repeat this – blood products from COVID-vaccinated donors are safe for transfusion. Hence, there is no need to separate them based on the donor’s COVID-vaccination status, just like how blood products are not separated based on whether their donors received the measles, mumps, or influenza vaccines.

Fact #3 : Red Cross Is Not Obligated To Cater To Your Preferences

Donated blood products are meant to save lives. Organisations that receive and process blood products have to comply with regulations, and best practices. These are not trivial products that for-profit companies can cater to the whims and fancies of the consumer.

Hence, Red Cross and other similar blood organisations are not obligated to cater to anyone’s preferences of “unvaccinated” blood. If you wish to receive only “unvaccinated blood”, then you will have to donate and store your own blood, or have an unvaccinated friend or relative donate their blood for you to use.

Go ahead, and knock yourself out. Just don’t insist that organisations like the American Red Cross must cater to your whims and fancies.

Recommended : Did Pfizer Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History?!

Fact #4 : Blood Of Vaccinated People Is Safe For Transfusions

It isn’t just the Red Cross that claims that the blood of COVID-19 vaccinated people are safe for transfusions. Other organisations like the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies and America’s Blood Centers issued a joint statement with the American Red Cross on this very issue:

The following statement has been issued by AABB, America’s Blood Centers and the American Red Cross regarding misinformation concerning COVID-19 vaccines and blood donations:

Amid ongoing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccinations and blood donation, America’s Blood Centers, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies (AABB), and the American Red Cross reiterate the safety of America’s blood supply and assure the public that vaccines do not pose a risk to patients receiving blood transfusions.

Blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine approved or authorized for use in the U.S. are safe for transfusion. Similar to other vaccines such as those for measles, mumps or influenza, COVID-19 vaccines are designed to generate an immune response to help protect an individual from illness, but vaccine components themselves do not replicate through blood transfusions or alter a blood recipients’ DNA.

In summary, there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates adverse outcomes from the transfusions of blood products collected from vaccinated donors and, therefore, no medical reason to distinguish or separate blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccination.

All blood collection organizations in the U.S. are required to follow Food and Drug Administration guidelines and regulations to collect, process and distribute blood products for patients in need. The FDA explicitly allows donors who have recently received approved or authorized COVID-19 vaccines to give blood as long as they are healthy on the day of donation and meet all other eligibility criteria. On multiple occasions, the Food and Drug Administration has confirmed that there is no evidence to support concerns related to the safety of blood donated by vaccinated individuals.

All Americans, including both blood donors and blood recipients, should feel confident that receiving a blood transfusion is safe. COVID-19 vaccines do not replicate, and all blood donations offer the same life-saving therapeutic benefits, regardless of the vaccination status of the donor.

You will also note that this statement was issued on 27 January 2023, which makes it old news too… Will this statement now become “breaking news” too? I certainly hope not…

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Red Cross begins deferring COVID-vaccinated blood donors?!

Did the American Red Cross just begin to defer blood donors who had the COVID-19 vaccine?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Red Cross Begins Deferring COVID-Vaccinated Blood Donors!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that the WHO Director-General just order governments to eliminate independent media, before the arrival of Disease X!

American Red Cross Begins Deferring Blood Donors Who Had Covid Vaccine

Recommended : Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

 

Truth : Red Cross Did Not Begin Deferring COVID-Vaccinated Blood Donors!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Red Cross Deferment Isn’t New

Let me start by pointing out that this deferment by the American Red Cross isn’t new. It actually dates back to at least 28 July 2021 (archive), which is more than 2.5 years ago!

Q: Are individuals who received a COVID-19 vaccine eligible to give blood, platelets and plasma?

A: Yes, you can donate blood after getting a COVID-19 vaccine, as long as you are symptom-free and feeling well at the time of the donation. Please come prepared to share the manufacturer name of the vaccine you received. If you do not know the name of the vaccine manufacturer, we request you wait two weeks to donate after vaccination, out of precaution.

The fact that some people are only realising this now isn’t shocking. What’s shocking is that some people would actually claim that the Red Cross is only “now” asking blood donors if they ever received the COVID-19 vaccine.

Fact #2 : Red Cross Has No Problem With mRNA Vaccines

The People’s Voice article claimed or suggested that the American Red Cross if asking blood donors if “they ever received the Covid mRNA vaccine“. That’s not true.

The American Red Cross only asks that if you received the COVID-19 vaccine to share “the manufacturer name” to determine if you need to “wait two weeks… after vaccination” to donate your blood.

In fact, the American Red Cross specifically pointed out that donors who received mRNA-based vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna do not need to wait to donate their blood.

There is no deferral time for eligible blood donors who are vaccinated with an inactivated or RNA based COVID-19 vaccine manufactured by AstraZeneca, Janssen/J&J, Moderna, Novavax, or Pfizer.

To be clear – the American Red Cross has never said that mRNA vaccines were dangerous, and donors who received it would need to defer giving blood.

Recommended : Is Bill Gates Planning To Kill Billions Using Turbo AIDS?!

Fact #3 : Red Cross Only Wants To Defer Live Attenuated Vaccine

The truth is Red Cross is only asking blood donors who received a “live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine” to wait two weeks before giving blood.

But guess what – no live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine has ever been approved anywhere in the world, as of 21 February 2024!

It appears that the Red Cross initiated this decision as far back as July 2021, out of an abundance of caution – because some donors may be a participant in a clinical trial involving a live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine, and kept it as a forward-looking requirement, when such COVID-19 vaccine is ever approved.

Eligible blood donors who received a live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine or do not know what type of COVID-19 vaccine they received must wait two weeks before giving blood.

Even that deferral isn’t set in stone, as it appears that the Red Cross will still accept blood donations from donors who are “symptom free and feeling well at the time of donation”:

In most cases, there is no deferral time for individuals who received a COVID-19 vaccine as long as they are symptom free and feeling well at the time of donation.

Recommended : Did Autopsies Show COVID-19 Vaccines Caused Deaths?!

Fact #5 : Red Cross Is Helping To Vaccinated People

Interestingly, the American Red Cross points out that while they are not a healthcare provider that administers COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States, its teams are helping to vaccinated US service members overseas!

The Red Cross, as an organization, is not a healthcare provider and is not administering COVID-19 vaccinations in the U.S. However, Red Cross volunteers who are medical professionals may work with local authorities to help give vaccinations if their state licenses permit them to do so. In addition, Red Cross teams are currently helping to vaccinate U.S. service members on bases around the world.

Yet again, it shows that the Red Cross does not have an issue with COVID-19 vaccinations. So why would anyone suggest otherwise???

Fact #6 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Is Red Cross Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood?!

Is the American Red Cross rejecting blood from people who were vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines?!

Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Red Cross May Be Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood!

Some people are claiming or suggesting on X (formerly Twitter) that Red Cross may be rejecting blood from people who were vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines!

Alex Jones : COVID Vaxxed May Be Ineligible To Give Blood, Says Red Cross

Recommended : Did WEF Pass Law To Criminalise Criticism Of mRNA?!

 

Truth : Red Cross Is Not Rejecting COVID Vaccinated Blood!

This is yet another example of fake news circulating on X (formerly Twitter), and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : This Eligibility Requirement Isn’t New

Let me start by pointing out that this eligibility requirement isn’t new. The American Red Cross posted about this in a Q&A (archive) on 28 July 2021. That’s 2.5 years ago!

The fact that some people are only realising this now isn’t shocking. What’s shocking is that they are actually making a fuss about it.

Fact #2 : Red Cross Isn’t Rejecting Any COVID Vaccinated Blood

I should also point out that the American Red Cross has not, and is not, rejecting any blood from people who were vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine.

This was stated clearly in their July 2021 Q&A on COVID-19 vaccines and blood, platelet, or plasma donation eligibility.

Q: Are individuals who received a COVID-19 vaccine eligible to give blood, platelets and plasma?

A: Yes, you can donate blood after getting a COVID-19 vaccine, as long as you are symptom-free and feeling well at the time of the donation. Please come prepared to share the manufacturer name of the vaccine you received. If you do not know the name of the vaccine manufacturer, we request you wait two weeks to donate after vaccination, out of precaution.

Recommended : Did Alexei Navalny Die Suddenly From Vaccine SADS?!

Fact #3 : Red Cross Only Defers Some Blood Donations

The truth is Red Cross is only asking blood donors who received a “live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine” to wait two weeks before giving blood.

But guess what – no live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine has ever been approved anywhere in the world, as of 21 February 2024!

It appears that the Red Cross initiated this decision as far back as July 2021, out of an abundance of caution – because some donors may be a participant in a clinical trial involving a live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine, and kept it as a forward-looking requirement, when such COVID-19 vaccine is ever approved.

Eligible blood donors who received a live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine or do not know what type of COVID-19 vaccine they received must wait two weeks before giving blood.

Even that deferral isn’t set in stone, as it appears that the Red Cross will still accept blood donations from donors who are “symptom free and feeling well at the time of donation”:

In most cases, there is no deferral time for individuals who received a COVID-19 vaccine as long as they are symptom free and feeling well at the time of donation.

Recommended : Did Pfizer Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History?!

Fact #4 : There’s No Deferral For Inactivated / RNA / mRNA Vaccines

In any case, all of the approved COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, and the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines, do not require any deferral, because they are based on the inactivated or RNA and mRNA vaccine technologies:

There is no deferral time for eligible blood donors who are vaccinated with an inactivated or RNA based COVID-19 vaccine manufactured by AstraZeneca, Janssen/J&J, Moderna, Novavax, or Pfizer.

So why would anyone throw a (pretend?) hissy fit about something that has zero effect on blood donors in the United States?

Fact #6 : Red Cross Is Helping To Vaccinated People

Interestingly, the American Red Cross points out that while they are not a healthcare provider that administers COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States, its teams are helping to vaccinated US service members overseas!

The Red Cross, as an organization, is not a healthcare provider and is not administering COVID-19 vaccinations in the U.S. However, Red Cross volunteers who are medical professionals may work with local authorities to help give vaccinations if their state licenses permit them to do so. In addition, Red Cross teams are currently helping to vaccinate U.S. service members on bases around the world.

Yet again, it shows that the Red Cross does not have an issue with COVID-19 vaccinations. So why would anyone suggest otherwise???

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did WEF Pass Law To Criminalise Criticism Of mRNA?!

Did the WEF just pass a new law to criminalise criticism of mRNA technology?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : WEF Passed Law To Criminalise Criticism Of mRNA!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that France just passed a new law to jail people for opposing mRNA vaccines!

Here is an excerpt of the long and (intentionally?) rambling article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

WEF Passes New Law To Criminalize Criticism of mRNA

Recommended : Did France Pass Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines?!

 

Truth : WEF Did Not Pass Law To Criminalise Criticism Of mRNA!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : WEF Cannot Pass Any Law

Let me just start by pointing out that the World Economic Forum (WEF) cannot pass any law in any country. It is merely an international non-governmental organisation (NGO) that focuses on public-private sector collaboration.

The WEF has no power over world leaders, beyond its lobbying and influencing efforts. The WEF may be an influential lobbying organisation, but it cannot pass laws in any country.

Fact #2 : Only French National Assembly Passed Article 4

The controversial bill that has gotten anti-vaccine activists so riled up is called The Bill To Strengthen The Fight Against Sectarian Excesses And Improve The Support Of Victims. You can read the bill as it was presented to the Senate on 15 November 2023.

What particularly incensed them was Article 4 of that bill, which many are calling “Article Pfizer“. It failed the first vote on Tuesday, 13 February, but passed in the National Assembly with a vote of 116 to 108 on Wednesday, 14 February 2024.

To be clear – Article 4 was not passed by the French government, but by the National Assembly of the French Parliament. The full bill, which is not yet the law, was also passed by the National Assembly, and not the WEF, or the French government.

Fact #3 : WEF Screenshot Is Fake

The cover image used by The People’s Voice article has a screenshot which purportedly shows the World Economic Forum (WEF) posting on X (formerly Twitter) that:

mRNA deniers are dangerous – and must be imprisoned!

That is most definitely a fake screenshot, because there is no such post on X by the World Economic Forum. Yet again, The People’s Voice article provided no evidence that such a post ever existed, or that the WEF just passed a law to criminalise criticism of mRNA technology.

Recommended : Has Canada Begun Euthanising Vaccine-Injured Citizens?!

Fact #4 : French Bill Does Not Involve mRNA Vaccines

Regardless of what one may think of the new French bill or its Article 4, it does not have anything to do with the criticism of mRNA vaccines in France.

To the best of my knowledge – mRNA vaccines were not even mentioned once in the entire bill, or Article 4 itself! In fact, none of those who claimed that mRNA vaccines are involved ever provided any evidence they were mentioned in the bill!

If that’s true, you have to wonder – why do some people claim that the French bill, or its Article 4, would imprison anyone who criticises or refuses to accept mRNA vaccines???

Fact #5 : Article 4 Targets Health Disinformation

As the La Chaîne parlementaire (LCP) explained, Article 4 of the bill made it a crime to incite the “abandonment of care” in France.

Specifically dedicated to therapeutic-type excesses, this Article 4 creates a new crime aimed at punishing “the provocation to abandon or refrain from following medical-therapeutic or prophylactic treatment“, as well as “the provocation to adopt practices presented as having a therapeutic or prophylactic purpose“, when these incentives may be “particularly serious” for physical or mental health.

In other words – Article 4 of this French bill makes it a crime to convince or encourage people not to accept reasonable medical treatment or prophylactic treatments (like vaccines), or to undertake treatments that can cause serious physical or mental harm.

Why would anyone want to continue letting unscrupulous people promote fake cures, or mislead people about proven medical treatments and prophylactics???

Recommended : Does Pfizer CEO aim to cut world population by 50%?

Fact #6 : French Bill Targets Self-Declared “Gurus”

As LCP explained in a separate article, the overall bill targets “sectarian excesses in the digital space and the new gurus 2.0“, pointing out that the COVID-19 pandemic enabled many of these “gurus” to take advantage of social networks to promote sectarian excesses:

The text also stresses that “the health crisis has been an ideal ground for these new sectarian excesses. New forms of “gurus” or self-proclaimed master thinkers act online, taking advantage of the vitality of social networks to federate real communities around them.”

In other words – if the bill passes and becomes law, it only endangers self-proclaimed “gurus” and cults that use social media and the Internet to snare their victims.

There does not seem to be any provision in the law to fine or imprison people in France who criticise mRNA vaccines, or pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer.

Fact #7 : Article 4 Was Amended Before Passage

According to LCP, Article 4 was amended after it first failed to pass, to include these amendments:

  • a crime would not be committed when proof of the free and informed consent of the person is provided”
  • whistleblowers of such crimes would be protected as “the information reported or disclosed by the whistleblower under the conditions provided for in Article 6” of the aforementioned law “does not constitute a provocation

In other words, these gurus would not be guilty of any crime if the people they convince to go against proven medical treatments acknowledge that they provided their free and informed consent.

Recommended : Did Scientists Call For Global mRNA Vaccine Moratorium?!

Fact #8 : French Bill Isn’t Law Yet

While many people claim that the bill or its Article 4 were passed into law, that is simply not true. As of 20 February 2024, this bill, and its Article 4, has not become law in France.

After the amended Article 4 passed on 13 February, the entire bill passed in the National Assembly the next day – on 14 February 2024, with an overwhelming 151 to 73 vote. Even so, that does not make the bill a law yet.

For one thing – that was only the first reading in the National Assembly. The bill now goes to the Senate for its approval or amendments, before returning to the National Assembly for its second reading if there are any amendments.

Only after the final bill is approved by both houses, can it then be sent to the President of France for his signature. Assuming there is no request for a constitutional review, the bill only becomes law once the French President signs it, and the Prime Minister countersigns it, and it is sent to the Journal Officiel for publication.

Fact #9 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Law + CrimeTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did France Pass Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines?!

Did France just pass a new law to jail people for opposing mRNA vaccines?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : France Passed Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that France just passed a new law to jail people for opposing mRNA vaccines!

Here is an excerpt of the long and (intentionally?) rambling article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

France: Opposition To mRNA Injections Carries Penalty Of Up To 3 Years In Jail

Recommended : Did France Pass “Article Pfizer” Law To Ban mRNA Criticism?!

 

Truth : France Did Not Pass Law To Jail Opposition To mRNA Vaccines!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Only National Assembly Passed Article 4

Let me start by pointing out that the controversial bill that has gotten anti-vaccine activists so riled up is called The Bill To Strengthen The Fight Against Sectarian Excesses And Improve The Support Of Victims. You can read the bill as it was presented to the Senate on 15 November 2023.

What particularly incensed them was Article 4 of that bill, which many are calling “Article Pfizer“. It failed the first vote on Tuesday, 13 February, but passed in the National Assembly with a vote of 116 to 108 on Wednesday, 14 February 2024.

Fact #2 : French Bill Does Not Involve mRNA Vaccines

Regardless of what one may think of the new French bill or its Article 4, it does not have anything to do with the criticism of mRNA vaccines in France.

To the best of my knowledge – mRNA vaccines were not even mentioned once in the entire bill, or Article 4 itself! In fact, none of those who claimed that mRNA vaccines are involved ever provided any evidence they were mentioned in the bill!

If that’s true, you have to wonder – why do some people claim that the French bill, or its Article 4, would imprison anyone who criticises or refuses to accept mRNA vaccines???

Recommended : Does Pfizer CEO aim to cut world population by 50%?

Fact #3 : Article 4 Targets Health Disinformation

As the La Chaîne parlementaire (LCP) explained, Article 4 of the bill made it a crime to incite the “abandonment of care” in France.

Specifically dedicated to therapeutic-type excesses, this Article 4 creates a new crime aimed at punishing “the provocation to abandon or refrain from following medical-therapeutic or prophylactic treatment“, as well as “the provocation to adopt practices presented as having a therapeutic or prophylactic purpose“, when these incentives may be “particularly serious” for physical or mental health.

In other words – Article 4 of this French bill makes it a crime to convince or encourage people not to accept reasonable medical treatment or prophylactic treatments (like vaccines), or to undertake treatments that can cause serious physical or mental harm.

Why would anyone want to continue letting unscrupulous people promote fake cures, or mislead people about proven medical treatments and prophylactics???

Recommended : Did Scientists Call For Global mRNA Vaccine Moratorium?!

Fact #4 : French Bill Targets Self-Declared “Gurus”

As LCP explained in a separate article, the overall bill targets “sectarian excesses in the digital space and the new gurus 2.0“, pointing out that the COVID-19 pandemic enabled many of these “gurus” to take advantage of social networks to promote sectarian excesses:

The text also stresses that “the health crisis has been an ideal ground for these new sectarian excesses. New forms of “gurus” or self-proclaimed master thinkers act online, taking advantage of the vitality of social networks to federate real communities around them.”

In other words – if the bill passes and becomes law, it only endangers self-proclaimed “gurus” and cults that use social media and the Internet to snare their victims.

There does not seem to be any provision in the law to fine or imprison people in France who criticise mRNA vaccines, or pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer.

Fact #5 : Article 4 Was Amended Before Passage

According to LCP, Article 4 was amended after it first failed to pass, to include these amendments:

  • a crime would not be committed when proof of the free and informed consent of the person is provided”
  • whistleblowers of such crimes would be protected as “the information reported or disclosed by the whistleblower under the conditions provided for in Article 6” of the aforementioned law “does not constitute a provocation

In other words, these gurus would not be guilty of any crime if the people they convince to go against proven medical treatments acknowledge that they provided their free and informed consent.

Recommended : Did Pfizer Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History?!

Fact #6 : French Bill Isn’t Law Yet

While many people claim that the bill or its Article 4 were passed into law, that is simply not true. As of 20 February 2024, this bill, and its Article 4, has not become law in France.

After the amended Article 4 passed on 13 February, the entire bill passed in the National Assembly the next day – on 14 February 2024, with an overwhelming 151 to 73 vote. Even so, that does not make the bill a law yet.

For one thing – that was only the first reading in the National Assembly. The bill now goes to the Senate for its approval or amendments, before returning to the National Assembly for its second reading if there are any amendments.

Only after the final bill is approved by both houses, can it then be sent to the President of France for his signature. Assuming there is no request for a constitutional review, the bill only becomes law once the French President signs it, and the Prime Minister countersigns it, and it is sent to the Journal Officiel for publication.

Fact #7 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Law + CrimeTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Alexei Navalny Die Suddenly From Vaccine SADS?!

Did Alexei Navalny die suddenly from COVID-19 vaccine SADS?! Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Alexei Navalny Died Suddenly From Vaccine SADS!

Right after news broke that Alexei Navalny died suddenly in a remote Russian penal colony, some people immediately claimed or suggested that Vladimir Putin’s most feared opposition leader was killed by the COVID-19 vaccine!

Richard : So according to the most recent autopsy results of Alexei Navalny, the 47-year-old’s cause of death is a blood clot in the heart.

Doctors suspect it was caused by vaccination against the coronavirus with the Pfizer vaccine. Apparently Navalny was vaccinated four times…. #Navalny #AlexeiNavalny #Nawalny

Recommended : Did Amy Schumer Develop VAIDS After Third Booster?!

 

No Evidence Alexei Navalny Died From Vaccine SADS!

It’s now tradition for anti-vaccine activists to blame all sudden deaths or illnesses on the COVID-19 vaccine. Here are the reasons why this is yet another example of fake news created and propagated by anti-vaccine activists…

Fact #1 : Alexei Navalny Died Suddenly In Arctic Prison

Alexei Navalny (born Alexei Anatolyevich Navalny / Алексей Анатольевич Навальный on 4 June 1976) died suddenly at the FKU IK-3 Arctic Circle penal colony in the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug on Friday, 16 February 2024.

His death was announced by the Russian Federal Penitentiary Service (FSIN) the same day, which stated that Navalny lost consciousness after a walk. Medical workers at the penal colony attended to him, and an emergency medical team was called.

On 02/16/2024, in correctional colony No. 3, convicted Navalny A.A. felt ill after a walk, almost immediately losing consciousness. The medical staff of the institution immediately arrived, and an ambulance team was called. All necessary resuscitation measures were carried out, which did not give positive results. The doctors of the emergency medical service pronounced the convict dead.

Several Russian state-owned news agencies reported that an ambulance arrived at the scene in less than 7 minutes, and performed resuscitation measures for more than half an hour. However, they failed to revive Alexeï Navalny, who was then pronounced dead at 2:17 PM local time.

His mother, Lyudmila Navalnaya, 69, received an official note the next day, on Saturday, 17 February. Alexei Navalny was 47 years old when he died.

Fact #2 : An Autopsy Is Being Conducted On Alexei Navalny

The Investigative Committee of Russia announced that “a set of investigative and operative measures” will be undertaken to determine Navalny’s cause of death, and his body would only be released to his family after the investigation was complete. The Russian authorities can legally hold his body for up to 30 days.

According to Novaya Gazeta, Alexei Navalny’s body was taken to Labytnangi, before being taken to a clinical morgue in Salekhard in the evening. His body allegedly had bruises consistent with chest compressions, which indicated that attempts were made to resuscitate Navalny.

Recommended : mRNA Vaccines Created Spike Protein In Human Heart?!

Fact #3 : Alexei Navalny’s Cause Of Death Has Not Been Revealed!

It seems absurd for anyone to claim that Alexeï Navalny died from the COVID-19 vaccine, when his official cause of death has not been announced.

His mother was told by the prison that Alexei Navalny died from “sudden death syndrome”. However, there is no such diagnosis of death according to the ICD-10, which Russian doctors must follow.

In any case, “sudden death syndrome” has nothing to do with COVID-19 vaccines, and is a general term for any sudden, unexpected death from natural causes”.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), sudden death syndrome (SDS) is defined as the sudden, unexpected death from natural causes witnessed within one hour of symptom onset, or if there are no witnesses – death occurring within 24 hours of someone being seen alive and symptom-free.

Russian propaganda outlet RT, citing an anonymous source, reported that Alexei Navalny died from a blood clot. While that is possible, it is not possible for anyone to know that without first conducting an autopsy.

Until Alexei Navalny’s official cause of death is revealed after his autopsy is complete, take these claims with a pinch of salt. More so if the sources are Russian state-owned media outlets.

Fact #4 : Unknown If Alexei Navalny Was Vaccinated Against COVID-19

Despite claims or suggestions that Alexei Navalny was fully-vaccinated, receiving four doses of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, there isn’t any actual evidence that he ever received the COVID-19 vaccine.

It is possible that Alexei Navalny was unvaccinated against COVID-19, because the COVID-19 vaccine is not mandatory in Russia. In fact, many people who were injured or died suddenly were actually unvaccinated, like Kris Jordan, Aaron Carter, Kirstie Alley, Stephan Bonnar, Shane Macaulay, David Wayne Burleson, and Kaden Clymer.

Until and unless his family (or the Russian authorities) reveal his COVID-19 vaccination status, anyone who tells you that Alexei Navalny was vaccinated or otherwise, is likely lying to you. None of us know that.

Recommended : Did Pfizer Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History?!

Fact #5 : Russia Never Approved Any mRNA Vaccines

Even if Alexei Navalny was vaccinated against COVID-19 in Russia, it is almost a certainty he never received any mRNA vaccine. That’s because Russia has never approved any mRNA vaccine to date.

Alexei Navalny was hospitalised in Germany in December 2020, and flew back to Russia on 17 January 2021, where he was immediately detained and imprisoned. This was before COVID-19 vaccination was available to his age group in Germany on 17 May 2021, so he couldn’t have gotten his mRNA vaccine then either.

Fact #6 : Russian Vaccines Do Not Have Four Doses

It also seems quite impossible for Alexei Navalny to have received four vaccine doses. as many have claimed.

After all, Russia only approved four COVID-19 vaccines, two of which were approved for a third (booster) dose. There is no fourth dose for any COVID-19 vaccine in Russia.

Even Alexei Navalny was vaccinated against COVID-19 in Russia, he would have received at most – three doses of the Sputnik V or Sputnik Light vaccines.

Fact #7 : Vaccine Side Effects Appear Within Hours / Days

Even if Alexei Navalny was fully-vaccinated against COVID-19, he would have received his doses more than two years ago! He cannot possibly have suffered from a vaccine side effect, because they appear within hours or days, not months later.

Mild side effects like injection site pain, fever, muscle ache, headache, lethargy develop within minutes to hours of the vaccination. Anaphylaxis develops within minutes, while other severe adverse reactions like myocarditis and VITT develop within days or weeks.

The spike proteins produced by the COVID-19 vaccines also do not stick around for months. If these spike proteins are permanent (as antivaxxers claim), we would have lifelong immunity.

Your own immune system will identify the spike proteins as foreign, and destroy them within a matter of days, although some may last for up to a few weeks. This is part of how vaccines teach your immune system to identify the enemy and destroy it.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did France Pass “Article Pfizer” Law To Ban mRNA Criticism?!

Did France just pass a new “Article Pfizer” law to ban and criminalise any criticism of mRNA vaccines?!

Take a look at the viral video, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : France Passed “Article Pfizer” Law To Ban mRNA Criticism!

People are sharing articles and/or a screenshot on X (formerly Twitter), which appears to show that France just passed a new “Article Pfizer” law to ban and criminalise any criticism of mRNA vaccines!

Dr. Kat Lindley : France: any criticism of mRNA platform punishable with up to 3 years imprisonment and 45,000 euros.

“Article 4 is central to the new law, which was first deleted but then reinstated. This creates a new criminal offense and criminalizes the “ request to stop or refrain from therapeutic or prophylactic medical treatment” as well as “the request to use practices that are presented as therapeutic or prophylactic ”. This means that any resistance to mRNA treatment (and other corporate medical methods) can be criminalized in the future.”

Recommended : Did COVID vaccines kill 14X more people than they saved?

 

Truth : France Did Not Pass “Article Pfizer” Law To Ban mRNA Criticism!

This is yet another example of fake news circulating on X (formerly Twitter), and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : French National Assembly Passed Article 4 On 14 February 2024

Let me start by pointing out that the controversial bill that has gotten anti-vaccine activists so riled up is called The Bill To Strengthen The Fight Against Sectarian Excesses And Improve The Support Of Victims. You can read the bill as it was presented to the Senate on 15 November 2023.

What particularly incensed them was Article 4 of that bill, which many are calling “Article Pfizer“. It failed the first vote on Tuesday, 13 February, but passed in the National Assembly with a vote of 116 to 108 on Wednesday, 14 February 2024.

Fact #2 : French Bill Does Not Involve Pfizer / mRNA

Regardless of what one may think of the new French bill or its Article 4, it does not have anything to do with Pfizer or the criticism of mRNA vaccines in France.

To the best of my knowledge – neither Pfizer nor mRNA vaccines were mentioned even once in the entire bill, or Article 4 itself! In fact, none of those who claimed that Pfizer and mRNA vaccines are involved ever provided any evidence they were mentioned in the bill!

If that’s true, you have to wonder – why do some people claim that the French bill, or its Article 4, would fine or imprison anyone who criticises or refuses to accept mRNA vaccines???

Recommended : Does Pfizer CEO aim to cut world population by 50%?

Fact #3 : Article 4 Targets Health Disinformation

As the La Chaîne parlementaire (LCP) explained, Article 4 of the bill made it a crime to incite the “abandonment of care” in France.

Specifically dedicated to therapeutic-type excesses, this Article 4 creates a new crime aimed at punishing “the provocation to abandon or refrain from following medical-therapeutic or prophylactic treatment“, as well as “the provocation to adopt practices presented as having a therapeutic or prophylactic purpose“, when these incentives may be “particularly serious” for physical or mental health.

In other words – Article 4 of this French bill makes it a crime to convince or encourage people not to accept reasonable medical treatment or prophylactic treatments (like vaccines), or to undertake treatments that can cause serious physical or mental harm.

Why would anyone want to continue letting unscrupulous people promote fake cures, or mislead people about proven medical treatments and prophylactics???

Recommended : Did Scientists Call For Global mRNA Vaccine Moratorium?!

Fact #4 : French Bill Targets Self-Declared “Gurus”

As LCP explained in a separate article, the overall bill targets “sectarian excesses in the digital space and the new gurus 2.0“, pointing out that the COVID-19 pandemic enabled many of these “gurus” to take advantage of social networks to promote sectarian excesses:

The text also stresses that “the health crisis has been an ideal ground for these new sectarian excesses. New forms of “gurus” or self-proclaimed master thinkers act online, taking advantage of the vitality of social networks to federate real communities around them.”

In other words – if the bill passes and becomes law, it only endangers self-proclaimed “gurus” and cults that use social media and the Internet to snare their victims.

There does not seem to be any provision in the law to fine or imprison people in France who criticise mRNA vaccines, or pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer.

Fact #5 : Article 4 Was Amended Before Passage

According to LCP, Article 4 was amended after it first failed to pass, to include these amendments:

  • a crime would not be committed when proof of the free and informed consent of the person is provided”
  • whistleblowers of such crimes would be protected as “the information reported or disclosed by the whistleblower under the conditions provided for in Article 6” of the aforementioned law “does not constitute a provocation

In other words, these gurus would not be guilty of any crime if the people they convince to go against proven medical treatments acknowledge that they provided their free and informed consent.

Recommended : Did Pfizer Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History?!

Fact #6 : French Bill Isn’t Law Yet

While many people claim that the bill or its Article 4 were passed into law, that is simply not true. As of 16 February 2024, this bill, and its Article 4, has not become law in France.

After the amended Article 4 passed on 13 February, the entire bill passed in the National Assembly the next day – on 14 February 2024, with an overwhelming 151 to 73 vote. Even so, that does not make the bill a law yet.

For one thing – that was only the first reading in the National Assembly. The bill now goes to the Senate for its approval or amendments, before returning to the National Assembly for its second reading if there are any amendments.

Only after the final bill is approved by both houses, can it then be sent to the President of France for his signature. Assuming there is no request for a constitutional review, the bill only becomes law once the French President signs it, and the Prime Minister countersigns it, and it is sent to the Journal Officiel for publication.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Does Pfizer Plan To Make Trillions Off mRNA Turbo Cancer?!

Did an insider reveal that Pfizer plans to make trillions off turbo cancer caused by its mRNA vaccine for COVID-19?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Pfizer Plans To Make Trillions Off mRNA Turbo Cancer!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claims or suggests that an insider just revealed that Pfizer plans to make trillions off turbo cancer caused by its mRNA vaccine for COVID-19!

Here is an excerpt of the long and (intentionally?) rambling article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

Pfizer To Rake In Trillions From Turbo Cancer Deaths, Insider Claims

Recommended : Was Pfizer CEO found guilty of vaccine misinformation?!

 

Truth : Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Does Not Cause Turbo Cancer!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Turbo Cancer Does Not Exist!

Let me start by pointing out that there is no such thing as “turbo cancer”, and there is no evidence that any COVID-19 vaccine can cause cancer, or make cancer go “turbo”.

Many cases of cancer go undetected until they become symptomatic. And sometimes, patients ignore those symptoms until they worsen.

Some cancers are also known “silent killers”, because they show no symptoms until they are already in an advanced stage, and have spread to other parts of the body. Such patients often die soon after diagnosis.

Hence, many people that were claimed to have died of turbo cancers were suffering from such “silent killer” cancers, or their cancers were actually diagnosed long before the COVID-19 vaccines were invented.

Needless to say, anti-vaccine activists provide no evidence to back their claims that vaccinated people are dying from turbo cancer. Ironically, they even accused unvaccinated people (and fellow anti vaxxers) like Kirstie Alley of dying from turbo cancer!

Fact #2 : Mike Yeadon Lost Pfizer Job In 2011

Anti-vaccine activists and articles often label Mike Yeadon (born Michael Yeadon) as a Pfizer insider, or Pfizer’s Vice President and chief scientist. That’s not really true.

For one thing – Mike Yeadon lost his job as a vice-president of Pfizer’s allergy and respiratory research unit in Kent when it was shut down in 2011. So Yeadon is hardly a Pfizer insider, having left the company more than 12 years ago!

On top of that, Mike Yeadon never worked on vaccines. His former Pfizer research unit only developed drugs for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). If he had any insight into Pfizer’s “evil plans”, it would have been limited to its asthma and COPD drugs, not COVID-19 vaccines.

Recommended : Did Pfizer Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History?!

Fact #3 : Truth Be Told Rally Was Held In January 2023

It is odd that The People’s Voice article should only quote what Mike Yeadon said at the Truth Be Told Rally in London, because that event occurred more than a year earlier – on 21 January 2023!

Why would anyone dig up an old claim to resurrect in February 2024? They must be running out of new material to scare people…

Needless to say – there is still no evidence to back up any of those old claims. Even after more than a year, where is the evidence?

Fact #4 : No Evidence COVID-19 Pandemic Was Planned

According to The People’s Voice article, Mike Yeadon claimed that the COVID-19 pandemic was planned years ago. Neither The People’s Voice, nor Mike Yeadon, have ever provided any evidence to back up those claims.

If Mike Yeadon knew of such a plan as a former Pfizer Vice-President and chief scientist, why did he not reveal this before the COVID-19 pandemic? Why did he only mention this after the COVID-19 pandemic was declared?

He had a good 12 years to announce such a dastardly plan, from the time he lost his job at Pfizer, to the COVID-19 pandemic. If he exposed Pfizer before the COVID-19 pandemic, imagine how many lives he could have saved! So why did he not expose Pfizer earlier?

Fact #5 : Mike Yeadon Never Said Pfizer Plans To Make Trillions Off Turbo Cancer

The People’s Voice article claimed or suggested that Mike Yeadon was the insider who said that Pfizer plans to make trillions of dollars off turbo cancer caused by the mRNA vaccines.

Not only do mRNA vaccines not cause turbo cancer, it does not appear that Mike Yeadon ever made such claims at the Truth Be Told rally in London last year!

In fact, The People’s Voice article provided no evidence that Mike Yeadon ever said anything about turbo cancer, or plans by Pfizer to make trillions of dollars from turbo cancer caused by mRNA vaccines.

Recommended : Did COVID vaccines kill 14X more people than they saved?

Fact #6 : Vaccines Saved Lives + Prevented Depopulation

According to The People’s Voice article, Mike Yeadon claimed that the COVID-19 pandemic was a depopulation plot by the globalists. If that is the case, the COVID-19 vaccines have ruined that evil plot, because they have proven to be safe and effective at preventing hospitalisation and death from COVID-19.

In fact, the world’s population has continued to increase throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, breaching the 8 billion point in November 2022. It is expected to exceed 8.1 billion people in July – a 0.91% increase from 2023.

In short – there is zero evidence of any depopulation efforts, with the world population increasing throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

On the off-chance that you are worried that COVID-19 or the vaccines are causing a drop in population growth, that has been dropping since its peak in 1963.

Recommended : Are Vaccinated People Developing Full Blown AIDS?!

Fact #6 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did COVID vaccines kill 14X more people than they saved?!

Did a study just show that COVID-19 vaccines killed 14x more people than they saved?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : COVID Vaccines Kill 14X More People Than They Saved!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claims that a study just showed that COVID-19 vaccines killed 14x more people than they saved!

Here is an excerpt from the long, and (intentionally?) rambling article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

Peer-Reviewed Study Finds Covid Vaccines Killed 14x More People Than They Saved

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

Truth : COVID Vaccines Did Not Kill 14X More People Than They Saved!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Study Did Not Show 14X More People Died From Vaccines

Let me just start by pointing out that the study, which is called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. (archive), did not show that the COVID vaccines killed 14X more people than they saved.

Fact #2 : Cureus Relies On Post-Publication Peer Review

The People’s Voice article took great pains to point out that the paper was “peer-reviewed”, probably to suggest that it should be taken seriously. That’s not exactly accurate.

Even though this paper was marked as “peer-reviewed”, the peer review process at Cureus is “unusually fast” at just a few days. That’s because the journal Cureus relies on “post-publication peer review“, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication.

Even if the paper was properly peer-reviewed by a prestigious journal, that would only be the first step in the scientific review process, which would include replication and verification, as well as criticism by other members of the scientific community.

Recommended : Pfizer Vaccine Causes Autism? Rats Are Not Mini Humans!

Fact #3 : Paper Regurgitates Long-Debunked Claims

The paper in question is a literature review, and was penned by notable anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough. You may note that some of the authors are not even scientists or were trained in medicine.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. It certainly offers no evidence to back up their claim for a vaccine moratorium. Let’s just take a look at a few:

COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials Were Too Short?!

The paper claimed that no vaccine was permitted for market release without a testing period of at least four years, using the mumps vaccine by Merck as example. That’s not true.

The Mumpsvax (Jeryl Lynn strain) vaccine was developed and approved in a record four years, but its testing did not last four years. The mumps vaccine clinical trial in 1966 (abstract) only lasted 6 months.

This paper gives the results of a large field trial of the vaccine conducted among schoolchildren in North Carolina.

Vaccination was carried out in November 1966, every tenth child receiving a placebo preparation. Serum specimens were obtained at the time of vaccination and 4 weeks later from 556 children representing a cross-section of the total group of participants.

During the 180 days of post-vaccination surveillance, 56 cases of mumps were reported among the study population and 69 cases among non-participants.

There is no requirement by health authorities that testing or assessing any vaccine should last 10 years. The typical vaccine development time of 10-15 years is not a reflection of how much time a clinical trial needs to run, but rather the time it “generally” takes to create a vaccine, gather resources, get approvals, run clinical trials, process the data, file for approval, etc.

COVID-19 vaccines were so quickly developed because scientists all over the world collaborated on the effort, while governments funded their development, and fast-tracked their clinical trials and manufacturing preparations.

The speedy development of COVID-19 vaccines was also enabled by new vaccine platforms using mRNA or DNA technologies, in which genetic information from the new virus only needed to be “plugged in” to produce a new vaccine.

More importantly – the paper provided no evidence that the accelerated development of COVID-19 vaccines has actually resulted in unsafe vaccines.

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Long-Term Heart Damage?!

mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Were Not Proven Safe / Effective?

The Mead et. al. paper claimed or suggested that the clinical trials did not show that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were safe or effective because too few people in the unvaccinated (placebo) group died from COVID-19.

Well, not only is that a “misunderstanding” of the clinical trial results (see the next section), many studies have been conducted into the safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 since they were deployed.

Those real world studies (example, example, example) consistently showed that the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 are safe and effective.

Low Absolute Risk Shows No Need To Vaccinate?!

The Mead et. al. paper repeats the old trope that the low absolute risk (AR) seen in the mRNA vaccine clinical trials mean there is no need for anyone to get vaccinated. That’s simply not true, and is a (deliberate?) misunderstanding of statistical calculations.

The Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) will “always appear low” because it depends very much on the “event rate”. As the Meedan Health Desk explained:

Let’s say a study enrolled 20,000 patients into the control group and 20,000 in the vaccine group. In that study, 200 people in the control group got sick and 0 people in the vaccine group got sick.

Even though the vaccine efficacy would be a whopping 100%, the ARR would show that vaccines reduce the absolute risk by just 1% (200/20,000= 1%).

For the ARR to increase to 20% in our example study with a vaccine with 100% efficacy, 4,000 of the 20,000 people in the control group would have to get sick (4,000/20,000= 20%).

Hence, the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) is used instead to determine a vaccine’s efficacy, because it tells us how much risk is reduced in the vaccinated group, compared to the unvaccinated control group.

To be clear – the clinical trials and post-vaccination monitoring and studies have clearly shown that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19.

Recommended : Did Norway Study Show mRNA Vaccine Danger In Children?!

mRNA Vaccines Do Not Prevent Transmission?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that the CDC said that “COVID-19 products would stop transmission”, but in the end “COVID-19 mRNA products do not prevent transmission or infection”. Well, that’s not really true.

For one thing – the CDC never said that COVID-19 vaccines would stop transmission. In fact, the CDC article the paper linked to only said that the vaccines appear to reduce (not stop) transmission:

… a growing body of evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines also reduce asymptomatic infection and transmission.

To be clear – the COVID-19 vaccines were primarily designed to reduce or prevent severe disease and death, which is why transmission for not an endpoint for their clinical trials. It would have been a nice bonus to block transmission completely, but partially reducing transmission is not too bad.

mRNA Vaccines Have A Lot Of AESIs?!

The Mead et. al. paper warns us about the many Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) reported after COVID-19 vaccinations. The problem is – those AESI are not actual vaccine side effects!

The AESI list for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for example has 9 pages of 1,291 adverse events, but that is not a list of the mRNA vaccine side effects. It is a list of “adverse events” that Pfizer must look for during the post-vaccination monitoring period. Not only are these “adverse events” not specific to the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, they include:

  • diseases like Herpes, MERS, Varicella, and other “communicable disease”,
  • exposure to SARS-CoV-2,
  • manufacturing and lab test issues, and even…
  • product availability and supply issues!

Needless to say – those adverse events are not vaccine side effects, or are any indication of vaccine performance or safety in any way.

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Increase Risk Of Long COVID?!

Lots Of Deaths + Hospitalisation Were Reported?!

The Mead et. al. paper also claimed that two large drug safety reporting systems in the US and Europe have over 7.8 million reports of adverse events, with “death, hospitalisations, and life-threatening reactions”. It is probably referring to VAERS and EudraVigilance.

The thing is – VAERS / Yellow Card / EudraVigilance data are all unverified, and may contain duplicated information. That’s why they are all prefaced with warnings like:

  • they may contain duplicated information and/or reports
  • the reported event may be caused by an illness, like a COVID-19 infection for example,
  • the reported event may be caused by a different drug taken by the patient at the same time
  • they have not been assessed by health authorities to ascertain if it’s even “biologically plausible”

In addition, open systems like VAERS, or the UK Yellow Card system, are very susceptible to abuse because they allow anyone from anywhere to post anything they want, without evidence or verification.

Anti-vaccination activists can, for example, key in unlimited numbers of adverse reaction reports, even if they never received a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine!

Autopsy Reports Show Deaths Caused By Vaccines?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that “autopsy studies” showed that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”.

The problem is – the study it referred to was a preprint by one of its own authors – Peter McCullough, that was removed by The Lancet for violating its “screening criteria”.

This preprint has been removed by Preprints with The Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology. Preprints with The Lancet reserves the right to remove a paper that has been posted if we determine that it has violated our screening criteria.

Not only was that study just a “review” of autopsy reports, many of the cases had other far more likely causes of death.

Recommended : Did mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage?!

mRNA Vaccines Are Contaminated By DNA?!

The paper suggested that the mRNA vaccines are contaminated with DNA “orders of magnitude higher than the EMA’s limit”.

The truth is – residual DNA is found in all biological products manufactured using cells, and has not shown any health risk after being studied for many decades.

In any case, the amount of residual DNA in mRNA vaccines were found to be far below regulatory limits.

Pfizer Vaccine Has DNA From SV40 Virus That Causes Cancer?!

The paper also warned about the Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter found in samples of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Why? Because it warns – the SV40 virus “induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals”.

First of all – after decades of studies, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

In any case, the SV40 promoter is a DNA sequence that is often used to manufacture mRNA, and is not dangerous. It certainly poses no cancer risk, because the part of the SV40 that can potentially cause cancer – the T-antigen, is not present in the SV40 promoter, or the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

CDC has no proof COVID-19 vaccines reduce spread + variants?!

Does the CDC really have no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines reduce the spread of the virus, and help prevent new variants from emerging?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : CDC Has No Proof Vaccines Reduce Spread + Variants!

People are sharing a post on X (formerly Twitter) by Zachary Stieber of The Epoch Times, which claims or suggests that the CDC has no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines reduce the spread of the virus, and help prevent new variants from emerging.

Zachary Stieber : CDC says no records supporting COVID statement that “high vaccination coverage in a population reduces the spread of the virus and helps prevent new variants from emerging.”

Recommended : Did Scientists Call For Global mRNA Vaccine Moratorium?!

 

Truth : CDC Has Evidence Vaccines Reduce Spread + Variants!

Let’s take a look at what’s going on with this startling “new claim”, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : FOIA Is Only For Non-Public Information

Let me start by pointing out that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) allows members of the public to request for documents that are not publicly available from US federal agencies (source).

Every US federal agency has a FOIA office that will process each request, which may include redacting sensitive or protected information if necessary. But if the information requested is already in the public domain, no such documents would be made available through a FOIA request.

Before making a request, first see if the information is already publicly available. You can find a lot of useful information on a range of topics on each agency’s website.

If the information you want is not publicly available, you can submit a FOIA request to the agency’s FOIA Office. The request simply must be in writing and reasonably describe the records you seek.

As you can see, it would be quite silly to submit a FOIA request for documents that are already available publicly… unless what you want is a letter from the agency stating it failed to locate any such documents?

Fact #2 : CDC Could Not Find Any Non-Public Documents

The CDC response to Zachary Stieber’s FOIA request is not an admission that it has no evidence or proof to back up its claim that high vaccination rates will reduce the spread of the virus, and help prevent new variants from emerging.

Rather, the CDC FOIA office appears to be informing Stieber that it could not find any non-public documents that it would be required to process under the Freedom of Information Act. In other words – all available information is in the public domain.

Recommended : Did Pfizer Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History?!

Fact #3 : FOIA Is Not For Basic Science Questions

The Freedom of Information Act is meant to provide transparency to US citizens through the full or partial disclosure of “previously unreleased or uncirculated information“. It is not meant for people to ask basic science questions.

You can’t use FOIA requests, for example, to ask for records from the CDC on how vaccines reduce the spread of a virus, or how vaccines can help prevent new virus variants from emerging. These are basic virology knowledge that are already available publicly!

Those who want to ask those questions should take up a course, or read some books on virology; not submit FOIA requests on such basic virology questions from the CDC. Of course, they would have no “unreleased” information on such basic topics!

It is therefore no surprise that the CDC FOIA office pointed out to Stieber that he was asking an academic question about the basics of virology.

Dear Mr. Stieber:

This letter is in response to your Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request of May 12, 2022, for:

Please provide documents supporting the CDC’s statement that “High vaccination coverage in a population reduces the spread of the virus and helps prevent new variants from emerging.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html.

A search of our records failed to reveal any documents pertaining to your request. Specifically, the EOC apprises as follows:

We do not have records related to this request, as the request puts forth what is really an academic question about the basics of virology.

You can literally picture the eye roll and face palm of the unfortunate CDC staffer processing this peculiar request.

Recommended : Are Vaccinated People Developing Full Blown AIDS?!

Fact #4 : Studies Have Shown Vaccines Reduce Spread + Variants

The CDC reply also pointed out to Stieber that many studies have already shown that vaccines reduce infections and the spread of the virus; and that reducing infections mean there are fewer opportunities for the virus to replicate and mutate into new variants.

Many studies have been done concluding that viral infection and spread is lower among highly vaccinated populations. If infection and therefore replication are reduced, there are fewer opportunities for the virus to make errors during replication that might be selected for during infection, which is what leads to the emergence of new variants.

Too bad the CDC did not include a list of basic virology books to demonstrate how long ago such basic questions have been answered by science, and taught to medical students and allied health professionals.

Fact #5 : CDC Does Not Conduct Fundamental Research

The same CDC letter also points out to Stieber that it does not generally conduct such fundamental scientific research, and only applies fundamental research towards public health policies. Hence, it would have no documents to offer in response to his FOIA request.

CDC does not generally conduct research into such fundamentals, but rather applies fundamental research to public health.

As noted on its official Vaccine Effectiveness Studies page, the CDC collaborates with public health partners that actually conduct those studies, which it then uses to provide its advisories.

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

Fact #6 : This Is An Old Story

Frankly, this story about CDC not having any records to back up its claims that “High vaccination coverage in a population reduces the spread of the virus and helps prevent new variants from emerging” isn’t new.

The Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) – which has been labelled as one of the main anti-vaccination groups in the United States, posted a story about it on 10 May 2022. So it is interesting to see this being resurrected almost two years later. No new material?

Even ICAN was late to the party, because I pinpointed the first time the CDC made that claim to 4 October 2021. This was right after the CDC approved the first Pfizer vaccine booster dose in September 2021 for people 65 years and older, long-term care facility residents, and people with certain underlying conditions.

Can COVID-19 vaccines cause variants?

No. COVID-19 vaccines do not create or cause variants of the virus that causes COVID-19.

New variants of a virus happen because the virus that causes COVID-19 constantly changes through a natural ongoing process of mutation (change). Even before the COVID-19 vaccines, there were several variants of the virus. Looking ahead, variants are expected to continue to emerge as the virus continues to change.

COVID-19 vaccines can help prevent new variants from emerging. As it spreads, the virus has more opportunities to change. High vaccination coverage in a population reduces the spread of the virus and helps prevent new variants from emerging.

As you can see, the CDC already explained (back in October 2021!) how vaccines reduce new variants from emerging – by reducing infections in the population.

This is publicly available information. You don’t even need to submit a FOIA request!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Bill Gates Just Admit To Committing Planetary Genocide?!

Did Bill Gates just admit to committing planetary genocide in an interview with USA Today?!

Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Bill Gates Just Admits To Committing Planetary Genocide!

People are sharing a video clip on X (formerly Twitter), while claiming or suggesting that Bill Gates just admitted to committing planetary genocide in an interview with USA Today!

Liz Churchill : “We just need to mess around with all of the Nano-lipid Particles to make more vaccines”. -Bill Gates admitting to committing Planetary Genocide.

Arrest this Monster.

Recommended : Is Bill Gates Planning To Kill Billions Using Turbo AIDS?!

 

Truth : Bill Gates Did Not Admit To Committing Planetary Genocide!

This is yet another example of fake news created / shared by anti-vaccine activists, or conspiracy theorists, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : USA Today Video Is Over Two Years Old!

Let me start by pointing out that the USA Today interview that people are sharing isn’t new. Heck, it’s more than two years old!

USA Today published that interview on 27 January 2021, with the title – Bill Gates predicts mRNA will be a game changer for vaccines over next 5 years.

Fact #2 : Bill Gates Did Not Admit To Committing Genocide

Bill Gates is, no doubt, a very popular bogeyman for conspiracy theorists and anti-vaccine activists. But this claim is just silly, and makes them look like absolute idiots.

The USA Today video does not show Bill Gates admitting to committing genocide of any kind, neither the planetary variety or just the local stuff. Anyone can see that.

Those making these claims that “Bill Gates admitting to committing Planetary Genocide” offered no evidence to back them up. The video is actually proof that Bill Gates did no such thing.

In the interview, Bill Gates was predicting the mRNA vaccine platform’s potential to treat or eradicate many other diseases. At no point in time did he ever admit to committing genocide… of any kind.

Recommended : Will Microsoft Disable Your Computer If You Share Fake News?!

Fact #3 : mRNA Vaccines Proven Safe + Effective

Tens of billions of doses of mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 have been administered worldwide over the last 3 years, and have been proven in multiple studies to be safe and effective. Here are just some examples:

In fact, the very fact that the world has been able to reopen completely after the COVID-19 pandemic is a testament to the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines, which include mRNA vaccines from Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna.

Fact #4 : This Is Just Fake News About Bill Gates

This is ultimately just more fake news being created / spread about Bill Gates. Here are some other recent examples:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | ScienceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Scientists Call For Global mRNA Vaccine Moratorium?!

Did scientists call for a global moratorium on the mRNA vaccine, after finding high rates of serious post-injection injuries?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Scientists Call For mRNA Vaccine Moratorium!

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) activist group, which is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just posted an article claiming that scientists have called for a global moratorium on the mRNA vaccine, after finding high rates of serious post-injection injuries!

Here is an excerpt from the CHD article (archive) with my emphasis in bold.

Scientists Call for Global Moratorium on mRNA Vaccines, Immediate Removal From Childhood Schedule

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

Scientists Call For mRNA Vaccine Moratorium : My Fact Check

The CHD story appears to suggest that scientists are calling for a global moratorium on the mRNA vaccine because it’s dangerous. However, it’s really more like the same bunch of anti-vaccine activists repeating long-debunked claims about the mRNA vaccine, and calling (yet again) for a moratorium.

Here are the reasons why the vast majority of scientists and health authorities are ignoring them, and why you too should ignore their repeated calls for an mRNA vaccine moratorium:

Fact #1 : Cureus Relies On Post-Publication Peer Review

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) article repeatedly points out that the paper was “peer-reviewed”, probably to suggest that it should be taken seriously. That’s not exactly accurate.

Even though this paper was marked as “peer-reviewed”, the peer review process at Cureus is “unusually fast” at just a few days. That’s because the journal Cureus relies on “post-publication peer review“, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication.

Fact #2 : It Regurgitates Long-Debunked Claims

The paper in question is a literature review called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. (archive), which includes anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. It certainly offers no evidence to back up their claim for a vaccine moratorium. Let’s just take a look at a few:

COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials Were Too Short?!

The paper claimed that no vaccine was permitted for market release without a testing period of at least four years, using the mumps vaccine by Merck as example. That’s not true.

The Mumpsvax (Jeryl Lynn strain) vaccine was developed and approved in a record four years, but its testing did not last four years. The mumps vaccine clinical trial in 1966 (abstract) only lasted 6 months.

This paper gives the results of a large field trial of the vaccine conducted among schoolchildren in North Carolina.

Vaccination was carried out in November 1966, every tenth child receiving a placebo preparation. Serum specimens were obtained at the time of vaccination and 4 weeks later from 556 children representing a cross-section of the total group of participants.

During the 180 days of post-vaccination surveillance, 56 cases of mumps were reported among the study population and 69 cases among non-participants.

There is no requirement by health authorities that testing or assessing any vaccine should last 10 years. The typical vaccine development time of 10-15 years is not a reflection of how much time a clinical trial needs to run, but rather the time it “generally” takes to create a vaccine, gather resources, get approvals, run clinical trials, process the data, file for approval, etc.

COVID-19 vaccines were so quickly developed because scientists all over the world collaborated on the effort, while governments funded their development, and fast-tracked their clinical trials and manufacturing preparations.

The speedy development of COVID-19 vaccines was also enabled by new vaccine platforms using mRNA or DNA technologies, in which genetic information from the new virus only needed to be “plugged in” to produce a new vaccine.

More importantly – the paper provided no evidence that the accelerated development of COVID-19 vaccines has actually resulted in unsafe vaccines.

Recommended : Pfizer Vaccine Causes Autism? Rats Are Not Mini Humans!

mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Were Not Proven Safe / Effective?

The Mead et. al. paper claimed or suggested that the clinical trials did not show that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were safe or effective because too few people in the unvaccinated (placebo) group died from COVID-19.

Well, not only is that a “misunderstanding” of the clinical trial results (see the next section), many studies have been conducted into the safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 since they were deployed.

Those real world studies (example, example, example) consistently showed that the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 are safe and effective.

Low Absolute Risk Shows No Need To Vaccinate?!

The Mead et. al. paper repeats the old trope that the low absolute risk (AR) seen in the mRNA vaccine clinical trials mean there is no need for anyone to get vaccinated. That’s simply not true, and is a (deliberate?) misunderstanding of statistical calculations.

The Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) will “always appear low” because it depends very much on the “event rate”. As the Meedan Health Desk explained:

Let’s say a study enrolled 20,000 patients into the control group and 20,000 in the vaccine group. In that study, 200 people in the control group got sick and 0 people in the vaccine group got sick.

Even though the vaccine efficacy would be a whopping 100%, the ARR would show that vaccines reduce the absolute risk by just 1% (200/20,000= 1%).

For the ARR to increase to 20% in our example study with a vaccine with 100% efficacy, 4,000 of the 20,000 people in the control group would have to get sick (4,000/20,000= 20%).

Hence, the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) is used instead to determine a vaccine’s efficacy, because it tells us how much risk is reduced in the vaccinated group, compared to the unvaccinated control group.

To be clear – the clinical trials and post-vaccination monitoring and studies have clearly shown that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19.

Recommended : Did Norway Study Show mRNA Vaccine Danger In Children?!

mRNA Vaccines Do Not Prevent Transmission?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that the CDC said that “COVID-19 products would stop transmission”, but in the end “COVID-19 mRNA products do not prevent transmission or infection”. Well, that’s not really true.

For one thing – the CDC never said that COVID-19 vaccines would stop transmission. In fact, the CDC article the paper linked to only said that the vaccines appear to reduce (not stop) transmission:

… a growing body of evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines also reduce asymptomatic infection and transmission.

To be clear – the COVID-19 vaccines were primarily designed to reduce or prevent severe disease and death, which is why transmission for not an endpoint for their clinical trials. It would have been a nice bonus to block transmission completely, but partially reducing transmission is not too bad.

mRNA Vaccines Have A Lot Of AESIs?!

The Mead et. al. paper warns us about the many Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) reported after COVID-19 vaccinations. The problem is – those AESI are not actual vaccine side effects!

The AESI list for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for example has 9 pages of 1,291 adverse events, but that is not a list of the mRNA vaccine side effects. It is a list of “adverse events” that Pfizer must look for during the post-vaccination monitoring period. Not only are these “adverse events” not specific to the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, they include:

  • diseases like Herpes, MERS, Varicella, and other “communicable disease”,
  • exposure to SARS-CoV-2,
  • manufacturing and lab test issues, and even…
  • product availability and supply issues!

Needless to say – those adverse events are not vaccine side effects, or are any indication of vaccine performance or safety in any way.

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Increase Risk Of Long COVID?!

Lots Of Deaths + Hospitalisation Were Reported?!

The Mead et. al. paper also claimed that two large drug safety reporting systems in the US and Europe have over 7.8 million reports of adverse events, with “death, hospitalisations, and life-threatening reactions”. It is probably referring to VAERS and EudraVigilance.

The thing is – VAERS / Yellow Card / EudraVigilance data are all unverified, and may contain duplicated information. That’s why they are all prefaced with warnings like:

  • they may contain duplicated information and/or reports
  • the reported event may be caused by an illness, like a COVID-19 infection for example,
  • the reported event may be caused by a different drug taken by the patient at the same time
  • they have not been assessed by health authorities to ascertain if it’s even “biologically plausible”

In addition, open systems like VAERS, or the UK Yellow Card system, are very susceptible to abuse because they allow anyone from anywhere to post anything they want, without evidence or verification.

Anti-vaccination activists can, for example, key in unlimited numbers of adverse reaction reports, even if they never received a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine!

Autopsy Reports Show Deaths Caused By Vaccines?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that “autopsy studies” showed that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”.

The problem is – the study it referred to was a preprint by one of its own authors – Peter McCullough, that was removed by The Lancet for violating its “screening criteria”.

This preprint has been removed by Preprints with The Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology. Preprints with The Lancet reserves the right to remove a paper that has been posted if we determine that it has violated our screening criteria.

Not only was that study just a “review” of autopsy reports, many of the cases had other far more likely causes of death.

Recommended : Did mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage?!

mRNA Vaccines Are Contaminated By DNA?!

The paper suggested that the mRNA vaccines are contaminated with DNA “orders of magnitude higher than the EMA’s limit”.

The truth is – residual DNA is found in all biological products manufactured using cells, and has not shown any health risk after being studied for many decades.

In any case, the amount of residual DNA in mRNA vaccines were found to be far below regulatory limits.

Pfizer Vaccine Has DNA From SV40 Virus That Causes Cancer?!

The paper also warned about the Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter found in samples of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Why? Because it warns – the SV40 virus “induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals”.

First of all – after decades of studies, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

In any case, the SV40 promoter is a DNA sequence that is often used to manufacture mRNA, and is not dangerous. It certainly poses no cancer risk, because the part of the SV40 that can potentially cause cancer – the T-antigen, is not present in the SV40 promoter, or the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Pfizer Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History?!

Did Pfizer just admit that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are the deadliest drug in history?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Pfizer Calls mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claims that Pfizer just admitted that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are the deadliest drug in history!

Here is an excerpt from the article, which is long and (intentionally?) rambling. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

Covid Vaccines Are Officially Deadliest Drug In History and Nobody Is Allowed to Talk About It

Recommended : Did WEF Just Admit Disease X Will Be Leaked In 2025?!

 

Truth : Pfizer Did Not Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Pfizer Did Not Call mRNA Vaccines Deadliest Drug In History

This is really silly, but let me start by pointing out that Pfizer never said / admitted / called the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines the deadliest drug in history.

The People’s Voice article certainly offered no evidence to back up its “fact checked” claim. Did it include a link to a Pfizer statement? A quote by Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla whose visage featured prominently in their video cover?

Nope. Zilch. Nada. Not a single shred of evidence that Pfizer ever called the mRNA vaccines the “deadliest drug in history”.

Fact #2 : FDA Released Pfizer Documents

The People’s Voice article claimed that Pfizer released documents “admitting the unprecedented carnage caused by their product”. That’s not true – Pfizer did not release any documents.

It was the US FDA that was releasing those Pfizer documents under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by the PHMPT (Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency) group.

Fact #3 : FDA Released Pfizer 5.3.6 Document In 2021

The People’s Voice article claimed that the Pfizer 5.3.6 document was “dropped on April Fools Day 2022”, but that’s not exactly true either.

The Pfizer 5.3.6 Postmarketing Experience document was first released by the FDA to the PHMPT (Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency) group, with three small pieces of information redacted on 17 November 2021.

The FDA later decided that the redacted information were not confidential after all, and reissued the same document in full on 1 April 2022. You can read more about this here.

Recommended : Did Pfizer Vaccine Documents Reveal 1,291 Side Effects?!

Fact #4 : Pfizer 5.3.6 Deaths + Injuries Were Not Vaccine-Linked

The People’s Voice video pointed out that the Pfizer 5.3.6 document appears to list 42,086 injuries, and 1,223 deaths. That’s not accurate.

The deaths and injuries listed in the Pfizer 5.3.6 document were not linked to the mRNA vaccine, because it was based on the “List of Adverse Events of Special Interest” (AESI).

This AESI list is not a list of side effects caused by the Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Rather, it is a list of adverse events that Pfizer must look for post-vaccination case reports. As the Pfizer document noted on Page 16 (with my emphasis in bold) :

The AESI terms are incorporated into a TME list and include events of interest due to their association with severe COVID-19 and events of interest for vaccines in general.

Pfizer also pointed out that this adverse event evaluation is different (distinct) from the safety evaluation of its COVID-19 vaccine.

This is distinct from safety signal evaluations which are conducted and included, as appropriate, in the Summary Monthly Safety Reports submitted regularly to the FDA and other Health Authorities.

Claiming that these are vaccine side effects is like pointing to a list of prosecutable crimes in a legislation, and calling it a list of crimes the government actually committed. That’s how stupid it really is.

Fact #5 : Adverse Events Are Not Side Effects

I should now point out that adverse events are not necessarily side effects. Adverse events are “unfavourable” or “unintended” events that happen after vaccination or taking a drug, like having an anaphylactic reaction or getting into a car accident.

All reported adverse events have to be investigated to find out if they are related (anaphylactic reaction) or not (getting into a car accident) to the vaccine or drug that was taken.

Even if an adverse event was “possibly caused” by the vaccine, it must still be confirmed that the vaccine directly caused it, because an anaphylactic reaction (for example) can also occur from a bee sting, or an existing peanut allergy.

Only once an adverse event is confirmed to be caused by the vaccine, is it then a vaccine side effect. Otherwise, it is merely an adverse event, not a side effect.

Recommended : Why Adverse Events of Special Interest Are NOT Side Effects!

Fact #6 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Publishing Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | ScienceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned Fact Check!

Let’s take a look at the recent “peer-reviewed” study on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, and find out what the facts really are!

 

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned??

Some people are excitedly sharing a “peer-reviewed” study on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, while calling for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to be removed.

Mary Talley Bowden MD : Peer-reviewed article published in @CureusInc : COVID shots must be pulled off the market. If you are a physician or politician, now is the time to be on the right side of history.

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned : My Fact Check

Let’s go through the “peer-reviewed” study on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, and see what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Cureus Relies On Post-Publication Peer Review

Let me start by pointing out that the journal Cureus relies on “post-publication peer review”.  Even though this paper was marked as “peer-reviewed”, it was an “unusually fast” peer review.

Cureus uses “an unusually fast” peer-review process of just “a few days”, and relies heavily on “post-publication peer review”, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication.

Fact #2 : It Regurgitates Long-Debunked Claims

The paper in question is called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. which includes anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Let’s just take a look at a few:

COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials Were Too Short?!

The paper claimed that no vaccine was permitted for market release without a testing period of at least four years, using the mumps vaccine by Merck as example. That’s not true.

The Mumpsvax (Jeryl Lynn strain) vaccine was developed and approved in a record four years, but its testing did not last four years. The mumps vaccine clinical trial in 1966 (abstract) only lasted 6 months.

This paper gives the results of a large field trial of the vaccine conducted among schoolchildren in North Carolina.

Vaccination was carried out in November 1966, every tenth child receiving a placebo preparation. Serum specimens were obtained at the time of vaccination and 4 weeks later from 556 children representing a cross-section of the total group of participants.

During the 180 days of post-vaccination surveillance, 56 cases of mumps were reported among the study population and 69 cases among non-participants.

There is no requirement by health authorities that testing or assessing any vaccine should last 10 years. The typical vaccine development time of 10-15 years is not a reflection of how much time a clinical trial needs to run, but rather the time it “generally” takes to create a vaccine, gather resources, get approvals, run clinical trials, process the data, file for approval, etc.

COVID-19 vaccines were so quickly developed because scientists all over the world collaborated on the effort, while governments funded their development, and fast-tracked their clinical trials and manufacturing preparations.

The speedy development of COVID-19 vaccines was also enabled by new vaccine platforms using mRNA or DNA technologies, in which genetic information from the new virus only needed to be “plugged in” to produce a new vaccine.

More importantly – the paper provided no evidence that the accelerated development of COVID-19 vaccines has actually resulted in unsafe vaccines.

Recommended : Did COVID-19 Vaccines Cause 17 Million Deaths?!

mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Were Not Proven Safe / Effective?

The Mead et. al. paper claimed or suggested that the clinical trials did not show that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were safe or effective because too few people in the unvaccinated (placebo) group died from COVID-19.

Well, not only is that a “misunderstanding” of the clinical trial results (see the next section), many studies have been conducted into the safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 since they were deployed.

Those real world studies (example, example, example) consistently showed that the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 are safe and effective.

Low Absolute Risk Shows No Need To Vaccinate?!

The Mead et. al. paper repeats the old trope that the low absolute risk (AR) seen in the mRNA vaccine clinical trials mean there is no need for anyone to get vaccinated. That’s simply not true, and is a (deliberate?) misunderstanding of statistical calculations.

The Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) will “always appear low” because it depends very much on the “event rate”. As the Meedan Health Desk explained:

Let’s say a study enrolled 20,000 patients into the control group and 20,000 in the vaccine group. In that study, 200 people in the control group got sick and 0 people in the vaccine group got sick.

Even though the vaccine efficacy would be a whopping 100%, the ARR would show that vaccines reduce the absolute risk by just 1% (200/20,000= 1%).

For the ARR to increase to 20% in our example study with a vaccine with 100% efficacy, 4,000 of the 20,000 people in the control group would have to get sick (4,000/20,000= 20%).

Hence, the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) is used instead to determine a vaccine’s efficacy, because it tells us how much risk is reduced in the vaccinated group, compared to the unvaccinated control group.

To be clear – the clinical trials and post-vaccination monitoring and studies have clearly shown that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19.

Recommended : Hybrid Immunity Better Than Natural / Vaccine Immunity!

mRNA Vaccines Do Not Prevent Transmission?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that the CDC said that “COVID-19 products would stop transmission”, but in the end “COVID-19 mRNA products do not prevent transmission or infection”. Well, that’s not really true.

For one thing – the CDC never said that COVID-19 vaccines would stop transmission. In fact, the CDC article the paper linked to only said that the vaccines appear to reduce (not stop) transmission:

… a growing body of evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines also reduce asymptomatic infection and transmission.

To be clear – the COVID-19 vaccines were primarily designed to reduce or prevent severe disease and death, which is why transmission for not an endpoint for their clinical trials. It would have been a nice bonus to block transmission completely, but partially reducing transmission is not too bad.

mRNA Vaccines Have A Lot Of AESIs?!

The Mead et. al. paper warns us about the many Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) reported after COVID-19 vaccinations. The problem is – those AESI are not actual vaccine side effects!

The AESI list for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for example has 9 pages of 1,291 adverse events, but that is not a list of the mRNA vaccine side effects. It is a list of “adverse events” that Pfizer must look for during the post-vaccination monitoring period. Not only are these “adverse events” not specific to the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, they include:

  • diseases like Herpes, MERS, Varicella, and other “communicable disease”,
  • exposure to SARS-CoV-2,
  • manufacturing and lab test issues, and even…
  • product availability and supply issues!

Needless to say – those adverse events are not vaccine side effects, or are any indication of vaccine performance or safety in any way.

Recommended : COVID-19 Vaccine Causes Turbo Skin Cancer – Melanoma?!

Lots Of Deaths + Hospitalisation Were Reported?!

The Mead et. al. paper also claimed that two large drug safety reporting systems in the US and Europe have over 7.8 million reports of adverse events, with “death, hospitalisations, and life-threatening reactions”. It is probably referring to VAERS and EudraVigilance.

The thing is – VAERS / Yellow Card / EudraVigilance data are all unverified, and may contain duplicated information. That’s why they are all prefaced with warnings like:

  • they may contain duplicated information and/or reports
  • the reported event may be caused by an illness, like a COVID-19 infection for example,
  • the reported event may be caused by a different drug taken by the patient at the same time
  • they have not been assessed by health authorities to ascertain if it’s even “biologically plausible”

In addition, open systems like VAERS, or the UK Yellow Card system, are very susceptible to abuse because they allow anyone from anywhere to post anything they want, without evidence or verification.

Anti-vaccination activists can, for example, key in unlimited numbers of adverse reaction reports, even if they never received a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine!

Autopsy Reports Show Deaths Caused By Vaccines?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that “autopsy studies” showed that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”.

The problem is – the study it referred to was a preprint by one of its own authors – Peter McCullough, that was removed by The Lancet for violating its “screening criteria”.

This preprint has been removed by Preprints with The Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology. Preprints with The Lancet reserves the right to remove a paper that has been posted if we determine that it has violated our screening criteria.

Not only was that study just a “review” of autopsy reports, many of the cases had other far more likely causes of death.

Recommended : Did CDC Alter Death Certificates To Remove Vaccine Deaths?!

mRNA Vaccines Are Contaminated By DNA?!

The paper suggested that the mRNA vaccines are contaminated with DNA “orders of magnitude higher than the EMA’s limit”.

The truth is – residual DNA is found in all biological products manufactured using cells, and has not shown any health risk after being studied for many decades.

In any case, the amount of residual DNA in mRNA vaccines were found to be far below regulatory limits.

Pfizer Vaccine Has DNA From SV40 Virus That Causes Cancer?!

The paper also warned about the Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter found in samples of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Why? Because it warns – the SV40 virus “induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals”.

First of all – after decades of studies, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

In any case, the SV40 promoter is a DNA sequence that is often used to manufacture mRNA, and is not dangerous. It certainly poses no cancer risk, because the part of the SV40 that can potentially cause cancer – the T-antigen, is not present in the SV40 promoter, or the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Bill Gates Invested In BioNTech Because COVID Was Coming?!

Did Bill Gates invest in BioNTech two months before COVID-19 was announced, because he was forewarned, or planned the pandemic?!

Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Bill Gates Invested In BioNTech Because COVID Was Coming!

People are sharing a post on X (formerly Twitter) by PeterSweden (archive), which appears to suggest that Bill Gates invested in BioNTech because COVID-19 was coming. Here is an excerpt:

I recently discovered something very weird. Bill Gates invested a whopping $55 MILLION in BioNTech that made the Pfizer mRNA injection. You will never believe the date that this happened…

This led some people to conclude or suggest that Bill Gates must have been forewarned, or even planned the pandemic himself! For example:

Thunder26 : It’s not a coincidence. It was all planned People who pulled the strings made a fortune out of this “pandemic”

Recommended : Is Bill Gates Planning To Kill Billions Using Turbo AIDS?!

 

Truth : Bill Gates Did Not Invest In BioNTech Because COVID Was Coming!

Let’s take a look at those claims, and find out what the facts really are…

Fact #1 : Investment Was Made By Gates Foundation

Let me start by pointing out that Bill Gates did not invest $55 million in BioNTech. It was the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF). You know, the world’s second largest charitable foundation?

While Bill Gates may be its most public face, the BMGF is governed by a board of trustees, with a CEO and five independent experts, and advised by a Scientific Advisory Committee.

Fact #2 : Agreement Was Signed In August 2019

Both BioNTech and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation announced the investment (here and here) on 4 September 2019. However, the investment agreement between the two parties was signed 5 days earlier, on 30 August 2019, as filed with the SEC.

This may seem like a small point, but a mistake here, a mistake there, and you end up with complete bollocks.

I should also point out that such large investments would have taken weeks, if not months, for both parties to negotiate, and their lawyers and boards to vet and approve.

Fact #3 : Investment Was Limited To HIV + TB Vaccines

The BioNTech press release made it clear that the BMGF investment was a partnership to “develop preclinical vaccine and immunotherapy candidates” for HIV and tuberculosis.

This was not mere PR. There was actually a legal agreement between the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and BioNTech SE, restricting what the funds can be used for.

This agreement on the “Strategic Relationship between the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and BioNTech SE“, which was also filed with the SEC on 30 August 2019, clearly stated that BioNTech will complete work packages on the Initial HIV SOW (Scope of Work) and the Initial TB Project SOW.

It also stated that “Additional Projects will not be funded by the Foundation Investment except in the limited circumstances following a determination that it is futile to continue with a workplan as set forth in the TB Project Statement of Work or HIV Project Statement of Work.

In other words – the $55 million BMGF investment was limited to the development of HIV and TV vaccines and immunotherapies.

Recommended : Is Bill Gates Facing Life Behind Bars For Child Rape?!

Fact #4 : $55 Million Is Chump Change For BMGF

As the world’s second-largest charitable foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation hold some $69 billion worth of assets. On top of that, it has given away some 7 billion dollars to fight disease and poverty.

In short – a $55 million investment is chump change. If Bill Gates was forewarned about COVID-19, and somehow knew that BioNTech’s mRNA vaccine technology would be a winner in the upcoming pandemic, he would have invested BILLIONS, not just a paltry $55 million.

Imagine if Bill Gates invested $10 billion into BioNTech, instead of just $55 million. The BMGF would be $100 billion richer, not just 0.55 billion richer. Ah, what a lousy businessman!

Fact #5 : BMGF To Grant Additional $45 Million

The BioNTech press release pointed that the total funding could reach $100 million, but oddly enough – the viral post failed to point that out. Why?

Possibly, that’s because the investment agreement stated that if BioNTech achieved its HIV and tuberculosis project milestones, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation would provide additional grants of up to $45 million!

Now, if the BMGF only invested in BioNTech to make money, why would it provide $45 million in grants when it can simply purchase $110 million of equity at one go?

Imagine if Bill Gates invested $110 million into BioNTech instead of just $55 million, he would have earned $1.1 billion, instead of “just $550 million” as claimed by the viral post. Ah, you silly, silly man…

Recommended : Was Bill Gates Destroyed In ABC News Interview?!

Fact #6 : China Only Revealed COVID-19 In December 2019

Finally, the viral post claimed that we first heard about the novel coronavirus that would be known as SARS-CoV-2 in November 2019. That’s not true.

While later reports suggested that SARS-CoV-2 was circulating in Wuhan in October and November, the public was only made aware of the new coronavirus on the very last day of 2019.

On 30 December 2019, the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission sent a hard-copy of guidelines on fighting “a possible outbreak of infectious pneumonia” to its affiliate institutions. It was only on 31 December that the Commission publicly announced the pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan, which was picked up by the WHO office in China and international news media.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | ScienceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Bill Gates Tremble With Fear In mRNA Vaccine Interview?!

Did Bill Gates tremble with fear in a recent interview with CBS News on the Moderna mRNA vaccine?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Bill Gates Trembled With Fear In mRNA Vaccine Interview!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed that Bill Gates trembled with fear in a recent interview with CBS News on the Moderna mRNA vaccine!

WATCH: Bill Gates Trembles With Fear When Confronted About Deadly mRNA