Sandra Finley

Nov 172024
 

PREVIOUS WAS:     For Your Selection November 1, 2024

– – – – – – – – – – –

For Your Selection NOVEMBER 18, 2024
COVID  (Includes Tyranny)
  1.  2024-11-16 Covid TRAVEL MANDATES LAWSUIT in Toronto on Monday Nov 18. URGENT MESSAGE In-person OR Register for the Court Zoom

2.   2024-11-12 Help us stop the Online Harms Act. (Do not let it get thru Parliament!) From JCCF (Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms). John Carpay

         #2 is closely associated with the info from Reclaim the Net (the next posting).  Online Harms Act is local (Canada).  The Same Legislation, wording the same or slightly altered, is under seige in a number of other countries.  I’d say the Act is part of the Globalist agenda.

3.  2024-11-05 Four Articles from Reclaim the Net 

4.  2024-10-18 HISTORIC WIN: Ontario man, Cullen McDonald, wins appeal for charges related to protesting COVID mandates. Jen Hodgson, Western Standard News.

All charges have been dropped against Cullen McDonald, who faced three criminal charges for peacefully protesting COVID-19 mandates in Ontario . . .  “I was falsely accused of endangering the lives of the public but I refused to plea guilty to something I didn’t do, and today, I stand vindicated.”  (Sandra speaking:  what the Prosecutor had in mind for Cullen was bizarre.  Perhaps the Prosecutor is an angry man.  The good news is The Judge (Blouin)  (a short posting.)

5.  2024-11-17 A Systematic Review Of Autopsy Findings In Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination

The term cardiovascular refers to the heart (cardio) and the blood vessels (vascular). The cardiovascular system includes:

      • Arteries
      • Arterioles
      • Capillaries
      • Heart
      • Venules
Cardiovascular system   Watch this 1-minute video about: Cardiovascular system
The last sentence is “Platelets cause blood to coagulate whenever an injury to a blood vessel occurs“.

The aim of this systematic review is to investigate possible causal links between COVID-19 vaccine administration and death using autopsies and post-mortem analysis.

The Systematic Review

Under RESULTS,  Table 1.  Of the deaths:

The cardiovascular system was most frequently implicated (49%),  . . .   (Sandra speaking:  I am reminded of the posting:

2024-05-05 Blood clots are red. White clots are fibrin. Embalmers see them post mortem. Dr Baun sees them in the still alive. Same phenomenon. Treat the clots, don’t end up dead.  Covid is NOT a “clotting disease”.

(It is healthy and NORMAL for the body to produce fibrin (which makes the clots) to stanch extra blood flow, e.g. from a cut.  The mRNA vaccines’ spike protein makes minute perforations in blood vessel walls & other parts of the cardiovascular system.  Tiny, tiny bleeding,  that you can’t see,  but collectively in mass amounts.)  It makes sense that 49% of the deaths are cardiovascular-related.)

6.  2024-11-15 Covid: Judge stays Freedom Convoy charges against Randy Hillier due to court delays. By Jonathan Bradley, Western Standard.

7.  2024-11-15 BC workers’ class action against COVID vax mandate allowed to move forward. by Jen Hodgson, Western Standard.

8.  2024-11-05 COVID ‘Historic’: Federal Court (American) Says AstraZeneca Not Immune From Liability in Case Involving Woman Injured by COVID Vaccine During Clinical Trial. Nevradakis, CHD

9.  2024-10-31 Court rules Alberta business COVID class action has grounds to proceed. By Jen Hodgson, Western Standard News.

10.  2024-11-01 Naomi Wolf Discusses ‘Chilling’ Revelations From Pfizer Documents. New book, The Pfizer Papers. Interviewer Nevradakis, CHD

 

AMERICAN ELECTION

11.  2024-11-14 More than any part of this (American) election …

12.  2024-11- American Secretary of State for Agriculture, Thomas Massie.

Wadda ya think?  Is the chemical rain from Big AgBiotech going to stop?  Who is Thomas Massie?

OTHER

13.  2024-11- A Map of the New Normal, book by Jeff Rubin. Video’d discussion

14.  Desiderata. by Max Ehrmann, 1927.

Nov 172024
 

A Systematic Review Of Autopsy Findings In Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination

  • Nicolas Hulscher *
  • Paul E. Alexander
  • Richard Amerling
  • Heather Gessling
  • Roger Hodkinson
  • William Makis
  • Harvey A. Risch
  • Mark Trozzi
  • Peter A. McCullough

Abstract


Background: The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, combined with a high number of adverse event reports, have led to concerns over possible mechanisms of injury including systemic lipid nanoparticle (LNP) and mRNA distribution, Spike protein-associated tissue damage, thrombogenicity, immune system dysfunction, and carcinogenicity. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate possible causal links between COVID-19 vaccine administration and death using autopsies and post-mortem analysis.

Methods: We searched PubMed and ScienceDirect for all published autopsy and organ-restricted autopsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination up until May 18th, 2023. All autopsy and organ-restricted autopsy studies that included COVID-19 vaccination as an antecedent exposure were included. Because the state of knowledge has advanced since the time of the original publications, three physicians independently reviewed each case and adjudicated whether or not COVID-19 vaccination was the direct cause or contributed significantly to death.

Results: We initially identified 678 studies and, after screening for our inclusion criteria, included 44 papers that contained 325 autopsy cases and one organ-restricted autopsy case (heart). The mean age of death was 70.4 years. The most implicated organ system among cases was the cardiovascular (49%), followed by hematological (17%), respiratory (11%), and multiple organ systems (7%). Three or more organ systems were affected in 21 cases. The mean time from vaccination to death was 14.3 days. Most deaths occurred within a week from last vaccine administration. A total of 240 deaths (73.9%) were independently adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination, of which the primary causes of death include sudden cardiac death (35%), pulmonary embolism (12.5%), myocardial infarction (12%), VITT (7.9%), myocarditis (7.1%), multisystem inflammatory syndrome (4.6%), and cerebral hemorrhage (3.8%).

Conclusions: The consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine mechanisms of injury and death, coupled with autopsy confirmation by physician adjudication, suggests there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death. Further urgent investigation is required for the purpose of clarifying our findings.

Introduction


As of May 31st, 2023, SARS-CoV-2 has infected an estimated 767,364,883 people globally, resulting in 6,938,353 deaths according to the World Health Organization (WHO) [1]. These official numbers are likely exaggerated due to widespread use of RT-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) with arbitrarily high cycle thresholds as the basis for COVID-19 diagnosis [2]. As a direct response to this worldwide catastrophe, governments adopted a coordinated approach to limit caseloads and mortality utilizing a combination of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and novel gene-based vaccine platforms. The first doses of vaccine were administered less than 11 months after the identification of the SARS-CoV-2 genetic sequence (in the United States, under the Operation Warp Speed initiative), which represented the fastest vaccine development in history with limited assurances of long-term safety [3]. As of May 31st, 2023, roughly 69% of the global population have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine [1].

Some of the utilized COVID-19 vaccine platforms include inactivated virus (Sinovac – CoronaVac), protein subunit (Novavax – NVX-CoV2373), viral vector (AstraZeneca – ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, Johnson & Johnson – Ad26.COV2.S), and messenger RNA (Pfizer-BioNTech – BNT162b2, Moderna – mRNA-1273)[4]. All utilize mechanisms that can cause serious adverse events; most involve the uncontrolled synthesis of the Spike glycoprotein as the basis of the immunological response. Circulating Spike protein is the likely deleterious mechanism through which COVID-19 vaccines produce adverse effects [5-9,12,13]. Spike protein and/or subunits/peptide fragments can trigger ACE2 receptor degradation and destabilization of the renin–angiotensin system (RAS), resulting in severe thrombosis [5]. Spike protein activates platelets, causes endothelial damage, and directly promotes thrombosis [6]. Moreover, immune system cells that uptake lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) from COVID-19 vaccines can then systemically distribute Spike protein and microRNAs via exosomes, which may cause severe inflammatory consequences [6]. Further, long term cancer control may be jeopardized in those injected with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines because of interferon regulatory factor (IRF) and tumor suppressor gene dysregulation [6]. Moreover, a possible causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and various diseases has been found, including neurological disorders, myocarditis, blood platelet deficiencies, liver disease, weakened immune adaptability, and cancer development [6]. These findings are supported by the finding that recurrent COVID-19 vaccination with genetic vaccines may trigger unusually high levels of IgG4 antibodies, which may lead to immune system dysregulation, and contribute to the emergence of autoimmune disorders, myocarditis, and cancer growth [7].

Neurotoxic effects of Spike protein may cause or contribute to the post-COVID syndrome, including headache, tinnitus, autonomic dysfunction, and small fiber neuropathy [8]. Specific to the administration of viral vector COVID-19 vaccines (AstraZeneca; Johnson and Johnson), a new clinical syndrome called vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) was identified in 2021 and characterized by the development of thromboses at atypical body sites combined with severe thrombocytopenia after vaccination [10]. The pathogenesis of this life-threatening side effect is currently unknown, though it has been proposed that VITT is caused by post-vaccination antibodies against platelet factor 4 (PF4) triggering extensive platelet activation [10]. mRNA-based vaccines rarely cause VITT, but they are associated with myocarditis, or inflammation of myocardium [11]. The mechanisms for the development of myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination are not clear, but it has been hypothesized that it may be caused by molecular mimicry of Spike protein and self-antigens, immune response to mRNA, and dysregulated cytokine expression [11]. In adolescents and young adults diagnosed with post-mRNA vaccine myocarditis, free Spike protein was detected in the blood while vaccinated controls had no circulating Spike protein [12]. It has been demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 Spike mRNA vaccine sequences can circulate in the blood for up to 28 days after vaccination [13]. However, the authors did not measure for vaccine mRNA past 28 days. These data indicate that adverse events may occur for an unknown period after vaccination, with Spike protein playing an important potential etiological role.

Parry et al. has demonstrated systemic distribution of the LNPs containing mRNA after vaccine administration in rats, concluding that LNPs reached their highest concentration at the injection site, followed by the liver, spleen, adrenal glands, ovaries (females), and bone marrow (femur) over 48 hours [14]. Further, LNPs were detected in the brain, heart, eyes, lungs, kidneys, bladder, small intestine, stomach, testes (males), prostate (males), uterus (females), thyroid, spinal cord, and blood [14]. This biodistribution data suggests that Spike protein may be expressed in cells from many vital organ systems, raising significant concerns regarding the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines. Given the identified vaccination syndromes and their possible mechanisms, the frequency of adverse event reports is expected to be high, especially given the vast number of vaccine doses administered globally.

Through May 31st, 2024, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) contained 1,640,416 adverse event reports associated with COVID-19 vaccines, including 37,647 deaths, 28,445 myocarditis and pericarditis, 21,741 heart attacks, and 9,218 thrombocytopenia reports [15]. If COVID-19 vaccination is indeed a determinant of the alarmingly high number of reported deaths, the implications could be immense, including: the complete withdrawal of all COVID-19 vaccines from the global market, suspension of all remaining COVID-19 vaccine mandates and passports, loss of public trust in government and medical institutions, investigations and inquiries into the censorship, silencing, and persecution of doctors and scientists who raised these concerns, and compensation for those who were harmed as a result of the administration of COVID-19 vaccines. Using VAERS data alone to establish a direct link between COVID-19 vaccination and death, however, is not possible due to many limitations and confounding factors.

In 2021, Walach et al. indicated that every death after COVID-19 vaccination should undergo an autopsy to investigate the mechanisms of harm [16]. Autopsies are one of the most powerful diagnostic tools in medicine to establish cause of death and clarify the pathophysiology of disease [17]. COVID-19 vaccines, with plausible mechanisms of injury to the human body and a substantial number of adverse event reports, represent an exposure that may be causally linked to death in some cases. The purpose of this systematic review is to investigate possible causal links between COVID-19 vaccine administration and death using post-mortem analyses, including autopsies.

Methods


Data Sources and Search Strategy

We performed a systematic review of all published autopsy and organ-restricted autopsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination through May 18th, 2023. We utilized the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA) Statement [18] to limit study selection bias and ensure transparency and completeness in reporting. The following databases were used: PubMed and ScienceDirect. The following keywords were used: “COVID-19 Vaccine,” “SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine,” or “COVID Vaccination,” and “Post-mortem,” or “Autopsy.” All possible keyword combinations were manually searched. The search was not restricted to any language. All selected studies were screened for relevant literature contained in their references.

Eligibility Criteria and Selection Process

All original articles, randomized clinical trials, case reports, and case series that contain autopsy or organ-restricted autopsy (gross and histologic analysis of a single organ) results with COVID-19 vaccines as an antecedent exposure were included. Review articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, papers with no autopsy or organ-restricted autopsy results, non-human studies, and papers with no reported COVID-19 vaccination status were excluded. The authors’ conclusions were not considered for study inclusion to avoid bias. Two authors (NH and PAM) independently screened the full text of all retrieved studies to assess their eligibility for inclusion and removed all ineligible/duplicate studies. Any disagreements for inclusion of an article were resolved by discussion until agreement was reached.

Data Extraction and Analysis

From the selected studies, two authors (NH and PAM) independently extracted the following data into Microsoft Excel: year published, country where the study was conducted, and all available individual case information (age, sex, brand of COVID-19 vaccine, cumulative number of COVID-19 vaccine doses administered, days from last COVID-19 vaccine administration to death, post-mortem findings, and type of post-mortem procedure). Any discrepancies in data were resolved by discussion and re-extraction of the data. Given the presence of some missing data, all available information was used to calculate descriptive statistics. Estimated age (exact age not given) and inferred time from last vaccine administration to death (no definitive time given) were excluded from calculations and figures. Because the state of knowledge regarding COVID-19 vaccine safety has advanced since the time of the original publications, we performed a contemporary review: three physician experts (RH, WM, PAM) with experience in death adjudication and anatomical/clinical pathology independently reviewed the available evidence of each case (Table S1), including demographic information, clinical vignette, vaccination data, gross and histologic autopsy findings, and determined whether or not COVID-19 vaccination was the direct cause or contributed significantly to the mechanism of death described. The physicians assessed the temporal relationships, strength of evidence and consistency of findings with reported characteristics and common presentations of COVID-19 vaccine-associated deaths documented in VAERS [15], and other potential etiologies to adjudicate each case. Agreement was reached when two or more physicians adjudicated a case concordantly. For the study by Chaves [23], only cardiovascular and hematological system-related cases were adjudicated as being linked to the vaccine due to a high probability of COVID-19 vaccination contributing to death. This high-probability assessment was supported by evaluating similar cases documented in VAERS, where cardiovascular and hematological adverse events represent a significant portion of serious adverse event reports [15]. Individual case information was missing for other cases, limiting adjudication for non-cardiovascular or hematological outcomes.

Results


A database search yielded 678 studies that had potential to meet our inclusion criterion. 562 duplicates were screened out. Out of the remaining 116 papers, 36 met our specified inclusion criterion. Through further analysis of references, we located 18 additional papers, with 8 of them meeting our inclusion criterion. In total, we found 44 studies that contained autopsy or organ-restricted autopsy reports of COVID-19 vaccinees (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Flow Diagram Detailing the Study Selection Process

Table 1 summarizes the 44 studies [19-62], which includes a total of 325 autopsy cases and 1 organ-restricted autopsy case (heart). The mean age of death was 70.4 years and there were 139 females (42.6%). Most received a Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (41%), followed by Sinovac (37%), AstraZeneca (13%), Moderna (7%), Johnson & Johnson (1%), and Sinopharm (1%).

Table 1.

Characteristics of Included Autopsy and Organ-Restricted Autopsy Studies Examining Potential COVID-19 Vaccine-Related Deaths

Table 1. Continued

*Cases = Number of deaths examined post-mortem
**Dose = Cumulative number of vaccine doses received
***Period = Time (in days) from most recent vaccine administration to death
~= Inferred Period (Estimated period using all available information, definitive period not given)
Abbreviations: MIS = Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome; SCD = Sudden Cardiac Death; MI = Myocardial Infarction; PE = Pulmonary Embolism; AZ = AstraZeneca; J&J = Johnson and Johnson; VITT = Vaccine-induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia; ADEM = Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis; SCLS = Systemic Capillary Leak Syndrome; GBS = Guillain-Barre Syndrome; TMA = Thrombotic Microangiopathies; VI-ARDS = Vaccine-induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome; UIP = Usual Interstitial Pneumonia.

The cardiovascular system was most frequently implicated (49%), followed by hematological (17%), respiratory (11%), multiple organ systems (7%), neurological (4%), immunological (4%), and gastrointestinal (1%). In 7% of cases, the cause of death was either unknown, non-natural (drowning, head injury, etc.) or infection (Figure 2). One organ system was affected in 302 cases, two in 3 cases, three in 8 cases, and four or more in 13 cases (Figure 3).

Figure 2.

Proportion of Cases by Affected Organ System

Figure 3.

Number of Affected Organ Systems by Cases

Table 2 shows the number and proportion of each reported cause of death. Sudden cardiac death was the most common cause of death (21.2%), followed by myocardial infarction (9.5%), pulmonary embolism (9.5%), ischemic heart disease (6.8%), VITT (5.8%), COVID-19 pneumonia (5.8%), myocarditis/pericarditis (5.5%), cerebral/subarachnoid hemorrhage (2.8%), coronary artery disease (2.5%), respiratory failure (2.5%), and unexplained (2.5%).

Table 2.

Number and Proportion of Reported Causes of Death Among Included Cases

Table 2.

Continued

The number of days from vaccination until death was 14.3 (mean), 3 (median) irrespective of dose; 7.8 (mean), 3 (median) after one dose; 23.2 (mean), 2 (median) after two doses; and 5.7 (mean), 2 (median) after three doses. The distribution of days from last vaccine administration to death is highly right skewed, showing that most of the deaths occurred within a week from last vaccination (Figure 4).

Figure 4.

Distribution of Time from Last Vaccine Administration to Death Among Cases

240 deaths (73.9%) were independently adjudicated by three physicians to be significantly linked to COVID-19 vaccination (Table S1). Among adjudicators, there was complete independent agreement (all three physicians) of COVID-19 vaccination contributing to death in 203 cases (62.5%). The one organ-restricted autopsy case was judged to be linked to vaccination with complete agreement. Among the 240 deaths that have been adjudicated as being significantly linked to COVID-19 vaccination, most received a Sinovac vaccine (46.3%), followed by Pfizer (30.1%), AstraZeneca (14.6%), Moderna (7.5%), Johnson & Johnson (1.3%), and Sinopharm (0.8%); the mean age of death was 55.8; the number of days from vaccination until death was 11.3 (mean), 3 (median) irrespective of dose; and the primary causes of death include sudden cardiac death (35%), pulmonary embolism (12.5%), myocardial infarction (12%), VITT (7.9%), myocarditis (7.1%), multisystem inflammatory syndrome (4.6%), and cerebral hemorrhage (3.8%).

Discussion


Among all published autopsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination, we found by independent adjudication that 73.9% of deaths were attributable to fatal COVID-19 vaccine injury syndromes (Table S1).  The cardiovascular system was by far the most implicated organ system in death, followed by hematological, respiratory, multiple organ systems, neurological, immunological, and gastrointestinal systems (Figure 2), with three or more organ systems affected in 21 cases (Figure 3). Sudden cardiac death, myocardial infarction, myocarditis, pericarditis, pulmonary embolism, VITT, brain hemorrhage, multi-organ failure, respiratory failure, and cytokine storm were the reported causes of death in the majority of cases (Table 2). The majority of deaths occurred within a week from last vaccine administration (Figure 4). These results corroborate known COVID-19 vaccine-induced syndromes and show significant, temporal associations between COVID-19 vaccination and death involving multiple organ systems, with a predominant implication of the cardiovascular and hematological systems.  Criteria of causality from an epidemiological perspective have been met including biological plausibility, temporal association, internal and external validity, coherence, analogy, and reproducibility with each successive case report of death after COVID-19 vaccination combined with population-based studies describing mortality among the vaccinated.

Our findings amplify concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccine adverse events and their mechanisms. COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis [11,63,64] and myocardial infarction [65,66] have been significantly well-described in the peer-reviewed literature, explaining the high proportion of cardiovascular deaths seen in our study. Spike protein’s deleterious effects [5-9,14], especially on the heart [12,67], further corroborate these findings. Our results also highlight the involvement of multiple organ systems described as Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome (MIS) reported following COVID-19 vaccination in both children [68] and adults [69]. A possible mechanism by which MIS occurs after vaccination could be the systemic distribution of the LNPs containing mRNA after vaccine administration [14] and the consequent systemic Spike protein expression and circulation resulting in system-wide inflammation. A significant proportion of cases were due to hematological system adverse events, which is not surprising given that VITT [70] and pulmonary embolism (PE) [71] have been reported in the literature as serious adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination. Deaths caused by adverse effects to the respiratory system were also relatively common in our review, a finding that is in line with the possibility of developing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) or drug-induced interstitial lung disease (DIILD) after COVID-19 vaccination [72,73]. Although uncommon among cases in this study, immunological [74], neurological [75], and gastrointestinal [76] adverse events can still occur after COVID-19 vaccination and, as with the cardiovascular system, may be directly or indirectly caused by the systemic expression or circulation of Spike protein.  Given the average time (14.3 days) in which cases died after vaccination, a temporal association between COVID-19 vaccination and death among most cases is further supported by the finding that SARS-CoV-2 Spike mRNA vaccine sequences can circulate in the blood for at least 28 days after vaccination [13].  Most of the deployed vaccine platforms are associated with death, suggesting that they share a common feature that causes adverse effects, which is most likely Spike protein.

The large number of COVID-19 vaccine induced deaths evaluated in this review is coherent with multiple papers that report excess mortality after COVID-19 vaccination. Pantazatos and Seligmann found that all-cause mortality increased 0-5 weeks post-injection in most age groups resulting in 146,000 to 187,000 vaccine-associated deaths in the United States between February and August of 2021 [77]. With similar findings, Skidmore estimated that 278,000 people may have died from the COVID-19 vaccine in the United States by December 2021 [78]. These concerning results were further elucidated by Aarstad and Kvitastein, who found that among 31 countries in Europe, a higher population COVID-19 vaccine uptake in 2021 was positively correlated with increased all-cause mortality in the first nine months of 2022 after controlling for alternative variables [79]. Since the initiation of the global COVID-19 vaccination campaign, excess mortality from non-COVID-19 causes has been detected in many countries [80-85], suggesting a common adverse exposure among the global population. Pantazatos estimated that VAERS deaths are underreported by a factor of 20 [77]. If we apply this underreporting factor to the May 5th, 2023, VAERS COVID-19 vaccine death report number of 35,324 [15], the number of deaths becomes an estimated 706,480 in the United States and other countries that utilize VAERS. If this extrapolated number of deaths were true, it would implicate the COVID-19 vaccines as a contributing factor to excess mortality among populations.

There have been several studies that have analyzed the causal relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and death. Maiese et al. [86] and Sessa et al. [87] used the conclusions of their included studies to assess the causal relationship between COVID-19 vaccination and death. In these studies, they found 14 and 15 deaths with a demonstrated causal link to COVID-19 vaccination, respectively. However, the collected conclusion methodology used in these studies is flawed for fully evaluating causal links at this time, specifically with COVID-19 vaccines, because they are novel medical products and new safety data is an inevitability as time advances. The average timeframe for a proper safety and efficacy evaluation for a vaccine is about 10.71 years [88]. Thus, collected conclusion methodology should only be considered for studies that have been published at least a few years after vaccine development to retain valid conclusions. For example, a paper published in 2021 indicates the AstraZeneca vaccines as safe with no links to serious adverse events including VITT [89], however, after more observation time, other researchers found a link between AstraZeneca vaccines and fatal VITT [70, 90] prompting widespread market withdrawal [91]. Pomara et al. [37] used the World Health Organization adverse event following immunization (WHO AEFI) guidelines, which we agree is a great method to assess causality between COVID-19 vaccination and death. In this paper, the researchers concluded that there may exist a causal link between COVID-19 vaccination and death from VITT. Unfortunately, we could not properly utilize the WHO AEFI methodology and complete the required checklist for our included cases due to missing needed case information. This methodology requires deceased subjects, extensive data, and IRB approval and can’t be utilized in a systematic review. Tan et al. [92] utilized incidence statistics to analyze the relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and death, and found a higher incidence of serious side effects compared to the prelicensing clinical trials. This method is not applicable to our study because the included autopsy reports do not present incidence statistics. Because the aforementioned methodologies were found to be incompatible with our study, we decided to utilize adjudication procedures helmed by medical professionals with relevant expertise to determine possible links between COVID-19 vaccines and death. Independent adjudication methodology was used by Hulscher et al. [93] to evaluate causal links between COVID-19 vaccines and death, where they found a highly probable causal link between COVID-19 vaccination and death from myocarditis in 28 autopsy cases.

There have been numerous studies concluding that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective [94-96]. However, many studies have demonstrated the opposite [97-102]. The OpenSAFELY study, which included more than 1 million adolescents and children, has demonstrated extremely limited efficacy and increased harm from COVID-19 vaccination. Myocarditis and pericarditis were documented only in COVID-19 vaccinated groups and not after COVID-19 infection, and accident and emergency attendance, and unplanned hospitalization were higher after first vaccination compared to unvaccinated groups [97]. Moreover, Alessandria et al. found all-cause death risks to be higher for those vaccinated with one and two COVID-19 vaccine doses compared to unvaccinated individuals and that booster doses were ineffective [98]. They also demonstrated a statistically significant loss of life expectancy for those vaccinated with 2 or 3/4 doses. The subjects vaccinated with 2 doses lost 37% of life expectancy compared to the unvaccinated population during follow-up [98]. Published reports from the original randomized placebo-controlled trials concluded that COVID-19 vaccination could greatly reduce ambulatory COVID-19 illness [94, 95]. However, Mead et al. pointed out that the trials were short in duration, preventing observation of potential adverse events after the trials were stopped. Post-authorization concerns over trial methods and execution have surfaced, including failure to follow intent-to-treat principles resulting in overestimation of efficacy [99]. Subsequent re-analyses with inclusion of post-marketing surveillance studies indicated significant mRNA-related harms, as reported in Pfizer documents revealing 1.6 million adverse events by August 2022, describing serious injuries and an increased occurrence in cancer [99]. In light of continued emergence of data on the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination, further research is essential. Our study provides a significant forensic contribution to understanding the safety profile of these products.

Our study has all the limitations of bias as it applies to selection of papers and independent adjudication of the case material. Three independent reviewers evaluated the case information to avoid influence from the investigators’ biases or their connections, if any, with COVID-19 vaccination. Our rendered conclusions from the autopsy findings are based on the evolving understanding of COVID-19 vaccines, which differs markedly from when the referenced studies were published, making a bias assessment for those studies inapplicable. We included all cases, regardless of the adjudication outcome, in the figures and tables to effectively summarize the literature regarding all autopsy studies that include COVID-19 vaccines as a previous exposure. The omission of cases we adjudicated as not being linked to vaccination from our tables and figures would introduce significant selection bias as we did not use author-provided conclusions.Our paper has all the limitations of systematic reviews of previously published case reports including selection bias at the level of referral for autopsy and acceptance into the peer reviewed literature.  We believe publication bias could have had a large influence on our findings because of the global push for mass vaccination by governments, medical societies, and academic medical centers coupled with investigator hesitancy to report adverse developments with new genetic products widely recommended for both caregivers and patients. Finally, confounding variables, particularly concomitant illnesses, infection, drug interactions, and other factors not accounted for, could have played roles in the causal pathway to death.

In summary, among the universe of published autopsies performed after COVID-19 vaccination available to date, with a contemporary and independent review, we found that in 73.9% of cases, COVID-19 vaccination was the direct cause or significantly contributed to death.  The consistency seen among cases in this review with previously reported COVID-19 vaccine serious adverse events, their known fatal mechanisms, coupled with our independent adjudication, suggests there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death. The implications of our study apply to cases of unanticipated death without antecedent illness among COVID-19 vaccine recipients.  We can infer that in such cases, death may have been caused by COVID-19 vaccination.  Further urgent investigation is required to build upon our results and further elucidate the pathophysiologic mechanisms of death with the goal of risk stratification and avoidance of death for the large numbers of individuals who have taken or will receive one or more COVID-19 vaccine in the future. Autopsies should be performed on all deceased individuals that have received one or more COVID-19 vaccines. Clinical monitoring of COVID-19 vaccine recipients is indicated for a period of at least one year after vaccination to ensure the absence of serious adverse events that may lead to death.

Acknowledgments


Author Contributions

Nicolas Hulscher: Conceptualization, Investigation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Project administration, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation.

Peter A. McCullough: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation.

Roger Hodkinson and William Makis: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Investigation.

Richard Amerling and Paul Alexander: Writing – review & editing, Validation.

Heather Gessling, Harvey A. Risch, and Mark Trozzi: Supervision, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Conflicts of Interest

Drs. Alexander, Amerling, Gessling, Hodkinson, Makis, McCullough, Risch, are affiliated with and receive salary support and/or hold equity positions in The Wellness Company, Boca Raton, FL which had no role in funding, analysis, or publication. Nothing to declare for Dr. Trozzi and Mr. Hulscher.

Funding

None.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable as this is a review article containing publicly available research.

Data Availability Statement

All data extracted and analyzed from included studies are publicly available.

Supplementary Files

References


WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard [Internet]. World Health Organization; [cited 2023 May 17]. Available from: https://covid19.who.int/

Lyons-Weiler J. The Use of Arbitrary and Generalized Ct Values in COVID-19 Non-Quantitative Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (nonQ-RT-PCR) Testing Must End. Science, Public Health Policy and the Law. 2022 Nov 01; v4.2019-2024

Kuter BJ, Offit PA, Poland GA. The development of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States: Why and how so fast? Vaccine. 2021 Apr 28;39(18):2491-2495. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.03.077. Epub 2021 Mar 26. PMID: 33824043; PMCID: PMC7997594 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.03.077

Graña C, Ghosn L, Evrenoglou T, Jarde A, Minozzi S, Bergman H, Buckley BS, Probyn K, Villanueva G, Henschke N, Bonnet H, Assi R, Menon S, Marti M, Devane D, Mallon P, Lelievre JD, Askie LM, Kredo T, Ferrand G, Davidson M, Riveros C, Tovey D, Meerpohl JJ, Grasselli G, Rada G, Hróbjartsson A, Ravaud P, Chaimani A, Boutron I. Efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Dec 7;12(12):CD015477. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015477. PMID: 36473651; PMCID: PMC9726273. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015477

Trougakos IP, Terpos E, Alexopoulos H, Politou M, Paraskevis D, Scorilas A, Kastritis E, Andreakos E, Dimopoulos MA. Adverse effects of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: the spike hypothesis. Trends Mol Med. 2022 Jul;28(7):542-554. doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2022.04.007. Epub 2022 Apr 21. PMID: 35537987; PMCID: PMC9021367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmed.2022.04.007

Seneff S, Nigh G, Kyriakopoulos AM, McCullough PA. Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs. Food Chem Toxicol. 2022 Jun;164:113008. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2022.113008. Epub 2022 Apr 15. PMID: 35436552; PMCID: PMC9012513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113008

Uversky VN, Redwan EM, Makis W, Rubio-Casillas A. IgG4 Antibodies Induced by Repeated Vaccination May Generate Immune Tolerance to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein. Vaccines (Basel). 2023 May 17;11(5):991. doi: 10.3390/vaccines11050991. PMID: 37243095; PMCID: PMC10222767. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11050991

Theoharides TC. Could SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Be Responsible for Long-COVID Syndrome? Mol Neurobiol. 2022 Mar;59(3):1850-1861. doi: 10.1007/s12035-021-02696-0. Epub 2022 Jan 13. PMID: 35028901; PMCID: PMC8757925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-021-02696-0

Theoharides TC, Conti P. Be aware of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein: There is more than meets the eye. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2021 May-Jun;35(3):833-838. doi: 10.23812/THEO_EDIT_3_21. PMID: 34100279. https://doi.org/10.23812/THEO_EDIT_3_21

Aleem A, Nadeem AJ. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia (VITT). 2022 Oct 3. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jan–. PMID: 34033367.

Bozkurt B, Kamat I, Hotez PJ. Myocarditis With COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines. Circulation. 2021 Aug 10;144(6):471-484. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056135. Epub 2021 Jul 20. PMID: 34281357; PMCID: PMC8340726. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056135

Yonker LM, Swank Z, Bartsch YC, Burns MD, Kane A, Boribong BP, Davis JP, Loiselle M, Novak T, Senussi Y, Cheng CA, Burgess E, Edlow AG, Chou J, Dionne A, Balaguru D, Lahoud-Rahme M, Arditi M, Julg B, Randolph AG, Alter G, Fasano A, Walt DR. Circulating Spike Protein Detected in Post-COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Myocarditis. Circulation. 2023 Mar 14;147(11):867-876. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.061025. Epub 2023 Jan 4. PMID: 36597886; PMCID: PMC10010667. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.061025

Castruita JAS, Schneider UV, Mollerup S, Leineweber TD, Weis N, Bukh J, Pedersen MS, Westh H. SARS-CoV-2 spike mRNA vaccine sequences circulate in blood up to 28 days after COVID-19 vaccination. APMIS. 2023 Mar;131(3):128-132. doi: 10.1111/apm.13294. Epub 2023 Jan 29. PMID: 36647776; PMCID: PMC10107710. https://doi.org/10.1111/apm.13294

Parry PI, Lefringhausen A, Turni C, et al. ‘Spikeopathy’: COVID-19 Spike Protein Is Pathogenic, from Both Virus and Vaccine mRNA. Biomedicines. 2023;11(8):2287. Published 2023 Aug 17. doi:10.3390/biomedicines11082287 https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11082287

Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) [online]. Available at: https://vaers.hhs.gov.

Harald Walach, Rainer J. Klement, and Wouter Aukema. 2021. The Safety of COVID-19 Vaccinations – Should We Rethink the Policy? Sci, Publ Health Pol & Law 3:87-99.

Scarl R, Parkinson B, Arole V, Hardy T, Allenby P. The hospital autopsy: the importance in keeping autopsy an option. Autopsy Case Rep. 2022 Feb 17;12:e2021333. doi: 10.4322/acr.2021.333. PMID: 35252044; PMCID: PMC8890781. https://doi.org/10.4322/acr.2021.333

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1006-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005. Epub 2009 Jul 23. PMID: 19631508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005

Hojberg Y, Abdeljaber M, Prahlow JA. Generalized Eosinophilia Following Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine Administration: A Case Report. Acad Forensic Pathol. 2023 Mar;13(1):9-15. doi: 10.1177/19253621231157933. Epub 2023 Mar 28. PMID: 37091194; PMCID: PMC10119868. https://doi.org/10.1177/19253621231157933

Nushida H, Ito A, Kurata H, Umemoto H, Tokunaga I, Iseki H, Nishimura A. A case of fatal multi-organ inflammation following COVID-19 vaccination. Leg Med (Tokyo). 2023 Mar 20;63:102244. doi: 10.1016/j.legalmed.2023.102244. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 36990036; PMCID: PMC10027302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2023.102244

Jeon YH, Choi S, Park JH, Lee JK, Yeo NS, Lee S, Suh YL. Sudden Death Associated With Possible Flare-Ups of Multiple Sclerosis After COVID-19 Vaccination and Infection: A Case Report and Literature Review. J Korean Med Sci. 2023 Mar 13;38(10):e78. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e78. PMID: 36918031; PMCID: PMC10010908. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e78

Esposito M, Cocimano G, Vanaria F, Sessa F, Salerno M. Death from COVID-19 in a Fully Vaccinated Subject: A Complete Autopsy Report. Vaccines (Basel). 2023 Jan 9;11(1):142. doi: 10.3390/vaccines11010142. PMID: 36679987; PMCID: PMC9865400. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11010142

Chaves JJ, Bonilla JC, Chaves-Cabezas V, Castro A, Polo JF, Mendoza O, Correa-Rodríguez J, Piedrahita AC, Romero-Fandiño IA, Caro MV, González AC, Sánchez LK, Murcia F, Márquez G, Benavides A, Quiroga MDP, López J, Parra-Medina R. A postmortem study of patients vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 in Colombia. Rev Esp Patol. 2023 Jan-Mar;56(1):4-9. doi: 10.1016/j.patol.2022.09.003. Epub 2022 Oct 31. PMID: 36599599; PMCID: PMC9618417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patol.2022.09.003

Mörz M. A Case Report: Multifocal Necrotizing Encephalitis and Myocarditis after BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination against COVID-19. Vaccines (Basel). 2022 Oct 1;10(10):1651. doi: 10.3390/vaccines10101651. PMID: 36298516; PMCID: PMC9611676. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10101651

Alunni V, Bernardi C, Chevalier N, Cabusat C, Quatrehomme G, Torrents J, Biglia E, Gaillard Y, Drici MD. Postmortem PF4 antibodies confirm a rare case of thrombosis thrombocytopenia syndrome associated with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 anti-COVID vaccination. Int J Legal Med. 2023 Mar;137(2):487-492. doi: 10.1007/s00414-022-02910-1. Epub 2022 Oct 27. PMID: 36289074; PMCID: PMC9607767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-022-02910-1

Takahashi M, Kondo T, Yamasaki G, Sugimoto M, Asano M, Ueno Y, Nagasaki Y. An autopsy case report of aortic dissection complicated with histiolymphocytic pericarditis and aortic inflammation after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Leg Med (Tokyo). 2022 Nov;59:102154. doi: 10.1016/j.legalmed.2022.102154. Epub 2022 Sep 29. PMID: 36191411; PMCID: PMC9519380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2022.102154

Murata K, Nakao N, Ishiuchi N, Fukui T, Katsuya N, Fukumoto W, Oka H, Yoshikawa N, Nagao T, Namera A, Kakimoto N, Oue N, Awai K, Yoshimoto K, Nagao M. Four cases of cytokine storm after COVID-19 vaccination: Case report. Front Immunol. 2022 Aug 15;13:967226. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.967226. PMID: 36045681; PMCID: PMC9420842. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.967226

Satomi H, Katano H, Kanno H, Kobayashi M, Ohkuma Y, Hashidume N, Usui T, Tsukada S, Ito I. An autopsy case of fulminant myocarditis after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine inoculation. Pathol Int. 2022 Oct;72(10):519-524. doi: 10.1111/pin.13267. Epub 2022 Aug 30. PMID: 36040128; PMCID: PMC9537995. https://doi.org/10.1111/pin.13267

Suzuki H, Ro A, Takada A, Saito K, Hayashi K. Autopsy findings of post-COVID-19 vaccination deaths in Tokyo Metropolis, Japan, 2021. Leg Med (Tokyo). 2022 Nov;59:102134. doi: 10.1016/j.legalmed.2022.102134. Epub 2022 Aug 20. PMID: 36037554; PMCID: PMC9392553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2022.102134

Mele F, Tafuri S, Stefanizzi P, D Amati A, Calvano M, Leonardelli M, Macorano E, Duma S, De Gabriele G, Introna F, De Donno A. Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis after COVID-19 vaccination and congenital deficiency of coagulation factors: Is there a correlation? Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2022 Nov 30;18(6):2095166. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2022.2095166. Epub 2022 Jul 27. PMID: 35895937; PMCID: PMC9746424. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2022.2095166

Yoshimura Y, Sasaki H, Miyata N, Miyazaki K, Okudela K, Tateishi Y, Hayashi H, Kawana-Tachikawa A, Iwashita H, Maeda K, Ihama Y, Hatayama Y, Ryo A, Tachikawa N. An autopsy case of COVID-19-like acute respiratory distress syndrome after mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Int J Infect Dis. 2022 Aug;121:98-101. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.04.057. Epub 2022 Apr 30. PMID: 35500794; PMCID: PMC9054706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2022.04.057

Roncati L, Manenti A, Corsi L. A Three-Case Series of Thrombotic Deaths in Patients over 50 with Comorbidities Temporally after modRNA COVID-19 Vaccination. Pathogens. 2022 Apr 3;11(4):435. doi: 10.3390/pathogens11040435. PMID: 35456110; PMCID: PMC9032304. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens11040435

Kang DH, Na JY, Yang JH, Moon SH, Kim SH, Jung JJ, Cha HJ, Ahn JH, Park YW, Cho SY, Yu HK, Lee SH, Park MY, Kim JW, Byun JH. Fulminant Giant Cell Myocarditis following Heterologous Vaccination of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19. Medicina (Kaunas). 2022 Mar 20;58(3):449. doi: 10.3390/medicina58030449. PMID: 35334625; PMCID: PMC8950462. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58030449

Kamura Y, Terao T, Akao S, Kono Y, Honma K, Matsue K. Fatal thrombotic microangiopathy with rhabdomyolysis as an initial symptom after the first dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine: A case report. Int J Infect Dis. 2022 Apr;117:322-325. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.02.031. Epub 2022 Feb 18. PMID: 35189339; PMCID: PMC8853962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2022.02.031

Ishioka Y, Makiguchi T, Itoga M, Tanaka H, Taima K, Goto S, Tasaka S. Acute Exacerbation of Interstitial Lung Disease After SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination: A Case Series. Chest. 2022 Dec;162(6):e311-e316. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2022.08.2213. PMID: 36494131; PMCID: PMC9723271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2022.08.2213

Gill JR, Tashjian R, Duncanson E. Autopsy Histopathologic Cardiac Findings in 2 Adolescents Following the Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2022 Aug 1;146(8):925-929. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2021-0435-SA. PMID: 35157759. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2021-0435-SA

Pomara C, Salerno M, Esposito M, Sessa F, Certo F, Tripodo C, Rappa F, Barbagallo GM. Histological and immunohistochemical findings in a fatal case of thrombotic thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccination. Pathol Res Pract. 2022 Mar;231:153796. doi: 10.1016/j.prp.2022.153796. Epub 2022 Feb 4. PMID: 35144085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prp.2022.153796

Yeo A, Kuek B, Lau M, Tan SR, Chan S. Post COVID-19 vaccine deaths – Singapore’s early experience. Forensic Sci Int. 2022 Jan 19;332:111199. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111199. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35078041; PMCID: PMC8767909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111199

Ameratunga R, Woon ST, Sheppard MN, Garland J, Ondruschka B, Wong CX, Stewart RAH, Tatley M, Stables SR, Tse RD. First Identified Case of Fatal Fulminant Necrotizing Eosinophilic Myocarditis Following the Initial Dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine (BNT162b2, Comirnaty): an Extremely Rare Idiosyncratic Hypersensitivity Reaction. J Clin Immunol. 2022 Apr;42(3):441-447. doi: 10.1007/s10875-021-01187-0. Epub 2022 Jan 3. PMID: 34978002; PMCID: PMC8720536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10875-021-01187-0

Günther A, Brämer D, Pletz MW, Kamradt T, Baumgart S, Mayer TE, Baier M, Autsch A, Mawrin C, Schönborn L, Greinacher A, Thiele T. Complicated Long Term Vaccine Induced Thrombotic Immune Thrombocytopenia-A Case Report. Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Nov 17;9(11):1344. doi: 10.3390/vaccines9111344. PMID: 34835275; PMCID: PMC8622649. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9111344

Permezel F, Borojevic B, Lau S, de Boer HH. Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) following recent Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccination. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2022 Mar;18(1):74-79. doi: 10.1007/s12024-021-00440-7. Epub 2021 Nov 4. PMID: 34735684; PMCID: PMC8567127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-021-00440-7

Choi S, Lee S, Seo JW, Kim MJ, Jeon YH, Park JH, Lee JK, Yeo NS. Myocarditis-induced Sudden Death after BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination in Korea: Case Report Focusing on Histopathological Findings. J Korean Med Sci. 2021 Oct 18;36(40):e286. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e286. PMID: 34664804; PMCID: PMC8524235. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e286

Schneider J, Sottmann L, Greinacher A, Hagen M, Kasper HU, Kuhnen C, Schlepper S, Schmidt S, Schulz R, Thiele T, Thomas C, Schmeling A. Postmortem investigation of fatalities following vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines. Int J Legal Med. 2021 Nov;135(6):2335-2345. doi: 10.1007/s00414-021-02706-9. Epub 2021 Sep 30. PMID: 34591186; PMCID: PMC8482743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-021-02706-9

Schneider J, Sottmann L, Greinacher A, Hagen M, Kasper HU, Kuhnen C, Schlepper S, Schmidt S, Schulz R, Thiele T, Thomas C, Schmeling A. Postmortem investigation of fatalities following vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines. Int J Legal Med. 2021 Nov;135(6):2335-2345. doi: 10.1007/s00414-021-02706-9. Epub 2021 Sep 30. PMID: 34591186; PMCID: PMC8482743. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2109975

Wiedmann M, Skattør T, Stray-Pedersen A, Romundstad L, Antal EA, Marthinsen PB, Sørvoll IH, Leiknes Ernstsen S, Lund CG, Holme PA, Johansen TO, Brunborg C, Aamodt AH, Schultz NH, Skagen K, Skjelland M. Vaccine Induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia Causing a Severe Form of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis With High Fatality Rate: A Case Series. Front Neurol. 2021 Jul 30;12:721146. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2021.721146. PMID: 34393988; PMCID: PMC8363077. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.721146

Pomara C, Sessa F, Ciaccio M, Dieli F, Esposito M, Giammanco GM, Garozzo SF, Giarratano A, Prati D, Rappa F, Salerno M, Tripodo C, Mannucci PM, Zamboni P. COVID-19 Vaccine and Death: Causality Algorithm According to the WHO Eligibility Diagnosis. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021 May 26;11(6):955. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11060955. PMID: 34073536; PMCID: PMC8229116. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11060955

Althaus K, Möller P, Uzun G, Singh A, Beck A, Bettag M, Bösmüller H, Guthoff M, Dorn F, Petzold GC, Henkes H, Heyne N, Jumaa H, Kreiser K, Limpach C, Luz B, Maschke M, Müller JA, Münch J, Nagel S, Pötzsch B, Müller J, Schlegel C, Viardot A, Bäzner H, Wolf M, Pelzl L, Warm V, Willinek WA, Steiner J, Schneiderhan-Marra N, Vollherbst D, Sachs UJ, Fend F, Bakchoul T. Antibody-mediated procoagulant platelets in SARS-CoV-2-vaccination associated immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia. Haematologica. 2021 Aug 1;106(8):2170-2179. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2021.279000. PMID: 34011137; PMCID: PMC8327736. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2021.279000

Edler C, Klein A, Schröder AS, Sperhake JP, Ondruschka B. Deaths associated with newly launched SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (Comirnaty®). Leg Med (Tokyo). 2021 Jul;51:101895. doi: 10.1016/j.legalmed.2021.101895. Epub 2021 Apr 17. PMID: 33895650; PMCID: PMC8052499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2021.101895

Hansen T, Titze U, Kulamadayil-Heidenreich NSA, Glombitza S, Tebbe JJ, Röcken C, Schulz B, Weise M, Wilkens L. First case of postmortem study in a patient vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Jun;107:172-175. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.04.053. Epub 2021 Apr 16. PMID: 33872783; PMCID: PMC8051011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.04.053

Baronti A, Gentile F, Manetti AC, Scatena A, Pellegrini S, Pucci A, Franzini M, Castiglione V, Maiese A, Giannoni A, Pistello M, Emdin M, Aquaro GD, Di Paolo M. Myocardial Infarction Following COVID-19 Vaccine Administration: Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc? Viruses. 2022 Jul 27;14(8):1644. doi: 10.3390/v14081644. PMID: 36016266; PMCID: PMC9413746. https://doi.org/10.3390/v14081644

Ittiwut C, Mahasirimongkol S, Srisont S, Ittiwut R, Chockjamsai M, Durongkadech P, Sawaengdee W, Khunphon A, Larpadisorn K, Wattanapokayakit S, Wetchaphanphesat S, Arunotong S, Srimahachota S, Pittayawonganon C, Thammawijaya P, Sutdan D, Doungngern P, Khongphatthanayothin A, Kerr SJ, Shotelersuk V. Genetic basis of sudden death after COVID-19 vaccination in Thailand. Heart Rhythm. 2022 Aug 5;19(11):1874–9. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.07.019. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35934244; PMCID: PMC9352648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.07.019

Greinacher A, Thiele T, Warkentin TE, Weisser K, Kyrle PA, Eichinger S. Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1 nCov-19 Vaccination. N Engl J Med. 2021 Jun 3;384(22):2092-2101. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2104840. Epub 2021 Apr 9. PMID: 33835769; PMCID: PMC8095372. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2104840

Mauriello A, Scimeca M, Amelio I, Massoud R, Novelli A, Di Lorenzo F, Finocchiaro S, Cimino C, Telesca R, Chiocchi M, Sun Q, Wang Y, Shi Y, Novelli G, Melino G. Thromboembolism after COVID-19 vaccine in patients with preexisting thrombocytopenia. Cell Death Dis. 2021 Aug 3;12(8):762. doi: 10.1038/s41419-021-04058-z. PMID: 34344867; PMCID: PMC8328816. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-021-04058-z

Bjørnstad-Tuveng TH, Rudjord A, Anker P. Fatal cerebral haemorrhage after COVID-19 vaccine. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2021 Apr 29;141. English, Norwegian. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.21.0312. PMID: 33928772. https://doi.org/10.4045/tidsskr.21.0312

Scully M, Singh D, Lown R, Poles A, Solomon T, Levi M, Goldblatt D, Kotoucek P, Thomas W, Lester W. Pathologic Antibodies to Platelet Factor 4 after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccination. N Engl J Med. 2021 Jun 10;384(23):2202-2211. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2105385. Epub 2021 Apr 16. PMID: 33861525; PMCID: PMC8112532. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2105385

Choi GJ, Baek SH, Kim J, Kim JH, Kwon GY, Kim DK, Jung YH, Kim S. Fatal Systemic Capillary Leak Syndrome after SARS-CoV-2Vaccination in Patient with Multiple Myeloma. Emerg Infect Dis. 2021 Nov;27(11):2973-2975. doi: 10.3201/eid2711.211723. Epub 2021 Aug 30. PMID: 34459725; PMCID: PMC8544977. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2711.211723

Schwab C, Domke LM, Hartmann L, Stenzinger A, Longerich T, Schirmacher P. Autopsy-based histopathological characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination. Clin Res Cardiol. 2023 Mar;112(3):431-440. doi: 10.1007/s00392-022-02129-5. Epub 2022 Nov 27. PMID: 36436002; PMCID: PMC9702955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-022-02129-5

Hirschbühl K, Schaller T, Märkl B, Claus R, Sipos E, Rentschler L, Maccagno A, Grosser B, Kling E, Neidig M, Kröncke T, Spring O, Braun G, Bösmüller H, Seidl M, Esposito I, Pablik J, Hilsenbeck J, Boor P, Beer M, Dintner S, Wylezich C. High viral loads: what drives fatal cases of COVID-19 in vaccinees? – an autopsy study. Mod Pathol. 2022 Aug;35(8):1013-1021. doi: 10.1038/s41379-022-01069-9. Epub 2022 Apr 1. PMID: 35365771; PMCID: PMC8974809. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41379-022-01069-9

Hoshino N, Yanase M, Ichiyasu T, Kuwahara K, Kawai H, Muramatsu T, Ishii H, Tsukamoto T, Morimoto SI, Izawa H. An autopsy case report of fulminant myocarditis: Following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. J Cardiol Cases. 2022 Dec;26(6):391-394. doi: 10.1016/j.jccase.2022.06.006. Epub 2022 Jul 4. PMID: 35812802; PMCID: PMC9250935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jccase.2022.06.006

Colombo D, Del Nonno F, Marchioni L, Lalle E, Gallì P, Vaia F, Falasca L. Autopsies Revealed Pathological Features of COVID-19 in Unvaccinated vs. Vaccinated Patients. Biomedicines. 2023 Feb 14;11(2):551. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11020551. PMID: 36831087; PMCID: PMC9953314. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11020551

Mosna K, Vadkerti P, Papp L, Palkovic M, Janega P, Babal P. Guillain-Barré syndrome with lethal outcome following covid-19 vaccination – case report supported by autopsy examination. The Open Neurology Journal. 2022 Mar 10;16(1). doi:10.2174/1874205x-v16-e2207270 https://doi.org/10.2174/1874205x-v16-e2207270

Kaimori R, Nishida H, Uchida T, Tamura M, Kuroki K, Murata K, Hatakeyama K, Ikeda Y, Amemiya K, Nishizono A, Daa T, Mori S. Histopathologically TMA-like distribution of multiple organ thromboses following the initial dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Comirnaty, Pfizer/BioNTech): an autopsy case report. Thromb J. 2022 Oct 6;20(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s12959-022-00418-7. PMID: 36203145; PMCID: PMC9540301. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12959-022-00418-7

Wong HL, Hu M, Zhou CK, Lloyd PC, Amend KL, Beachler DC, Secora A, McMahill-Walraven CN, Lu Y, Wu Y, Ogilvie RP, Reich C, Djibo DA, Wan Z, Seeger JD, Akhtar S, Jiao Y, Chillarige Y, Do R, Hornberger J, Obidi J, Forshee R, Shoaibi A, Anderson SA. Risk of myocarditis and pericarditis after the COVID-19 mRNA vaccination in the USA: a cohort study in claims databases. Lancet. 2022 Jun 11;399(10342):2191-2199. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00791-7. PMID: 35691322; PMCID: PMC9183215. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00791-7

Park DY, An S, Kaur A, Malhotra S, Vij A. Myocarditis after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination: A systematic review of case reports and case series. Clin Cardiol. 2022 Jul;45(7):691-700. doi: 10.1002/clc.23828. Epub 2022 Jun 2. PMID: 35652390; PMCID: PMC9286338. https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.23828

Baqi DH, Kakamad FH, Mahmood ZH, Fattah FH, Ahmed SF, Hassan MN, Hama Amin BJ, Mohammed SH, Mikael TM, Hassan HA, Salh AM. Myocardial infarction following COVID-19 vaccine administration; a systematic review. Heliyon. 2022 Nov 11;8(11):e11385. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11385. PMID: 36406668; PMCID: PMC9650518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11385

Zafar U, Zafar H, Ahmed MS, Khattak M. Link between COVID-19 vaccines and myocardial infarction. World J Clin Cases. 2022 Oct 6;10(28):10109-10119. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i28.10109. PMID: 36246837; PMCID: PMC9561578. https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i28.10109

Baumeier C, Aleshcheva G, Harms D, Gross U, Hamm C, Assmus B, Westenfeld R, Kelm M, Rammos S, Wenzel P, Münzel T, Elsässer A, Gailani M, Perings C, Bourakkadi A, Flesch M, Kempf T, Bauersachs J, Escher F, Schultheiss HP. Intramyocardial Inflammation after COVID-19 Vaccination: An Endomyocardial Biopsy-Proven Case Series. Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Jun 22;23(13):6940. doi: 10.3390/ijms23136940. PMID: 35805941; PMCID: PMC9266869. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23136940

Wangu Z, Swartz H, Doherty M. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) possibly secondary to COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. BMJ Case Rep. 2022 Mar 30;15(3):e247176. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2021-247176. PMID: 35354564; PMCID: PMC8968554. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2021-247176

Ehikhametalor K, Deans-Minott J, Duncan JP. Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Adults (MIS-A) After COVID-19 Infection and Recent Vaccination with Recombinant Adenoviral Vector Encoding the Spike Protein Antigen of SARS-CoV-2 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, Vaxzevria). J Intensive Care Med. 2023 Feb;38(2):232-237. doi: 10.1177/08850666221121589. Epub 2022 Aug 17. PMID: 35979616; PMCID: PMC9389272. https://doi.org/10.1177/08850666221121589

Zidan A, Noureldin A, Kumar SA, Elsebaie A, Othman M. COVID-19 Vaccine-Associated Immune Thrombosis and Thrombocytopenia (VITT): Diagnostic Discrepancies and Global Implications. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2023 Feb;49(1):9-14. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1759684. Epub 2023 Jan 5. PMID: 36603593. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1759684

Ifeanyi N, Chinenye N, Oladiran O, David E, Mmonu C, Ogbonna-Nwosu C. Isolated pulmonary embolism following COVID vaccination: 2 case reports and a review of post-acute pulmonary embolism complications and follow-up. J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect. 2021 Nov 15;11(6):877-879. doi: 10.1080/20009666.2021.1990825. PMID: 34804412; PMCID: PMC8604520. https://doi.org/10.1080/20009666.2021.1990825

Abraham B, Mohammed Saeed H, Azeez Pasha SA. Acute respiratory distress syndrome secondary to COVID-19 mRNA vaccine administration in a pregnant woman: A case report. Qatar Med J. 2022 Aug 9;2022(3):40. doi: 10.5339/qmj.2022.40. PMID: 35974885; PMCID: PMC9372495. https://doi.org/10.5339/qmj.2022.40

Yoshifuji A, Ishioka K, Masuzawa Y, Suda S, Murata S, Uwamino Y, Fujino M, Miyahara H, Hasegawa N, Ryuzaki M, Hoshino H, Sekine K. COVID-19 vaccine induced interstitial lung disease. J Infect Chemother. 2022 Jan;28(1):95-98. doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2021.09.010. Epub 2021 Sep 20. PMID: 34580010; PMCID: PMC8450284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiac.2021.09.010

Chen Y, Xu Z, Wang P, Li XM, Shuai ZW, Ye DQ, Pan HF. New-onset autoimmune phenomena post-COVID-19 vaccination. Immunology. 2022 Apr;165(4):386-401. doi: 10.1111/imm.13443. Epub 2022 Jan 7. PMID: 34957554. https://doi.org/10.1111/imm.13443

Hosseini R, Askari N. A review of neurological side effects of COVID-19 vaccination. Eur J Med Res. 2023 Feb 25;28(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s40001-023-00992-0. PMID: 36841774; PMCID: PMC9959958. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-023-00992-0

Ajmera K, Bansal R, Wilkinson H, Goyal L. Gastrointestinal Complications of COVID-19 Vaccines. Cureus. 2022 Apr 12;14(4):e24070. doi: 10.7759/cureus.24070. PMID: 35573556; PMCID: PMC9097558. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.24070

Pantazatos S, Seligmann H. COVID vaccination and age-stratified all-cause mortality risk. Research Gate 2021 Oct 26. Epub Oct 26. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28257.43366. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.28257.43366

Skidmore, M. 2023. COVID-19 Illness and Vaccination Experiences in Social Circles Affect COVID-19 Vaccination Decisions. Science, Public Health Policy & the Law 4:208-226.

Aarstad, J.; Kvitastein, O.A. Is there a Link between the 2021 COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake in Europe and 2022 Excess All-Cause Mortality?. Preprints.org 2023, 2023020350. doi:10.20944/preprints202302.0350.v1. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202302.0350.v1

Beesoon S, Bakal JA, Youngson E, Williams KP, Berzins SA, Brindle ME, Joffe AM. Excess deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic in Alberta, Canada. IJID Reg. 2022 Dec;5:62-67. doi: 10.1016/j.ijregi.2022.08.011. Epub 2022 Aug 30. PMID: 36060856; PMCID: PMC9424127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijregi.2022.08.011

Todd M, Scheeres A. Excess Mortality From Non-COVID-19 Causes During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 2020-2021. Am J Public Health. 2022 Dec;112(12):1800-1803. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2022.307096. PMID: 36383938; PMCID: PMC9670212. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307096

Karlinsky A, Kobak D. The World Mortality Dataset: Tracking excess mortality across countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. medRxiv [Preprint]. 2021 Jun 4:2021.01.27.21250604. doi: 10.1101/2021.01.27.21250604. Update in: Elife. 2021 Jun 30;10: PMID: 33532789; PMCID: PMC7852240. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.27.21250604

COVID-19 Excess Mortality Collaborators. Estimating excess mortality due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic analysis of COVID-19-related mortality, 2020-21. Lancet. 2022 Apr 16;399(10334):1513-1536. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02796-3. Epub 2022 Mar 10. Erratum in: Lancet. 2022 Apr 16;399(10334):1468. PMID: 35279232; PMCID: PMC8912932. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02796-3

Msemburi W, Karlinsky A, Knutson V, Aleshin-Guendel S, Chatterji S, Wakefield J. The WHO estimates of excess mortality associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Nature. 2023 Jan;613(7942):130-137. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05522-2. Epub 2022 Dec 14. PMID: 36517599; PMCID: PMC9812776. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05522-2

Shang W, Wang Y, Yuan J, Guo Z, Liu J, Liu M. Global Excess Mortality during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Vaccines (Basel). 2022 Oct 12;10(10):1702. doi: 10.3390/vaccines10101702. PMID: 36298567; PMCID: PMC9607451. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10101702

Maiese A, Baronti A, Manetti AC, Di Paolo M, Turillazzi E, Frati P, Fineschi V. Death after the Administration of COVID-19 Vaccines Approved by EMA: Has a Causal Relationship Been Demonstrated? Vaccines (Basel). 2022 Feb 16;10(2):308. doi: 10.3390/vaccines10020308. PMID: 35214765; PMCID: PMC8875435. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10020308

Sessa F, Salerno M, Esposito M, Di Nunno N, Zamboni P, Pomara C. Autopsy Findings and Causality Relationship between Death and COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review. J Clin Med. 2021 Dec 15;10(24):5876. doi: 10.3390/jcm10245876. PMID: 34945172; PMCID: PMC8709364. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10245876

Pronker ES, Weenen TC, Commandeur H, Claassen EH, Osterhaus AD. Risk in vaccine research and development quantified. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e57755. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057755. Epub 2013 Mar 20. PMID: 23526951; PMCID: PMC3603987. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057755

Falsey AR, Sobieszczyk ME, Hirsch I, Sproule S, Robb ML, Corey L, Neuzil KM, Hahn W, Hunt J, Mulligan MJ, McEvoy C, DeJesus E, Hassman M, Little SJ, Pahud BA, Durbin A, Pickrell P, Daar ES, Bush L, Solis J, Carr QO, Oyedele T, Buchbinder S, Cowden J, Vargas SL, Guerreros Benavides A, Call R, Keefer MC, Kirkpatrick BD, Pullman J, Tong T, Brewinski Isaacs M, Benkeser D, Janes HE, Nason MC, Green JA, Kelly EJ, Maaske J, Mueller N, Shoemaker K, Takas T, Marshall RP, Pangalos MN, Villafana T, Gonzalez-Lopez A; AstraZeneca AZD1222 Clinical Study Group. Phase 3 Safety and Efficacy of AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) Covid-19 Vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2021 Dec 16;385(25):2348-2360. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2105290. Epub 2021 Sep 29. PMID: 34587382; PMCID: PMC8522798. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2105290

Matar RH, Than CA, Nakanishi H, Daniel RS, Smayra K, Sim BL, Beran A, Danoun OA. Outcomes of patients with thromboembolic events following coronavirus disease 2019 AstraZeneca vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 2022 Mar 1;33(2):90-112. doi: 10.1097/MBC.0000000000001113. PMID: 34980833; PMCID: PMC8815637. https://doi.org/10.1097/MBC.0000000000001113

Jain V, Lorgelly P. The impact of pausing the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine on uptake in Europe: a difference-in-differences analysis. Eur J Public Health. 2022 Aug 1;32(4):648-654. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckac039. PMID: 35394507; PMCID: PMC9341841. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac039

Tan LJ, Koh CP, Lai SK, Poh WC, Othman MS, Hussin H. A systemic review and recommendation for an autopsy approach to death followed the COVID 19 vaccination. Forensic Sci Int. 2022 Nov;340:111469. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111469. Epub 2022 Sep 20. PMID: 36162300; PMCID: PMC9487151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111469

Hulscher N, Hodkinson R, Makis W, McCullough PA. Autopsy findings in cases of fatal COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis. ESC Heart Fail. 2024 Jan 14. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.14680. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 38221509. https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.14680

Polack FP, Thomas SJ, Kitchin N, et al. Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(27):2603-2615. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2034577. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577

Baden LR, El Sahly HM, Essink B, et al. Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(5):403-416. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2035389. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2035389

Beladiya J, Kumar A, Vasava Y, et al. Safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials. Rev Med Virol. 2024;34(1):e2507. doi:10.1002/rmv.2507. https://doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2507

97. Andrews CD, Parker EPK, Horne E, Walker V, Palmer T, Schaffer AL, et al. OpenSAFELY: Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents. medRxiv. 2024; Available from: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/05/20/2024.05.20.24306810

Alessandria M, Malatesta GM, Berrino F, Donzelli A. A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province. Microorganisms. 2024; 12(7):1343. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms12071343. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071343

Mead M, Seneff S, Wolfinger R, et al. COVID-19 Modified mRNA “Vaccines” Part 1: Lessons Learned from Clinical Trials, Mass Vaccination, and the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex. Vaccine Theory Prac & Res. 2024;3(1):1112-1178. doi:10.56098/fdrasy50. https://doi.org/10.56098/fdrasy50

Suzumura Y. Analysis of the Association Between BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination and Deaths Within 10 Days After Vaccination Using the Sex Ratio in Japan. Cureus. 2023;15(12):e50144. Published 2023 Dec 7. doi:10.7759/cureus.50144. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.50144

Acevedo-Whitehouse K, Bruno R. Potential health risks of mRNA-based vaccine therapy: A hypothesis. Med Hypotheses. 2023;171:111015. doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2023.111015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2023.111015

Igyártó BZ, Qin Z. The mRNA-LNP vaccines – the good, the bad and the ugly?. Front Immunol. 2024;15:1336906. Published 2024 Feb 8. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2024.1336906. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1336906

Share this content

Subscribe to SciPublHealth


Science-based knowledge, not narrative-dictated knowledge, is the goal of WSES, and we will work to make sure that only objective knowledge is used in the formation of medical standards of care and public health policies.

Nov 162024
 

Freedom and Justice .ca  is another Canadian organization (small)  that is intent on taking back what the Governments are taking away.   Their call to action for the Lawsuit in Toronto (below) begins with:

We need a MASSIVE turnout online to send a clear message to the court and the government that there is SUBSTANTIAL public interest in this case. We had close to 20K members of the public register to attend our appeal hearing via Zoom, the most people to attend a Federal Court hearing ever in Canadian history.

BACKGROUND

Rupa Subramanya  wrote up excellent background (August 2, 2022). Click on his name to read it.  It’s another of those  “I can’t believe this is happening”.   Canadians are SO fortunate to have people who are in there, fighting.

Court Documents Reveal Canada’s Travel Ban Had No Scientific Basis

In the days leading up to the mandate, transportation officials were frantically looking for a rationale for it.  They  came up short.

 

= = = = = = =  = = = = =

TRAVEL MANDATES LAWSUIT: URGENT MESSAGE

 

**REGISTER FOR THE COURT ZOOM**

 
Due to the overwhelming amount of e-mails they’ve received from the public requesting to attend our motion hearing via Zoom and in person on Monday November 18th, the (Canadian) Federal Court has now set up the hearing as a webinar to accommodate a much larger number of attendees.
We need a MASSIVE turnout online to send a clear message to the court and the government that there is SUBSTANTIAL public interest in this case. We had close to 20K members of the public register to attend our appeal hearing via Zoom, the most people to attend a Federal Court hearing ever in Canadian history.
 
**After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar
 
In person attendance: Federal Court – Courtroom 4A 180 Queen St W, Toronto, ON M5V 1Z4
 
All donations to our legal fund are much needed and greatly appreciated.
Thank you all once again for your continued support.

Travel Mandates Case

On August 13, 2021, the Canadian government announced that anyone who hadn’t been vaccinated against Covid would soon be barred from planes and trains inside Canada or out of Canada (the “Travel Ban”). The Travel Ban took effect on October 30, 2021. As a result, roughly six million unvaccinated Canadians were barred from visiting loved ones, working or otherwise traveling.

Karl Harrison and Shaun Rickard launched a judicial review that challenged the basis of Travel Ban. Throughout the summer of 2022, parties underwent extensive cross-examination to assess the strength of the evidence that supported the Travel Ban. On June 14, 2022, and in the middle of the 1.5 month cross-examination, the Canadian government announced – out-of-the blue – that they were suspending the Travel Ban. Thousands of pages of evidence was amassed notably that the agents that enacted the Travel Ban had no formal education in public health, that likely a senior official directed that the Travel Ban must be imposed and that days before implementing the Travel Ban transportation officials were seeking rational to support the Travel Ban. Within days, lawyers for the Canadian government filed a motion to shut down the Travel Ban Case on grounds that the case was moot.

View the Examination Transcripts.

In September 2022 the parties went before Associate Chief Justice Gagne challenging the Canadian governments motion that the Travel Ban Case is moot.

On October 20, 2022, Justice Gagne decided (Gagne decision) in favour of the Canadian Government and stated:
these Applications will be struck as moot. The air and rail passenger vaccine mandates were repealed, as have other related public health measures. The Applicants have substantially received the remedies sought and as such, there is no live controversy to adjudicate.
There is no important public interest or inconsistency in the law that would justify allocating significant judicial resources to hear these moot Applications.
Finally, it is not the role of the Court to dictate or prevent future government actions.

Harrison and Rickard have appealed Justice Gagne’s decision (Notice of Appeal) (Memorandum of Fact) arguing that the principle of mootness in the Canadian courts needs to be reviewed and that it is squarely the role of the courts in Canada to hear cases that challenge government policies on the basis of whether they are found to be unconstitutional, discriminatory and egregious. The Attorney General filed the following response to the appeal on May 29, 2023 (AG response)

= = = = = = = = = =

There are 477 Comments on Rupa Subramanya ‘s  article (substack).   The first two:

Aug 2, 2022·edited Aug 2, 2022

What should frighten people today, isn’t the authoritarian governments of China and Russia, but the authoritarians in our midsts. It is terrifying that such a retrograde philosophy has taken root amongst so many western leaders…including among the Democrats in the US.

They know these policies (like the travel ban in Canada) will have no discernible effect, but that isn’t the point. The point is control…do what we say you little plebs or we will crush you.

This is only possible because of a largely compliant media…which is why I am so thankful for places like Common Sense which give alternative (non-government) narratives a voice.

PS – if you’re interested in my writings on freedom and other important topics…check out my substack

https://gordoncomstock.substack.com/

Reply
Share

Thank you to these two men for standing up to tyranny. And thanks Rupa for your reporting. I’ve been enjoying watching your interviews.

Two things that I believe need to change in regards to government overreach in the US, in Canada, etc.:

1. Typically US courts don’t decide the merits of a policy, but rather if an official or agency has the authority to make that policy. So political leaders can just say they are following the science, without having to support their arguments with actual science. But in murder cases or civil cases, there is typically a battle of the experts. Denying freedoms should be the absolute last type of public policy / law and if the science is unequivocal, then political leaders should be able to defend it in court.

2. And actually more important, when implementing policies to deny freedoms granted in the US Constitution or the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms, political leaders should have to defend their position in court BEFORE the restrictions are implemented. Citizens shouldn’t have to sue to get their freedoms back. Freedoms shouldn’t be denied without a just and defensible cause. Otherwise, our governments are stealing our freedoms and our most precious time, time that we can never get back. And I submit that they do not have that right.

 

Nov 162024
 

Agriculture, Food and Health are, of course,  closely related.

So who is the Secretary for Agriculture in the Trump Administration?

If you want the short of it:  slide on down to the bottom of this posting for the link to “Off the Grid with Thomas Massie”.

 

RELATED TO:   2024-09-23 Roundtable Discussion on American Health and Nutrition: A Second Opinion

I found this:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/11/07/could-rep-thomas-massie-be-the-next-secretary-of-agriculture/76109588007/

Kimberly Gale     @KimberlyGale5

 

Massie for the win @ Agriculture – so much winning !

From cincinnati.com    4:17 AM · Nov 15, 2024

 

Thomas Massie     @RepThomasMassie

If you liked the second half of my conversation with   @TuckerCarlson,

you might enjoy this short movie about my farm and house. It’s “Off the Grid with Thomas Massie” produced by  @freethepeople

https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1799406403498480063?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1799406403498480063%7Ctwgr%5Ecb524ba68d1b45d062c67c0c9a866115f8b846f4%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cincinnati.com%2Fstory%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Felections%2F2024%2F11%2F07%2Fcould-rep-thomas-massie-be-the-next-secretary-of-agriculture%2F76109588007%2F

Nov 162024
 
Randy Hillier
Randy Hillier Courtesy No More Lockdowns Canada | Randy Hillier    Article by   Jonathan Bradley   

 

Former Ontario Independent MPP Randy Hillier (Lanark-Frontenac-Kingston) is free at last.

After careful consideration and deliberation, Ontario Court of Justice (OCJ) Justice Heather Perkins-McVey agreed the Crown attorney failed to act properly in prosecuting charges from the Freedom Convoy against Hillier and had violated his rights, including by not having the case prosecuted within 30 months.

“All criminal charges against me have been stayed and all bail conditions extinguished by Justice Perkins-McVey on November 14th, 2024,” said Hillier in a Friday blog post.

“I have begun reviewing the 32-month record with the great team of volunteers to determine and evaluate the conduct and actions of the Ottawa Crown, Ottawa Police and other elected and administrative bodies that may have conducted this prosecution contrary to their legal obligations and determine if there are grounds for civil remedies.”

For 32 months, Hillier had been prohibited by the OCJ from posting or commenting on the Freedom Convoy.

He had been accused of nine criminal charges by Ottawa Police Service (OPS) Det. Akiva Geller. In 2022, the Crown sought a three-and-a-half year prison sentence to punish him for engaging in civil disobedience to protest against the Canadian government’s COVID-19 restrictions.

The OCJ had imposed financial sureties on his family and restricted his freedom of expression and peaceful assembly and mobility rights as conditions for release in 2022. He alleged the actions by the Crown and OPS “were motivated by a political agenda that began two years earlier, in March of 2020, as I became the first elected Parliamentarian in Canada to oppose the foundational corruption of the ‘Pandemic.’”

Hillier concluded by saying he wanted “to thank the many wonderful people who have prayed, supported me, and contributed to my defence and have been stalwart in defending our faith, freedom, and families during this dark period of corruption in Canada.”

“God Bless you all!” he said.

Perkins-McVey had said the case had been ongoing for 1,061 days, but certain delays would not be counted to the total.

“This brings the total net delay to 31 months and 13 days,” she said.

“The remaining delay is over the 30-month Jordan ceiling.”

As a result, the application against Hillier’s charges was granted. Therefore, they were stayed.

Hillier had been slapped with nine criminal charges and surrendered to the OPS in 2022.

READ MORE
SELICK: Randy Hillier gets bail – but also gets silenced
Randy Hillier

He had been accumulating provincial charges for various No More Lockdowns protests he had organized and attended across Ontario, but sources have said many of them were being delayed and dropped by Crown attorneys who did not want to face a Charter challenge. However, criminal charges by the OPS were a different kettle of fish.

The charges he faced were two counts of mischief/obstruct property exceeding $5,000, three counts of counselling to commit an indictable offence, three counts of obstructing/resisting a person aiding a peace officer, and one count of assault on a peace or public officer.

Nov 162024
 

RELATED:

2023-11-29 B.C.: Bonnie Henry named as defendant in class-action lawsuit over her role in COVID-19 vaccine mandates

 

A lawsuit launched by a British Columbia public servant against COVID-19 vaccination mandates last year is allowed to proceed, with the case to be heard in court next year.

The BCPS Employees for Freedom, a non-profit organization that helps public service employees in BC, announced on Friday the class action, filed October 30, 2023, has been certified by the court.

Plaintiff Jason Baldwin’s lawsuit includes “all unionized BC public servants harmed by the BC government’s proof of COVID-19 vaccination mandate” — thereby potentially including tens of thousands of public servants.

BCPS says some 38,000 public servants were impacted by the BC government’s “coercive and unjustifiable proof of COVID-19 vaccination mandate” that caused “untold suffering and harm.”

As the Western Standard earlier reported, Baldwin filed the lawsuit last year, arguing the compelled injections and requirement of proof of vaccination violated bodily autonomy and medical privacy and contradicted the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Baldwin class action has since merged with a separate class action claim by United Health Care Workers of BC. The two parties will present arguments over five days of hearings beginning April 7, 2025.

Each of the class actions argue the mandate violates the Charter by “imposing new terms and conditions of employment on existing and freely negotiated employment agreements absent collective bargaining, consideration, or consent,” said BCPS.

The lawsuits also claim the mandates “breached employees’ common law and statutory privacy rights, as well as misfeasance in public office by BC’s Public Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry.”

According to court submissions, at least 314 employees were fired for not complying with the vaccine policy, and 175 workers were put on an unpaid leave. An untold  number were coerced to take the vaccine and accepted the injection for fear of losing their job.

BCPS in a post on social media called for unionized BC public servants and healthcare workers harmed by the provincial government’s COVID-19 vaccination mandates to join.

From “X”:

BCPS Employees for Freedom   @bcpsef
CLASS ACTION UPDATE We are pleased to announce that arguments for certification of the class action lawsuit filed October 30, 2023, on behalf of all unionized B.C. public servants harmed by the B.C. government’s proof of COVID-19 vaccination mandate, will be heard in April 2025.… Show more
BCPS Employees for Freedom    @bcpsef
CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT FILED Two years ago, the Province of B.C. violated the employment and constitutional rights, #medicalprivacy and #bodilyautonomy, of 38,000 B.C. public servants with its coercive and unjustifiable proof of COVID-19 vaccination mandate, leading to untold…

 

Nov 142024
 

With thanks to Dan who writes>

More than any part of this election …

… this is a dream come true. I still can’t believe it.

It will be fun watching all the Liberal cries of outrage that someone wanting to hold the big pharma / big food industrial complex accountable for poisoning america is placed in this position of power.

Haha

RE: Official Notice of Bobby Kennedy’s appointment to position of American Secretary of State for Health and Human Services

(Sandra>  I’m having trouble getting the info uploaded.  Will try some more later)

Nov 122024
 

I don’t know about you – – I see information in this (from Reclaim the Net) that is  The Globalist Agenda, AS IS BEING IMPLEMENTED IN CANADA RIGHT NOW – – the Online Harms Act,  a misnomer that George Orwell would love.  Ref:

2024-11-12 Help us stop the Online Harms Act. (Do not let it get thru Parliament!) From JCCF (Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms). John Carpay

(I need to get the links in this post below working,  if I can,  asap, /  S)

– – – – – – – – – – – – – –

 

  1.   MUSK LAYS IT OUT

“We’re Screwed Without It” Elon Musk Defends His Free Speech Twitter Takeover on Joe Rogan’s Podcast

In a new episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, Elon Musk shared insights into his motivations for acquiring Twitter (now X) and the implications for free speech, calling the platform’s previous approach “insane” and highlighting its shift under his leadership. Musk said he felt a duty to buy Twitter, suggesting that without his intervention, “we’re screwed.”

Rogan praised Musk, expressing gratitude for what he saw as a stand against censorship. He credited Musk’s decision as a “fork in the road” for free expression, allowing more transparency into practices of “suppressing information.”

Musk echoed this, noting he had been “attuned” to suspicious shifts in the platform’s operation long before the acquisition. “I was the most interacted-with user on Twitter… If they change the system, I can tell immediately,” he said, adding that the platform’s decision to deplatform then-president Donald Trump was “insane.”

Watch the clip here.

Musk also detailed the extent of the FBI’s involvement in Twitter’s past operations, revealing startling practices that he believes violate constitutional principles. He described a “magic portal” that the FBI had into Twitter’s system, allowing federal agents to communicate directly with the platform’s moderators and request content be removed or suppressed. Even more concerning, Musk added, was that all communication through this portal was automatically deleted after two weeks, in violation of federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) regulations. “It’s flat-out illegal,” Musk asserted, stressing that such erasure of communication prevented public oversight and accountability. He argued that the FBI’s covert access exemplifies the overreach and manipulation of information that he sought to end by taking ownership of the platform.

Musk delved into the government’s role in content control, mentioning the “Twitter Files” exposé, which shed light on government requests to remove certain posts or reduce their visibility on Twitter. “There was massive government interference in Twitter,” Musk noted. He explained that Twitter, at the time, had welcomed this influence, even receiving payments for content moderation services. Musk criticized this as “unconstitutional,” calling it a significant threat to open discourse.

Watch the clip here.

Discussing advertiser boycotts, Musk explained that X continues to face financial struggles, largely due to organized boycotts from activist organizations. “We had and still have a massive advertiser boycott,” he said, lamenting how “a bunch of left-wing NGOs” pushed for companies to halt their ad spending on the platform.

Watch the clip here.

“One of the most important forms of journalism is exposing government corruption,” Rogan stated, underscoring his stance that no entity—government or corporation—should have unchecked control over the flow of information.

– – – – – – –

Reclaim The Net needs your help

You subscribe to Reclaim The Net because you value free speech and privacy. Each issue we publish is a commitment to defend these critical rights, providing insights and actionable information to protect and promote liberty in the digital age.

Despite our wide readership, less than 0.2% of our readers contribute financially. With your support, we can do more than just continue; we can amplify voices that are often suppressed and spread the word about the urgent issues of censorship and surveillance.

Consider making a modest donation — just $5, or whatever amount you can afford. Your contribution will empower us to reach more people, educate them about these pressing issues, and engage them in our collective cause.

Thank you for considering a contribution. Each donation not only supports our operations but also strengthens our efforts to challenge injustices and advocate for those who cannot speak out.

Thank you.
Make a one-time donation

– – – – – – –

2.   GOOGLE SAYS IT’S WORKING ON A FIX  

INSERT, Sandra:  Good on Americans!  They went after Google, immediately;  no waiting around for “Enforcement” of what’s right!)  (Interesting example of – –  It MIGHT be no more than “Mistakes easily made,  HUMAN BEINGS + TECHNOLOGY”  Is there a name for that?)

– – – – – – –

Google’s Interactive Polling Station Map Ignites Claims of Pro-Harris Bias as Voters Head to the Polls

As Americans head to the polls today, a flurry of accusations has erupted on social media platform X, with several users alleging that Google’s search results display potential bias in the presentation of voting information. This controversy arises at a critical time as the presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, are neck and neck in the polls.

Several prominent figures and ordinary users have posted screenshots showing that searches for “where to vote for Harris” yield a special interactive map pinpointing voting locations, while equivalent searches for “where to vote for Trump” simply redirect users to generic search results, including news headlines from mainstream media outlets.

Reclaim The Net was able to reproduce the same results as the complainants.

Google says it’s working on a fix.

Most voters seeking information on polling locations are likely to search for general terms such as “where to vote” rather than specifying a candidate in their query. But while Google provides a useful service by directing voters to their polling stations, the consistency of this feature across different searches is crucial to maintaining fairness and neutrality. If Google offers a specialized map feature to help voters find polling locations when searching for one candidate, it stands to reason that the same functionality should be available regardless of which candidate’s name is included in the search.

David Sacks, a noted investor, tweeted a screenshot showing the Google feature that assists users in finding their voting station when searching for Harris, accompanied by a sarcastic comment suggesting that the feature is not available for Trump supporters. Elon Musk chimed in with his own observation, raising the question to his vast number of followers, “Are others seeing this too?”

Adding to the controversy, a tweet from the account DogeDesigner noted that Google has the largest corporate donations to the Democratic Party, implying that this could be influencing the alleged disparity in search result treatment.
Emma-Jo Morris from New York added to the outcry by posting a similar comparison, noting the disparity in how Google handles searches for the two presidential candidates. Her post has received significant attention, amassing nearly half a million views, indicating the widespread notice and concern about the issue.

The concern among voters is palpable, as they demand transparency and neutrality from tech giants, especially on an election day filled with high stakes.

In a response from Google News, Google said it’s working on a fix: “The ‘where to vote’ panel is triggering for some specific searches because Harris is also the name of a county in TX. Happens for ‘Vance’ too because it’s also the name of a county. Fix is coming. Note very few people actually search for voting places this way.”

– – – – – – –

3.   SPEECH POLICE

UN’s Latest on “Misinformation” and “Hate” – Will Tech Bow to Pressure?

Here comes UN’s Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications Melissa Fleming once again – with more demands regarding “misinformation” and “hate speech.”

And, censorship – the kind that would be algorithmically recommended, leading to demonetization of content and creators.

Yet a UN press release makes a grand statement – that its Communications Department is continuing to work “where public interest media are struggling to operate or are prevented from covering the truth.”

Backed up by a number of UN members (Lithuania, Estonia, Vietnam, and El Salvador among them, for their own specific reasons) – Fleming addressed the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization), to seemingly casually throw in “disinformation,” “AI,” and such, together with some of the most difficult issues related to wars and geopolitical hotspots (which is what the UN is supposed to be dealing with in the first place).

But Fleming took the opportunity to work not only her department’s engagement on “climate communications,” the humanitarian issues in the Middle East, Ukraine, etc. into her statements, and instead also highlight the UN Global Principles for Information Integrity, which recommend how member-countries may meet their commitments from the Global Digital Compact.

The principles, Fleming noted, “have important recommendations for tech companies.” She complained that there has been “very little self regulation” there, and identified two groups – those who want a “healthier information ecosystem” and those that want it to be “toxic.”

Fleming is not only optimistic that the first category is more numerous, but also about “lots of pressure” that’s currently on AI developers. In her words, it’s to “put the guardrails up before it is too late.”

Too late for what, though – that’s something the UN press release doesn’t go into.

Instead, this reporting about the committee’s meeting looks like it’s designed to at once promote the supposed successes of the UN Communications Departments in these various areas (detailing the number of various website hits, video views, etc.,) – and ask for more money from member states, to sustain the effort.

Namely, it mentions that these achievements were made “despite the resource crunch.”

Opponents of Fleming’s approach, and that of the UN in general, might be saying – may the crunch continue.

– – – – – – –

4.   PRIVATE MESSAGE BAN

Inside “EU Going Dark” The EU’s Push to End Private Messaging

For those in, or knowledgeable of the EU system who at the same time make digital rights, online privacy and security their priority, the work is never done – the European Union’s bureaucracy keeps throwing new challenges their way.

A recent scheme – dubbed “EU Going Dark” – is detailed by lawyer, and former German member of the European Parliament Patrick Breyer, who says the EU Commission (EC) has been working on this surveillance, encryption-undermining plan behind closed doors.

If the accusations against the scheme are true, as far as the EC is concerned, that’s for good reason – even if one is unacceptable in a democracy. Namely, opponents like Breyer call the measures “tyrannical” in nature, with scope described as “frightening.”

The plan is said to be developed by the High-Level Group (HLG) on access to data for effective law enforcement.

The reported effort to make sure that the ongoing work on the package of measures remains far from the public eye has been successful – at least up to this point. Breyer notes that those behind the scheme had managed to keep it secret from most citizens, journalists, and politicians – but some documents are available.

The key takeaway from the plan – which is in the phase of impact assessment and implementation preparations – is the reintroduction of what Breyer calls indiscriminate mass collection of data pertaining to people’s communications, “without suspicion.”

The former MEP sees the plan to introduce this package of surveillance measures as non-transparent, while “rarely questioned.” And yet other than mass-scale data harvesting and retention, it also entails erosion of online encryption, which is necessary for a secure internet – from chats to bank transactions.

The plans outlined here mention encrypted messengers – however, once weakened, technically, and a matter of policy – or both – encryption is weakened for all.

Should it prove accurate, the extent of the upcoming operation being described as being massive is no exaggeration. Hardware manufacturers would be under obligation to make sure phones, “smart home” devices, cars, etc., are always “monitorable.”

One element of this comprehensive surveillance is forcing providers of encrypted messenger apps to allow for interception of content, prevent encryption of both subscriber information and metadata, and hand over to the authorities users’ GPS location for tracking.

Service providers and their representatives who refuse to comply would be punished, all the way to imprisonment.

– – – – – – –

Reclaim The Net is funded by the community. Keep us going and get extra benefits by becoming a supporter today. Thank you.

Become a Supporter

Thanks for reading,

Reclaim The Net

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

plemented

 

SUPPORTERS

 

 

Don’t Let a Cookie Steal Your Online Identity: Simple Steps to Stay Secure

 

Imagine an invisible thief, lurking within the labyrinth of the digital world, poised to steal not just your passwords but your very identity. This is the stark reality of cookie hijacking, where your most personal data is just one careless click away from vanishing into the cyber abyss.

Today we explore the issue and the ways to neutralize these risks…

Become a supporter
here.

Get the post here.

 

Become a Supporter

 

MUSK LAYS IT OUT

 

 

“We’re Screwed Without It” Elon Musk Defends His Free Speech Twitter Takeover on Joe Rogan’s Podcast

 

In a new episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, Elon Musk shared insights into his motivations for acquiring Twitter (now X) and the implications for free speech, calling the platform’s previous approach “insane” and highlighting its shift under his leadership. Musk said he felt a duty to buy Twitter, suggesting that without his intervention, “we’re screwed.”

Rogan praised Musk, expressing gratitude for what he saw as a stand against censorship. He credited Musk’s decision as a “fork in the road” for free expression, allowing more transparency into practices of “suppressing information.”

Musk echoed this, noting he had been “attuned” to suspicious shifts in the platform’s operation long before the acquisition. “I was the most interacted-with user on Twitter… If they change the system, I can tell immediately,” he said, adding that the platform’s decision to deplatform then-president Donald Trump was “insane.”

Watch the clip here.

Musk also detailed the extent of the FBI’s involvement in Twitter’s past operations, revealing startling practices that he believes violate constitutional principles. He described a “magic portal” that the FBI had into Twitter’s system, allowing federal agents to communicate directly with the platform’s moderators and request content be removed or suppressed. Even more concerning, Musk added, was that all communication through this portal was automatically deleted after two weeks, in violation of federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) regulations. “It’s flat-out illegal,” Musk asserted, stressing that such erasure of communication prevented public oversight and accountability. He argued that the FBI’s covert access exemplifies the overreach and manipulation of information that he sought to end by taking ownership of the platform.

Musk delved into the government’s role in content control, mentioning the “Twitter Files” exposé, which shed light on government requests to remove certain posts or reduce their visibility on Twitter. “There was massive government interference in Twitter,” Musk noted. He explained that Twitter, at the time, had welcomed this influence, even receiving payments for content moderation services. Musk criticized this as “unconstitutional,” calling it a significant threat to open discourse.

Watch the clip here.

Discussing advertiser boycotts, Musk explained that X continues to face financial struggles, largely due to organized boycotts from activist organizations. “We had and still have a massive advertiser boycott,” he said, lamenting how “a bunch of left-wing NGOs” pushed for companies to halt their ad spending on the platform.

Watch the clip here.

“One of the most important forms of journalism is exposing government corruption,” Rogan stated, underscoring his stance that no entity—government or corporation—should have unchecked control over the flow of information.

 

 

Reclaim The Net needs your help

 

You subscribe to Reclaim The Net because you value free speech and privacy. Each issue we publish is a commitment to defend these critical rights, providing insights and actionable information to protect and promote liberty in the digital age.


Despite our wide readership, less than 0.2% of our readers contribute financially. With your support, we can do more than just continue; we can amplify voices that are often suppressed and spread the word about the urgent issues of censorship and surveillance.


Consider making a modest donation — just $5, or whatever amount you can afford. Your contribution will empower us to reach more people, educate them about these pressing issues, and engage them in our collective cause.


Thank you for considering a contribution. Each donation not only supports our operations but also strengthens our efforts to challenge injustices and advocate for those who cannot speak out.

 

Thank you.

 

Make a one-time donation

 

 

GOOGLE SAYS IT’S WORKING ON A FIX

 

 

Google’s Interactive Polling Station Map Ignites Claims of Pro-Harris Bias as Voters Head to the Polls

 

As Americans head to the polls today, a flurry of accusations has erupted on social media platform X, with several users alleging that Google’s search results display potential bias in the presentation of voting information. This controversy arises at a critical time as the presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, are neck and neck in the polls.

Several prominent figures and ordinary users have posted screenshots showing that searches for “where to vote for Harris” yield a special interactive map pinpointing voting locations, while equivalent searches for “where to vote for Trump” simply redirect users to generic search results, including news headlines from mainstream media outlets.

Reclaim The Net was able to reproduce the same results as the complainants.

Google says it’s working on a fix.

Most voters seeking information on polling locations are likely to search for general terms such as “where to vote” rather than specifying a candidate in their query. But while Google provides a useful service by directing voters to their polling stations, the consistency of this feature across different searches is crucial to maintaining fairness and neutrality. If Google offers a specialized map feature to help voters find polling locations when searching for one candidate, it stands to reason that the same functionality should be available regardless of which candidate’s name is included in the search.

David Sacks, a noted investor, tweeted a screenshot showing the Google feature that assists users in finding their voting station when searching for Harris, accompanied by a sarcastic comment suggesting that the feature is not available for Trump supporters. Elon Musk chimed in with his own observation, raising the question to his vast number of followers, “Are others seeing this too?”

Adding to the controversy, a tweet from the account DogeDesigner noted that Google has the largest corporate donations to the Democratic Party, implying that this could be influencing the alleged disparity in search result treatment.
Emma-Jo Morris from New York added to the outcry by posting a similar comparison, noting the disparity in how Google handles searches for the two presidential candidates. Her post has received significant attention, amassing nearly half a million views, indicating the widespread notice and concern about the issue.

The concern among voters is palpable, as they demand transparency and neutrality from tech giants, especially on an election day filled with high stakes.

In a response from Google News, Google said it’s working on a fix: “The ‘where to vote’ panel is triggering for some specific searches because Harris is also the name of a county in TX. Happens for ‘Vance’ too because it’s also the name of a county. Fix is coming. Note very few people actually search for voting places this way.”

 

SPEECH POLICE

 

 

UN’s Latest on “Misinformation” and “Hate” – Will Tech Bow to Pressure?

 

Here comes UN’s Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications Melissa Fleming once again – with more demands regarding “misinformation” and “hate speech.”

And, censorship – the kind that would be algorithmically recommended, leading to demonetization of content and creators.

Yet a UN press release makes a grand statement – that its Communications Department is continuing to work “where public interest media are struggling to operate or are prevented from covering the truth.”

Backed up by a number of UN members (Lithuania, Estonia, Vietnam, and El Salvador among them, for their own specific reasons) –  Fleming addressed the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization), to seemingly casually throw in “disinformation,” “AI,” and such, together with some of the most difficult issues related to wars and geopolitical hotspots (which is what the UN is supposed to be dealing with in the first place).

But Fleming took the opportunity to work not only her department’s engagement on “climate communications,” the humanitarian issues in the Middle East, Ukraine, etc. into her statements, and instead also highlight the UN Global Principles for Information Integrity, which recommend how member-countries may meet their commitments from the Global Digital Compact.

The principles, Fleming noted, “have important recommendations for tech companies.” She complained that there has been “very little self regulation” there, and identified two groups – those who want a “healthier information ecosystem” and those that want it to be “toxic.”

Fleming is not only optimistic that the first category is more numerous, but also about “lots of pressure” that’s currently on AI developers. In her words, it’s to “put the guardrails up before it is too late.”

Too late for what, though – that’s something the UN press release doesn’t go into.

Instead, this reporting about the committee’s meeting looks like it’s designed to at once promote the supposed successes of the UN Communications Departments in these various areas (detailing the number of various website hits, video views, etc.,) – and ask for more money from member states, to sustain the effort.

Namely, it mentions that these achievements were made “despite the resource crunch.”

Opponents of Fleming’s approach, and that of the UN in general, might be saying – may the crunch continue.

 

PRIVATE MESSAGE BAN

 

 

Inside “EU Going Dark” The EU’s Push to End Private Messaging

 

For those in, or knowledgeable of the EU system who at the same time make digital rights, online privacy and security their priority, the work is never done – the European Union’s bureaucracy keeps throwing new challenges their way.

A recent scheme – dubbed “EU Going Dark” – is detailed by lawyer, and former German member of the European Parliament Patrick Breyer, who says the EU Commission (EC) has been working on this surveillance, encryption-undermining plan behind closed doors.

If the accusations against the scheme are true, as far as the EC is concerned, that’s for good reason – even if one is unacceptable in a democracy. Namely, opponents like Breyer call the measures “tyrannical” in nature, with scope described as “frightening.”

The plan is said to be developed by the High-Level Group (HLG) on access to data for effective law enforcement.

The reported effort to make sure that the ongoing work on the package of measures remains far from the public eye has been successful – at least up to this point. Breyer notes that those behind the scheme had managed to keep it secret from most citizens, journalists, and politicians – but some documents are available.

The key takeaway from the plan – which is in the phase of impact assessment and implementation preparations – is the reintroduction of what Breyer calls indiscriminate mass collection of data pertaining to people’s communications, “without suspicion.”

The former MEP sees the plan to introduce this package of surveillance measures as non-transparent, while “rarely questioned.” And yet other than mass-scale data harvesting and retention, it also entails erosion of online encryption, which is necessary for a secure internet – from chats to bank transactions.

The plans outlined here mention encrypted messengers – however, once weakened, technically, and a matter of policy – or both – encryption is weakened for all.

Should it prove accurate, the extent of the upcoming operation being described as being massive is no exaggeration. Hardware manufacturers would be under obligation to make sure phones, “smart home” devices, cars, etc., are always “monitorable.”

One element of this comprehensive surveillance is forcing providers of encrypted messenger apps to allow for interception of content, prevent encryption of both subscriber information and metadata, and hand over to the authorities users’ GPS location for tracking.

Service providers and their representatives who refuse to comply would be punished, all the way to imprisonment.

 

Reclaim The Net is funded by the community. Keep us going and get extra benefits by becoming a supporter today. Thank you.

 

Become a Supporter

 

Thanks for reading,

Reclaim The Net

Nov 122024
 
INSERT, Sandra:   To me,  this is closely related to information about what’s happening at the Global Level.  See posting, 2024-11-12   Four articles from Reclaim the Net.     https://sandrafinley.ca/blog/?p=30407

The Online Harms Act is enactment of the Globalist Agenda.

– – – – – – –  –

The JCCF writes:

Dear friend of freedom,

You have likely heard about the Online Harms Act, the most aggressive censorship legislation in Canadian history. It is now before Parliament.

Presented under the clever guise of protecting children from harm (and nobody disagrees with that goal!), the Online Harms Act threatens our freedom of expression, our access to information, our privacy and our security.

 

 

If passed into law, the Online Harms Act will empower the government to prosecute Canadians over “hate” speech that has no clear definition. Former Supreme Court Justice Beverley McLachlin struggled to define “hate” when asking, “Where does dislike leave off, and hatred or contempt begin?” She also said that the term “hatred” is “vague and subjective, capable of extension should the interpreter be so inclined.”

 

Help us defend free speech

 

 

If the Online Harms Act passes into law, who will decide whether a Canadian is guilty of speaking or writing “hate”? Who will have the power to investigate and punish online harms if the Act passes?

The answer: Courts, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, and a new Digital Safety Commission.

 

 

Courts will punish Canadians for “future crimes”  

If the Online Harms Act becomes law, your neighbour will have the power to convince a judge that you might say something hateful in the future. If the judge believes that your neighbour’s fears are legitimate, the judge can order you to wear an ankle bracelet, obey a curfew, abstain from alcohol, avoid certain people or places, and surrender your legally owned firearms. All without having been charged with a crime or convicted of a crime!

 

 

Those who refuse to abide by the restrictions imposed by the court can be jailed for up to two years. All this because a complainant fears that a person might commit a speech crime in the future.   

 

 

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal will impose massive fines 

If the Online Harms Act becomes law, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal will acquire new powers to fine a Canadian up to $50,000 for a speech crime, plus the power to order a Canadian to pay up to $20,000 to the alleged “victim” of the speech crime.

Complaints can even be filed anonymously, depriving the accused person of her right to face her accuser. Complaints can be filed regarding anything on the internet, even if posted many years earlier.

The Online Harms Act will warp our sense of time and justice, and many Canadians will self-censor to avoid the risk of penalties from the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

 

 

New Digital Safety Commission will have extraordinary powers 

If the Online Harms Act passes into law, a new Digital Safety Commission will have the power to investigate and punish social media platforms. This Digital Safety Commission will unleash a new army of bureaucrats, who will exercise astonishing powers over what Canadians read and write online.

This new Commission will have powers to:

  • make online content inaccessible
  • investigate (without a warrant!) social media platforms
  • establish codes of conduct
  • conduct secret hearings
  • shut down websites
  • revoke licenses, and
  • impose billion-dollar fines

While exercising these vast powers over the speech of Canadians, the Digital Safety Commission will not be subject to basic rules of evidence, nor will any regulations created by the Commission require the approval of Parliament.

The Digital Safety Commission will also be empowered to fine regulated social media platforms up to six percent of global revenues (which would mean astronomically high fines, in light of the fact that the parent companies of most major social media platforms earn billions each year).

If the Online Harms Act becomes law, I fear that many social media platforms will cease operations in Canada rather than risk such significant fines. (I am reminded of Meta restricting access to news in Canada on their platforms in response to the Online News Act.) The companies that continue operating in Canada will become allies of the Digital Safety Commission, and do the Commission’s censorship work by removing anything that unaccountable bureaucrats might deem to be “hateful.”

 

 

If the Online Harms Act passes into law, the Digital Safety Commission will have the power to enter without a warrant into “any place in which they have reasonable grounds to believe” that there exists information relevant to verifying compliance with the Online Harms Act. Further, social media platforms will be forced to make their data available to external researchers, generating significant privacy and security risks.When unaccountable bureaucrats are empowered to enforce their own understanding of fuzzy and slippery definitions of “hate” speech, it becomes possible for thousands of Canadians to be fined, and some of them even imprisoned. If Supreme Court Justice McLachlin struggled to find a clear and stable definition of “hate,” how can we trust unaccountable bureaucrats to find it while respecting freedom of expression?

 

 

Help us stop the Online Harms Act 

If the Online Harms Act passes second reading, it will go on to committee review. From there, it must be accepted by Parliament and the Senate before becoming law. In other words, there’s still time for you to get involved.

1. Donate to our campaign 

We will present Parliament with an expert report on the dangers of the Online Harms Act in the coming months as the Bill moves towards being considered by a Committee of MPs of all parties. Your donations provide our team of lawyers and advocates with the resources they need to voice your concerns to Parliament and the Senate.

 

Donate Today

 

2. Sign our PetitionWe launched a petition against the Online Harms Act days after it was proposed in Parliament. In April, I delivered 55,000 signatures to the Minister of Justice in Ottawa. When you sign, you tell our elected representatives that freedom of expression, access to information, privacy and security, and democratic accountability should remain central to any discussion about the regulation of the internet.

 

 

Help us reach our goal of 110,000 signatures before the Online Harms Act passes second reading.

 

Sign our Petition

 

3. Connect with your Member of Parliament Email or phone your elected representative (regardless of which party) about the dangers of the Online Harms Act. They may be unaware. Find your Member of Parliament here.

 

 

We are up against a government determined to expand its powers and control the flow of information online. We are at a critical moment.

Please get involved before Canada joins a growing list of countries that value control above freedom. Sign our petition, connect with your MP, and donate to this critical cause

We are a registered charity. In February 2025, we will send you a tax receipt for all donations made in 2024.

I invite you to read our statement on the Online Harms Act here.

Thank you for partnering with the Justice Centre in defence of a free internet and a free Canada.

Yours sincerely,

John Carpay, B.A., LL.B.
President
Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

Nov 102024
 

The video, “An Evening With Jeff Rubin“,  is below.   I read his book which is the topic of discussion,  A Map of the New Normal:  How Inflation, War, and Sanctions Will Change Your World Forever.

You can understand that a Chief Economist’s job in the investment arena is NOT to REACT to current affairs,  but rather to be AHEAD of the game.  Which requires the ability to see what’s going on – –  the moves on the chess board.  The better you understand, the better you can PREDICT the most-likely scenarios that will unfold.

Rubin helps to make sense of Government policies that were crazy,   I haven’t read his second-last book  ((2020)   The Expendables: How the Middle Class Got Screwed By Globalization)  but I plan to.  “Globalization” is the trade deals we fought tooth and nail against for years.  They, step-by-relentless-step, brought us to our present predicament.

Jeff is a Canadian; former chief economist at CIBC World Markets (17 years); currently a senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI); and the author of (in sequence):

  1. (2009)   Why Your World Is About to Get a Whole Lot Smaller

    COMPLETELY REVISED AND UPDATED: A fearless and uncompromising look at what soaring oil prices mean for the present and the future of the way we do business …
  2. (2012)   The Big Flatline: Oil and the No-Growth Economy

  3. (2012)   The End of Growth: *But Is That All Bad?      (this book followed  The Big Flatline in 2012)

  4. (2015)   The Carbon Bubble: What Happens to Us When It Bursts
  5. (2020)   The Expendables: How the Middle Class Got Screwed By Globalization

  6. (2024)   A Map of the New Normal: How Inflation, War, and Sanctions Will Change Your World Forever

We can force better decisions in our Society by providing good information, empowering people to self-educate, and make a difference in our world that way – – but first we have to be Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz and pull back the curtain.   Here! . . . let Jeff Rubin give a hand – – listen in: