The Auto Immune diseases take about four months to begin kicking in. Save that cash influencers. You are going to need it to pay your doctor bills.
No. I will NOT be getting the shot.
https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1388114063545221123?s=20
https://twitter.com/AlabamaJaxx/status/1387881667696734210?s=20
I wonder how many thousands of dollars this influencer was paid to create this propaganda? (I balanced it out with a Jennifer Hudson song and some headlines).
My heart is aching with these outrageous numbers of side effects from the vaccine, especially knowing that so many people never report to anyone what happened to them.
8,430 DEAD 354,177 Injuries: European Database of Adverse Drug Reactions for COVID-19 “Vaccines
by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News
The European database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, which also tracks reports of injuries and deaths following the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines.”
Here is what EudraVigilance states about their database:
This website was launched by the European Medicines Agency in 2012 to provide public access to reports of suspected side effects (also known as suspected adverse drug reactions). These reports are submitted electronically to EudraVigilance by national medicines regulatory authorities and by pharmaceutical companies that hold marketing authorisations (licences) for the medicines.
EudraVigilance is a system designed for collecting reports of suspected side effects. These reports are used for evaluating the benefits and risks of medicines during their development and monitoring their safety following their authorisation in the European Economic Area (EEA). EudraVigilance has been in use since December 2001.
This website was launched to comply with the EudraVigilance Access Policy, which was developed to improve public health by supporting the monitoring of the safety of medicines and to increase transparency for stakeholders, including the general public.
The Management Board of the European Medicines Agency first approved the EudraVigilance Access Policy in December 2010. A revision was adopted by the Board in December 2015 based on the 2010 pharmacovigilance legislation. The policy aims to provide stakeholders such as national medicines regulatory authorities in the EEA, the European Commission, healthcare professionals, patients and consumers, as well as the pharmaceutical industry and research organisations, with access to reports on suspected side effects.
Transparency is a key guiding principle of the Agency, and is pivotal to building trust and confidence in the regulatory process. By increasing transparency, the Agency is better able to address the growing need among stakeholders, including the general public, for access to information. (Source.)
Their report through April 24, 2021 lists 8,430 deaths and 354,177 injuries following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:
A Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. This subscriber has volunteered to do this, and it is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.
Since we have started publishing this, others from Europe have also calculated the numbers and confirmed the totals.
Here is the summary data through April 24, 2021.
Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer: 4,524 deaths and 151,306 injuries to 24/04/2021
Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273 (CX-024414) from Moderna: 2,283 deaths and 17,625 injuries to 24/04/2021
Total reactions for the experimental vaccine AZD1222 (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/ AstraZeneca: 1,579 deaths and 184,833 injuries to 24/04/2021
Total reactions for the experimental COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson: 44 deaths and 413 injuries to 24/04/2021
This is public information funded by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and anyone can use the EudraVigilance system and verify this data.
Denmark and Norway have completely suspended use of the AstraZeneca experimental COVID-19 shots.
A statement issued by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health stated that the AstraZeneca COVID “vaccine” is more dangerous than COVID itself, especially for young people.
The EMA continues to recommend it. They did, however, add a safety warning to the J&J shots, due to fatal blood clots. (Source.)
Comment on this article at HealthImpactNews.com.
1,047 Dead 725,079 Reported Injuries following COVID19 Experimental “Vaccines” Reported in the U.K.
by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News
The UK Government’s reporting system for COVID vaccine adverse reactions from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency released their latest report today, April 29, 2021.
The report covers data collected from December 9, 2020, through April 21, 2021, for the three experimental COVID “vaccines” currently in use in the U.K. from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna.
They report a total of 1,047 deaths and 725,079 injuries recorded following the experimental COVID injections.
685 of the 1,047 deaths followed AstraZeneca COVID injections, and 573,650 of the 725,079 injuries followed AstraZeneca COVID injections.
Two countries, Norway and Denmark, have now completely halted injections of COVID shots by AstraZeneca, with the Norwegian Institute of Public Health stating that the AstraZeneca experimental shots are associated with a higher risk of injury and death than the COVID-19 virus. See:
Other European countries have also temporarily halted the AstraZeneca shots while they review safety data, but the UK has never halted injecting people with the shot causing fatal blood clots, and the reported events of death and injuries following AstraZeneca shots.
The latest UK COVID-19 vaccine Oxford University/AstraZeneca analysis report:
Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine Oxford University/AstraZenec vaccine: 685 deaths and 573,650 injuries.
The latest UK COVID-19 mRNA Pfizer- BioNTech vaccine analysis report:
Total reactions for the COVID-19 mRNA Pfizer- BioNTech vaccine: 347 deaths and 149,082 injuries
The latest (and first) COVID-19 vaccine Moderna vaccine analysis report:
Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine Moderna vaccine: 2 deaths and 660 injuries
Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine brand unspecified vaccines: 13 deaths and 1687 injuries.
The UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency concludes:
Comment on this article at HealthImpactNews.com.
https://www.instagram.com/p/COMq3UNhcWO/?igshid=1h0pauhqrqlm9
Dave Rubin talks to Paul Rossi, a whistleblower and math teacher at Grace Church School, about the NYC private school’s critical race theory curriculum that led him to publish “I Refuse to Stand By While My Students Are Indoctrinated” on the Substack of Bari Weiss.
In this clip Paul reveals the damage being done by critical race theory being forced onto young kids. Paul describes how critical race theory in education had been building slowly for years. Recently he had noticed the damaging effects it was having on his students by making them feel like they couldn’t have opinions that differed from the social justice orthodoxy. Young kids were made to feel guilt and shame over their alleged “white privilege”. He also describes the incident that made him decide to speak up and put his job at risk.
Paul RossiApr 13
I am a teacher at Grace Church High School in Manhattan. Ten years ago, I changed careers when I discovered how rewarding it is to help young people explore the truth and beauty of mathematics. I love my work.
As a teacher, my first obligation is to my students. But right now, my school is asking me to embrace “antiracism” training and pedagogy that I believe is deeply harmful to them and to any person who seeks to nurture the virtues of curiosity, empathy and understanding.
“Antiracist” training sounds righteous, but it is the opposite of truth in advertising. It requires teachers like myself to treat students differently on the basis of race. Furthermore, in order to maintain a united front for our students, teachers at Grace are directed to confine our doubts about this pedagogical framework to conversations with an in-house “Office of Community Engagement” for whom every significant objection leads to a foregone conclusion. Any doubting students are likewise “challenged” to reframe their views to conform to this orthodoxy.
I know that by attaching my name to this I’m risking not only my current job but my career as an educator, since most schools, both public and private, are now captive to this backward ideology. But witnessing the harmful impact it has on children, I can’t stay silent.
My school, like so many others, induces students via shame and sophistry to identify primarily with their race before their individual identities are fully formed. Students are pressured to conform their opinions to those broadly associated with their race and gender and to minimize or dismiss individual experiences that don’t match those assumptions. The morally compromised status of “oppressor” is assigned to one group of students based on their immutable characteristics. In the meantime, dependency, resentment and moral superiority are cultivated in students considered “oppressed.”
All of this is done in the name of “equity,” but it is the opposite of fair. In reality, all of this reinforces the worst impulses we have as human beings: our tendency toward tribalism and sectarianism that a truly liberal education is meant to transcend.
Recently, I raised questions about this ideology at a mandatory, whites-only student and faculty Zoom meeting. (Such racially segregated sessions are now commonplace at my school.) It was a bait-and-switch “self-care” seminar that labelled “objectivity,” “individualism,” “fear of open conflict,” and even “a right to comfort” as characteristics of white supremacy. I doubted that these human attributes — many of them virtues reframed as vices — should be racialized in this way. In the Zoom chat, I also questioned whether one must define oneself in terms of a racial identity at all. My goal was to model for students that they should feel safe to question ideological assertions if they felt moved to do so.
It seemed like my questions broke the ice. Students and even a few teachers offered a broad range of questions and observations. Many students said it was a more productive and substantive discussion than they expected.
However, when my questions were shared outside this forum, violating the school norm of confidentiality, I was informed by the head of the high school that my philosophical challenges had caused “harm” to students, given that these topics were “life and death matters, about people’s flesh and blood and bone.” I was reprimanded for “acting like an independent agent of a set of principles or ideas or beliefs.” And I was told that by doing so, I failed to serve the “greater good and the higher truth.”
He further informed me that I had created “dissonance for vulnerable and unformed thinkers” and “neurological disturbance in students’ beings and systems.” The school’s director of studies added that my remarks could even constitute harassment.
A few days later, the head of school ordered all high school advisors to read a public reprimand of my conduct out loud to every student in the school. It was a surreal experience, walking the halls alone and hearing the words emitting from each classroom: “Events from last week compel us to underscore some aspects of our mission and share some thoughts about our community,” the statement began. “At independent schools, with their history of predominantly white populations, racism colludes with other forms of bias (sexism, classism, ableism and so much more) to undermine our stated ideals, and we must work hard to undo this history.”
Students from low-income families experience culture shock at our school. Racist incidents happen. And bias can influence relationships. All true. But addressing such problems with a call to “undo history” lacks any kind of limiting principle and pairs any allegation of bigotry with a priori guilt. My own contract for next year requires me to “participate in restorative practices designed by the Office of Community Engagement” in order to “heal my relationship with the students of color and other students in my classes.” The details of these practices remain unspecified until I agree to sign.
I asked my uncomfortable questions in the “self-care” meeting because I felt a duty to my students. I wanted to be a voice for the many students of different backgrounds who have approached me over the course of the past several years to express their frustration with indoctrination at our school, but are afraid to speak up.
They report that, in their classes and other discussions, they must never challenge any of the premises of our “antiracist” teachings, which are deeply informed by Critical Race Theory. These concerns are confirmed for me when I attend grade-level and all-school meetings about race or gender issues. There, I witness student after student sticking to a narrow script of acceptable responses. Teachers praise insights when they articulate the existing framework or expand it to apply to novel domains. Meantime, it is common for teachers to exhort students who remain silent that “we really need to hear from you.”
But what does speaking up mean in a context in which white students are asked to interrogate their “white saviorism,” but also “not make their antiracist practice about them”? We are compelling them to tiptoe through a minefield of double-binds. According to the school’s own standard for discursive violence, this constitutes abuse.
Every student at the school must also sign a “Student Life Agreement,” which requires them to aver that “the world as we understand it can be hard and extremely biased,” that they commit to “recognize and acknowledge their biases when we come to school, and interrupt those biases,” and accept that they will be “held accountable should they fall short of the agreement.” A recent faculty email chain received enthusiastic support for recommending that we “‘officially’ flag students” who appear “resistant” to the “culture we are trying to establish.”
When I questioned what form this resistance takes, examples presented by a colleague included “persisting with a colorblind ideology,” “suggesting that we treat everyone with respect,” “a belief in meritocracy,” and “just silence.” In a special assembly in February 2019, our head of school said that the impact of words and images perceived as racist — regardless of intent — is akin to “using a gun or a knife to kill or injure someone.”
Imagine being a young person in this environment. Would you risk voicing your doubts, especially if you had never heard a single teacher question it?
Last fall, juniors and seniors in my Art of Persuasion class expressed dismay with the “Grace bubble” and sought to engage with a wider range of political viewpoints. Since the BLM protests often came up in our discussions, I thought of assigning Glenn Loury, a Brown University professor and public intellectual whose writings express a nuanced, center-right position on racial issues in America. Unfortunately, my administration put the kibosh on my proposal.
The head of the high school responded to me that “people like Loury’s lived experience—and therefore his derived social philosophy” made him an exception to the rule that black thinkers acknowledge structural racism as the paramount impediment in society. He added that “the moment we are in institutionally and culturally, does not lend itself to dispassionate discussion and debate,” and discussing Loury’s ideas would “only confuse and/or enflame students, both those in the class and others that hear about it outside of the class.” He preferred I assign “mainstream white conservatives,” effectively denying black students the opportunity to hear from a black professor who holds views that diverge from the orthodoxy pushed on them.
I find it self-evidently racist to filter the dissemination of an idea based on the race of the person who espouses it. I find the claim that exposing 11th and 12th graders to diverse views on an important societal issue will only “confuse” them to be characteristic of a fundamentalist religion, not an educational philosophy.
My administration says that these constraints on discourse are necessary to shield students from harm. But it is clear to me that these constraints serve primarily to shield their ideology from harm — at the cost of students’ psychological and intellectual development.
It was out of concern for my students that I spoke out in the “self-care” meeting, and it is out of that same concern that I write today. I am concerned for students who crave a broader range of viewpoints in class. I am concerned for students trained in “race explicit” seminars to accept some opinions as gospel, while discarding as immoral disconfirming evidence. I am concerned for the dozens of students during my time at Grace who shared with me that they have been reproached by teachers for expressing views that are not aligned with the new ideology.
One current student paid me a visit a few weeks ago. He tapped faintly on my office door, anxiously looking both ways before entering. He said he had come to offer me words of support for speaking up at the meeting.
I thanked him for his comments, but asked him why he seemed so nervous. He told me he was worried that a particular teacher might notice this visit and “it would mean that I would get in trouble.” He reported to me that this teacher once gave him a lengthy “talking to” for voicing a conservative opinion in class. He then remembered with a sigh of relief that this teacher was absent that day. I looked him in the eyes. I told him he was a brave young man for coming to see me, and that he should be proud of that.
Then I sent him on his way. And I resolved to write this piece.
CORRECTION: The anecdote about Glenn Loury was originally attributed to the head of Grace Church School. In fact, those statements were made by the head of the high school. Apologies for the error.
I am so amazed by the brave doctors who are risking EVERYTHING to get the truth out. And the indie journalists who are documenting their claims. Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson interviews Dr. Charles Hoffe.
Comments by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News
Charles Hoffe has been a medical doctor for 28 years in the small, rural town of Lytton in British Columbia, Canada. The town is comprised of many indigenous groups and the “First Nations.”
When Dr. Hoffe was given 900 doses of the Moderna experimental COVID-19 injections, he administered the doses through the Lytton Medical Clinic to those who wanted them.
He chose not to inject himself.
Dr. Hoffe reports that the result of injecting 900 people among the indigenous First Nations community was that 2 people went into anaphylactic shock, one person died, and several others have suffered what appear to be permanent disabilities. He relates how one of his patients is in so much pain now, that she prefers death to life.
By contrast, no one in the community died or became permanently disabled due to the COVID-19 virus for the past year.
Dr. Hoffe reported these adverse reactions by email to the medical personnel in his community who were responsible for the roll-out of the Moderna shots, which included pharmacists, nurses, and doctors in his area, a total of about 18 people he says.
His email expressed grave concern over the side effects he was seeing, and he asked if perhaps they should pause the injections for a while.
He reports that within 48 hours he received a very stern rebuke from his superiors at the Interior Health Authority accusing him of causing “vaccine hesitancy” and that they were going to report him to BC College of Physicians and Surgeons.
They forbade him from saying anything negative about the Moderna shots by issuing a gag order against him.
Dr. Hoffe explains that this is a method of intimidation that is being used against other doctors who have become too afraid to speak out, because the College of Physicians and Surgeons has great authority to shut down doctors’ careers, or heavily fine them.
As he continued to see more injuries the following week, he became very angry about his gag order. He was told that if he had any concerns about the injections that he had to contact the medical health officer in charge of the Moderna roll out.
He did, but when he did not receive a reply, he decided to write an open letter directly to Dr. Bonnie Henry, British Columbia Provincial Health Officer, in direct defiance of his gag order since he made it public.
Here is a copy of the letter.
Dr. Charles D. Hoffe, BSc, MB, BCh, LMCC
Lytton Medical Clinic
Lytton BC V0K 1Z0
5 April, 2021
Dr. Bonnie Henry,
British Columbia Provincial Health Officer
Ministry of Health
1515 Blanchard Street
Victoria, BC, V8W 3C9
Dear Dr. Henry,
The first dose of the Moderna vaccine has now been administered to some of my patients in the community of Lytton, BC. This began with the First Nations members of our community in mid-January, 2021. 900 doses have now been administered.
I have been quite alarmed at the high rate of serious side-effects from this novel treatment.
From this relatively small number of people vaccinated so far, we have had:
So in short, in our small community of Lytton, BC, we have one person dead, and three people who look as though they will be permanently disabled, following their first dose of the Moderna vaccine. The age of those affected ranges from 38 to 82 years of age.
So I have a couple of questions and comments:
I have also noticed that these vaccine induced side effects are going almost entirely unreported, by those responsible for the vaccine rollout. I am aware that this is often a problem, with vaccines in general, and that delayed side-effects after vaccines, are sometimes labelled as being “coincidences”, as causality is often hard to prove. However, in view of the fact that this is an experimental treatment, with no long-term safety data, I think that perhaps this issue should be addressed too.
Furthermore I have noticed, that the provincial vaccine injury reporting form, which was clearly designed for conventional vaccines, does not even have any place to report vaccine injuries of the nature and severity that we are seeing from this new mRNA therapy.
It is now clearly apparent with medical evidence from around the world, that the side-effect profiles of the various gene modification therapies against Covid-19, have been vastly understated by their manufacturers, who were eager to prove their safety.
Thank you for attention to this critically urgent public health matter.
Yours sincerely,
Dr. Charles Hoffe
The IH (Interior Health) responded to his letter publicly and it was published in the Ashcroft Cache Creek Journal as they tried to do “damage control” and attack Dr. Hoffe.
Doctor makes unsubstantiated claims about serious side effects of Moderna vaccine
by BARBARA RODEN
Interior Health (IH) is reassuring Lytton and area residents about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, after a physician in that community shared a letter in which he claimed that the death of a Lytton resident was linked to the Moderna vaccine.
In a letter to Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry dated April 5, Dr. Charles Hoffe claimed that there had been “numerous” allergic reactions — including two cases of anaphylaxis — among people in Lytton and area who had received the Moderna vaccine. He also claimed that three people were exhibiting “ongoing and disabling” neurological deficits.
Hoffe also claimed that the death of a 72-year-old patient with COPD, 24 days after the man was vaccinated, was “presumed” to be vaccine-induced. The physician did not produce any evidence to prove that any of the events resulted from the vaccine.
“It has been a challenge for us to investigate this thoroughly and take reports seriously,” says Dr. Carol Fenton, Medical Health Officer with IH. In a written statement issued on April 14, Fenton says that “There have been no deaths or lasting adverse reactions connected to the Moderna/Pfizer vaccines, or any COVID-19 vaccine, in Lytton, Interior Health, or B.C. at this time.”
The statement adds that IH knows unequivocally that the vaccines are safer than COVID-19 itself, and that the vaccines have been demonstrated to be safe and effective through all levels of clinical trials.
“There is a detailed process to review all adverse effects following immunizations, and all serious events are recorded and reported to the provincial and national level to monitor for safety signals that may be missed at the local level. With the information we have from the vaccine roll-out so far, the COVID-19 vaccines are very safe.”
Fenton tells the Journal that while there will always be some variations between medical practitioners, when it comes to the safety of vaccines it is important to look at consensus-based reports from those who are trained in the field.
“These people are the experts of the experts,” she says. “I can answer most vaccine questions, but I don’t consider myself to be an expert in vaccines. The decisions and analyses are defined by people with the skills and expertise to parse through the information we have.”
The immunization clinics being run by IH have trained vaccinators on site to monitor for and respond to allergic and anaphylactic reactions, which are rare, but can occur with any vaccine or medication.
“The safety of people in Lytton, Nlaka’pamux, and Northern St’at’imc Nations and all communities is the top priority, and our recommendation is that all individuals should get immunized when they are eligible,” says the statement. (Full article here.)
So basically the same as what we are seeing around the rest of the world when honest doctors come forward and report the truth.
The health authorities lie. No science, no statistics, just an appeal to authority. “We know what we are talking about, but this doctor does not.”
A local and independent talk show host in Canada, Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson, tracked down and interviewed Dr. Hoffe. The original show is an hour long and on her Facebook Page, as well as her Bitchute Channel.
We have extracted the 30 minute interview with Dr. Hoffe, and it is on our Rumble channel, and will also be on our Bitchute channel.
Dr. Hoffe has served the members of his community for 28 years, and he had a wonderful reputation among his patients, with glowing online reviews.It is being reported now on some social media sites that his patients are being told he is no longer available to meet with them.
Boris Epshteyn: Arizona Vote Off By Up to 30% in Election Decided By 0.3%
Exclusive Inside Look at Center Housing Maricopa Audit of 2.1 Million Ballots
https://www.instagram.com/p/CN8yT9phzPg/?igshid=1jlphs9d9ezza
