Sandra Finley

2025-03-12 Plaintiffs Will Appeal Ruling in Merck Gardasil Vaccine Injury Case. Brenda Baletti, CHD

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Mar 122025
 

Bless those who persist.

From today’s posting  “PLAINTIFFS WILL APPEAL . . . a North Carolina federal judge’s ruling, “

“Gardasil is one of Merck’s highest-grossing products. Global sales . . .  totaled $8.6 billion for the year (2024)”.

“(Judge)  Bell’s decision was made public the same day that Merck announced a new $1 billion facility — a 225,000-square-foot manufacturing plant in Durham, North Carolina — slated to produce the blockbuster Gardasil vaccine.”

The 4th posting below,  “Outrage of the father of a Gardasil- vaccinated boy . . .”.   WHY on Earth would a young boy get Gardasil shots?  . . .  As simple as revenue? totaled $8.6 billion for the year (2024).

The coverage I remember about Mothers organizing against the Gardasil vaccine were about injured GIRLS from other countries,  in large numbers.  Heart-breaking cases.  I listened to many of them.

Please share information.   It WORKS.    Canadians need to help out.

I am re-motivated because I reviewed what is known about Gardasil.  It almost makes me sick what these people do for making money.  HOWEVER!   there is GOOD NEWS.

Third link from the bottom of the list, EXCERPT:

A bill introduced late last week in the U.S. House of Representatives would end the liability protections Congress gave vaccine makers under the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

Thirty Republican lawmakers signed on as co-sponsors to House Bill 9828, End the Vaccine Carveout Act. The proposed legislation would end the broad protection from liability for injuries resulting from vaccines listed on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Childhood Immunization Schedule.

“The … vaccine makers are criminal enterprises that have paid tens of billions in criminal penalties over the past decade,” Children’s Health Defense (CHD) founder and chairman on leave Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a statement on the bill.

Kennedy, who has long advocated for eliminating liability protection for vaccine manufacturers, added, “By freeing them from liability for negligence, the 1986 statute removed any incentive for these companies to make safe products. If we want safe and effective vaccines we need to end the liability shield.”

Today’s posting about THOSE WHO PERSIST   is below.

POSTINGS RELATED TO GARDASIL (HPV Vaccine).

2025-03-12 Plaintiffs Will Appeal Ruling in Merck Gardasil Vaccine Injury Case. Brenda Baletti, CHD        (below)

2019-05-15 RFK, Jr.: Gardasil “The Science” Video and Other Facts

2018-09-02 Vaccinations, Gardasil (HPV Vaccine), Update

2017-2018  Vaccines: outrage of the father of a boy vaccinated for HPV (Merck’s Gardasil) without parental consent. Wetaskwin, Alberta, Canada . Edmonton Journal “Opinion” is propaganda for Merck.   (Merck may have spent some of the $8.6 billion on advertising??)

2018-02-21 Vaccines, more on Gardasil (HPV): Letter to Alberta School Division. Using schools to cut parents out of Vaccination Decisions?

While it is not clear exactly what is causing so many adverse reactions, it is known that Gardasil contains genetically engineered virus-like protein particles as well as aluminum, which can affect immune function.    Further,  . . .   (go to the article if you’d like to read further)

That’s 26 reported deaths of young, previously healthy, girls after Gardasil vaccination in just one year  (INSERT, S:   in just one country, the U.S.)

While it is not clear exactly what is causing so many adverse reactions, it is known that Gardasil contains genetically engineered virus-like protein particles as well as aluminum, which can affect immune function.    Further,  . . .   (go to the article if you’d like to read further)

UPDATE:    It would have been nice if I had I received the

Maryland HPV letter, by Josh Mazer   before I sent my letter to the Alberta School Board!

2024-10-29 NIH (U.S.) EHR (Electronic Health Records). Spending $2.2 Million to ‘Nudge’ to Get More Vaccines. University “Nudge Units”. The “Nudge Ladder”. Baletti, CHD.

2024-09-30 Covid: 30 Lawmakers Sponsor Bill to End Liability Protection for Vaccine Makers

2022-01-20 Bill Gates, Indian Government Targeted in Lawsuit Alleging AstraZeneca Vaccine Killed 23-Year-Old

2017-11-28 High Aluminum Found in Autism Brain Tissue, Children’s Health Defense (Vaccinations)

= = = = = =  = = =

TODAY’S  NEWS:  APPEAL OF THE COURT DECISION

Plaintiffs in a bellwether lawsuit against Merck alleging the company concealed the risks of its Gardasil HPV vaccine today said they will appeal a North Carolina federal judge’s ruling, handed down Tuesday, in favor of the pharmaceutical giant.

by Brenda Baletti, Ph.D.
merck building and gardasil box

Plaintiffs in a bellwether lawsuit against Merck alleging the company concealed the risks of its Gardasil HPV vaccine today said they will appeal a North Carolina federal judge’s ruling, handed down Tuesday, in favor of the pharmaceutical giant.

Michael Baum, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, told The Defender:

“We will be appealing the court’s order concluding that all of the Gardasil cases filed in federal court are preempted. In our view, none should have been.

“We believe the court failed to recognize that vaccine adverse event databases (VAERS and VigiBase), numerous case studies and Merck’s internal data clearly showed reasonable evidence of a causal association between Gardasil and autoimmune conditions like POTS [postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome] and POI [primary ovarian insufficiency].”

The lawsuit against Merck was the first of the “bellwether cases,” 16 cases selected as exemplar cases from a larger pool of more than 200 lawsuits pending in federal court against Merck for injuries related to its Gardasil vaccine.

In August 2022, the cases were consolidated into multidistrict litigation in a single court. The consolidation allowed Gardasil lawsuits filed throughout the country to move into coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings. It also means that the judge’s decision in this case can apply to all of the pending cases.

The plaintiffs in the first bellwether case alleged that Merck knew Gardasil carries multiple risks, including POTS and POI, more commonly known as ovarian failure, but violated the law by failing to warn the public.

However, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell ruled that Merck did not have authority under federal law to add warnings to the vaccine’s label without prior approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Federal law preempts the plaintiffs’ claims that Merck violated state laws when it failed to warn the plaintiffs of potential side effects, Bell said.

Bell said his decision extends to all of the 200-plus cases pending against Merck in federal court.

Plaintiffs reject judge’s claim of insufficient evidence to justify label change

In his decision, Bell said Merck didn’t have enough evidence to justify a label change showing that Gardasil could cause POTS or POI by 2011 and 2013, respectively, when the plaintiffs’ expert witness said warnings should have first been given.

Bell said only a few cases of those conditions had been reported by then and that broader studies had not, at that time, established causal associations.

The plaintiffs, however, said that not only was there evidence of a link at that time — which the judge failed to consider — but also that considerable evidence has since accumulated demonstrating the link and that evidence should be considered.

The plaintiffs in the 16 bellwether cases all received multiple doses of the Gardasil vaccine between 2012 and 2021 — after the 2011 date cited by the court. They all developed either POTS or POI after vaccination and allege that Merck failed to add those conditions as possible vaccine side effects to the label.

Bell’s decision was made public the same day that Merck announced a new $1 billion facility — a 225,000-square-foot manufacturing plant in Durham, North Carolina — slated to produce the blockbuster Gardasil vaccine.

A Merck spokesperson told Fierce Pharma that the company is “extremely pleased” with the court’s decision.

‘The fight goes on’ for those injured by Gardasil

In his ruling, Bell said that, as per the regulation, a label change by Merck would be required if there was “reasonable evidence” of a causal association based on newly acquired information and “during the relevant timeframe.”

He cited testimony by plaintiffs’ expert, Stephen Amato, Ph.D., who argued warnings should have been added by 2011 for POTS and 2013 for POI.

That means, Bell said, his decision focused on whether Merck had convincing evidence that Gardasil could cause POTS and POI between 2006, when the drug was approved, and 2011, which he said was a relevant timeframe.

On that basis, Bell excluded all evidence that arose both before and after the 2005-2011 timeframe. That includes new analyses of pre-approval and post-marketing data and revelations of misreporting — including Merck’s failure to include data on the presence of DNA fragments in Gardasil vials.

In his expert testimony, Amato argued early warnings should have been added based on existing post-marketing data and also that over time — after 2011 and 2013 — substantially more evidence appeared through statistical analysis of adverse event reporting systems and case series published in the scientific literature.

Bell treated those dates as a date to limit his analysis instead of how Amato presented them, which was as a starting point for when sufficient evidence was first available.

“Limiting its analysis to pre-2011 data is, we believe, in error, especially in light of the significantly elevated reporting of POTS and POI since 2011,” Baum said.

“For example, in a Danish Health Authority analysis, POTS was reported in post-HPV vaccination over 100 times more than all other vaccines,” he said. “Our experts found similar significant elevated reporting of POTS.”

Baum added:

“The bottom line is that there was a large volume of evidence that we think was misapprehended by the court. We are optimistic that the Court of Appeals will recognize that this preemption decision should be reversed.”

Kim Mack Rosenberg, an attorney for the plaintiffs and general counsel for Children’s Health Defense, said, “While we are disappointed in the decision, we believe there is substantial evidence that shows that the court’s decision was an error and we’re hopeful that the U.S. Court of Appeals will reverse the decision.”

“The fight goes on for those who have been injured by the Gardasil vaccines,” said Mack Rosenberg, who is also co-author of “The HPV Vaccine on Trial: Seeking Justice for a Generation Betrayed.”

‘The fight goes on’ for those injured by Gardasil

In his ruling, Bell said that, as per the regulation, a label change by Merck would be required if there was “reasonable evidence” of a causal association based on newly acquired information and “during the relevant timeframe.”

He cited testimony by plaintiffs’ expert, Stephen Amato, Ph.D., who argued warnings should have been added by 2011 for POTS and 2013 for POI.

That means, Bell said, his decision focused on whether Merck had convincing evidence that Gardasil could cause POTS and POI between 2006, when the drug was approved, and 2011, which he said was a relevant timeframe.

On that basis, Bell excluded all evidence that arose both before and after the 2005-2011 timeframe. That includes new analyses of pre-approval and post-marketing data and revelations of misreporting — including Merck’s failure to include data on the presence of DNA fragments in Gardasil vials.

In his expert testimony, Amato argued early warnings should have been added based on existing post-marketing data and also that over time — after 2011 and 2013 — substantially more evidence appeared through statistical analysis of adverse event reporting systems and case series published in the scientific literature.

Bell treated those dates as a date to limit his analysis instead of how Amato presented them, which was as a starting point for when sufficient evidence was first available.

“Limiting its analysis to pre-2011 data is, we believe, in error, especially in light of the significantly elevated reporting of POTS and POI since 2011,” Baum said.

“For example, in a Danish Health Authority analysis, POTS was reported in post-HPV vaccination over 100 times more than all other vaccines,” he said. “Our experts found similar significant elevated reporting of POTS.”

Baum added:

“The bottom line is that there was a large volume of evidence that we think was misapprehended by the court. We are optimistic that the Court of Appeals will recognize that this preemption decision should be reversed.”

Kim Mack Rosenberg, an attorney for the plaintiffs and general counsel for Children’s Health Defense, said, “While we are disappointed in the decision, we believe there is substantial evidence that shows that the court’s decision was an error and we’re hopeful that the U.S. Court of Appeals will reverse the decision.”

“The fight goes on for those who have been injured by the Gardasil vaccines,” said Mack Rosenberg, who is also co-author of “The HPV Vaccine on Trial: Seeking Justice for a Generation Betrayed.”

2024 sales of Gardasil hit $8.6 billion

Gardasil is one of Merck’s highest-grossing products. Global sales for the drug dropped 3% in 2024 overall but still totaled $8.6 billion for the entire year.

Merck markets the vaccine as “safe and effective,” but the lawsuits allege the drugmaker fast-tracked Gardasil through the FDA approval process and deceptively conducted clinical trials to mask serious side effects and exaggerate the vaccine’s effectiveness.

Some of the signature reactions observed following HPV vaccination — which afflict a number of the plaintiffs — include permanently disabling autoimmune and neurological conditions, fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome.

There have been thousands of reports of adverse events worldwide, peer-reviewed scientific literature from the U.S., Australia, Denmark, Sweden, France and Japan, and statistics published by public health agencies in each of these countries demonstrating associations between HPV vaccination and autoimmune conditions.

Recent documents made public in a similar case against Merck in California state court showed that Merck knew its Gardasil vaccine was contaminated with DNA, but covered it up.

Evidence from that trial also showed that Merck cherry-picked data to claim there was no link between its Gardasil vaccine and POTS.

Related articles in The Defender

Brenda Baletti, Ph.D.

Brenda Baletti, Ph.D.

Brenda Baletti, Ph.D., is a senior reporter for The Defender. She wrote and taught about capitalism and politics for 10 years in the writing program at Duke University. She holds a Ph.D. in human geography from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a master’s from the University of Texas at Austin.

2025-03-07 RFK Jr. and Federal Health Agencies Wisely Oppose Mass H5N1 Animal Vaccination Over Mutation Concerns

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Mar 082025
 

With thanks to Dianne for sending in:

“All three of my health agencies—NIH, CDC, and FDA—the acting heads of those agencies—have all recommended against the use of the bird flu vaccine.”

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
Mar 7
 
READ IN APP
 

By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

According to CBS News:

Federal health agencies oppose the use of bird flu vaccines in poultry right now, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said, weighing in publicly on it for the first time in his new role.

“There’s no indication that those vaccines actually provide sterilizing immunity and all three of my health agencies, NIH, CDC, and FDA, the acting heads of those agencies have all recommended against the use of the bird flu vaccine,” Kennedy said in an interview on Fox News published this week.

Kennedy’s remarks mark a sharp turn from the Biden administration, multiple former officials said.

Kennedy said the new opposition from his health agencies was based on concerns that vaccinating poultry without being able to provide sterilizing immunity would amount to “turning those birds into mutant factories,” resulting in worrying genetic changes to the virus. “That could actually accelerate the jump to human beings,” Kennedy said.

“We’ve in fact said, at the USDA, that they should consider maybe the possibility of letting it run through the flock so that we can identify the birds and preserve the birds that are immune to it,” Kennedy had said.

These comments provide a sigh of relief to the many who were deeply concerned about Medgene’s “protein-based prescription-platform vaccine,” which was on the verge of USDA approval for cattle vaccination:

BREAKING – USDA Approval Imminent for H5N1 Bird Flu Vaccine in Cattle

 
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH ·
Mar 1
By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

 
Read full story

At last, America has public health leadership that uses common sense and the most up-to-date science. Mass animal depopulation for H5N1 bird flu prevents population immunity, while widespread vaccination would accelerate viral evolution—prolonging the crisis, destabilizing the food supply chain, and increasing the risk to humans.

A recent study by Li et al found that mass vaccination of animals against H5N1 with a non-sterilizing vaccine during a widespread animal pandemic can accelerate viral evolution, leading to more virulent strains and increasing the risk of a human pandemic:

Mass depopulated poultry farms remain non-operational for approximately four months following H5N1 pooled PCR detections. Under the “stamping out” protocol, entire flocks are culled within 24 to 48 hours of a positive pooled PCR test—where swabs from 11 birds are combined into a single test tube—even if most birds appear healthy. The lack of marking on swabbed birds makes it impossible to distinguish healthy birds from infected ones. As a result, farms remain non-operational for an average of 111 days, leading to a never-ending cycle of mass culling, human infections, and food supply chain disruptions. Current biosecurity protocols are not sustainable, as chickens will never obtain herd immunity and migratory birds continue to spread H5N1:

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

www.mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.

Upgrade to paid

You’re currently a free subscriber to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse). For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Upgrade to paid

 
Like
Comment
Restack
 

© 2025 Peter McCullough MD MPH
548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104
Unsubscribe

2025-03-05 Covid: U.S. Supreme Court Orders Meta to Respond to CHD Petition in Censorship Case. by Brenda Baletti, CHD

 Censorship, Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Mar 052025
 

In January, after an appeals court ruled against Children’s Health Defense (CHD), CHD petitioned the Supreme Court to hear its case alleging Meta colluded with Biden administration officials to censor CHD. Meta waived its right to file a response to CHD’s petition. However, in a letter to the company’s attorneys, the court directed Meta to file a reply by March 31.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week asked Meta to respond to a petition filed by Children’s Health Defense (CHD) asking the court to hear its case against the social media giant over its collusion with government officials to censor CHD content on Facebook.

In January, CHD petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case, which had been rejected in the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Meta waived its right to file a response to CHD’s petition, but in a letter to the company’s attorneys, the court directed Meta to file a reply by March 31.

Commenting on the news, CHD CEO Mary Holland told The Defender:

“We see this as a good sign. When we asked the Supreme Court to hear our case, Meta declined to file a reply, even though it had the right to do so. This latest move by the Supreme Court may delay the court’s final decision on whether it will hear our case, but it also suggests the court has questions that it believes Meta should address.”

CHD sued Facebook in November 2020, alleging Biden administration officials targeted the organization and its then-chairman Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Facebook cooperated by censoring CHD’s speech — particularly speech related to vaccines and COVID-19 — that should have been protected under the First Amendment.

 

Mark Zuckerburg over fb and ig logos Notice of being unpublished fb and ig

Tell Mark Zuckerberg 
to Restore Our 
Facebook Account!
Sign the Petition

 

Facebook first took action against CHD in May 2019, removing or restricting CHD posts. Censored posts included data on the risks of COVID-19 vaccines, remdesivir, and ventilation, as well as having the temerity to raise the benefits of natural immunity and alternative treatment with ivermectin and other protocols.

In August 2022, Facebook, rebranded in 2021 as Meta, deplatformed CHD from Facebook and Instagram and has yet to reinstate the accounts.

On Aug. 9, 2024, the 9th Circuit ruled against CHD.

CHD General Counsel Kim Mack Rosenberg said, “Since this case was originally filed, and even since the 9th Circuit issued its decision, more and more information has come to light regarding Meta’s censorship activities, including some telling statements by Meta Chairman and CEO Mark Zuckerberg.”

She added:

“That the U.S. Supreme Court has now required Meta to respond seems a hopeful sign that the court is taking our petition seriously and that we also will get a chance to respond to Meta’s submission.”

Zuckerberg admitted caving to government censorship demands

CHD’s lawsuit against Meta also named “fact-checking” firms Science Feedback, and the Poynter Institute and its PolitiFact website.

On Jan. 27 — less than 24 hours after CHD asked the Supreme Court to hear its case — Zuckerberg announced the company was ending its third-party “fact-checking” program.

CHD launched a petition in January asking Zuckerberg to restore its Facebook and Instagram accounts. The petition has 20,804 signatures.

When Zuckerberg announced he was ending the company’s third-party fact-checking program, he admitted that during the pandemic, government officials pressured — as he told Joe Rogan, “would call up our team and, like, scream at them and curse” at them — Facebook to censor content that was factually accurate but didn’t align with the official government narrative.

Now, he says, his company is committed to “restoring free expression.”

After Zuckerberg made his public comments, CHD filed a letter with the Supreme Court, arguing that Zuckerberg’s public comments contradicted its statements to the lower courts that its decisions to censor CHD had been “internal decisions” and the White House’s actions hadn’t changed Meta’s behavior.

Attorney Roger Teich, who is representing CHD in its case against Meta, said he’s “grateful” the court has taken this latest step, given the importance of the issues CHD raised about Meta’s conflicting statements.

“Our state-action allegations cut across easy political characterizations,” Teich said. “Of course, Zuckerberg’s kowtowing to the new administration while continuing to censor CHD may also be a factor that gives us perhaps a fighting chance that the Court may want to review this issue.”

National healthcare and constitutional practice attorney Rick Jaffe, who is not involved in the case but represents CHD in other cases, said, “I view the order to the respondents to file a response despite their waiver as a positive indication. It seems that some members think enough of the petition that they want to hear the other side.”

“My speculation is that Zuckerberg’s recent admissions, adeptly pointed out by Roger Teich’s supplemental letter to the Court, made some members want a response from Meta,” he added.

In an op-ed published in January by RealClear Politics and the New York Post, Holland said the issues at stake in the case affect the entire American public.

She wrote:

“Ultimately, this debate is not about any one group or individual but all of us. How many people suffered or lost their lives because they didn’t have access to information that could have helped them make better-informed decisions about their health?

“The American public is better served with more information rather than less, especially when it is grounded on data-based scientific information. People are smart enough to make up their own minds.”

Related articles in The Defender 

2025-03-05 Hawaii Kills Bill to End Vaccine Exemptions After Massive Pushback From Public. Brenda Baletti, CHD.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Mar 052025
 

Rep. Diamond Garcia, House minority floor leader, who opposed the bill, told The Defender it was defeated because the “people of Hawai‘i sent a clear message: medical freedom is non-negotiable.”

School kids giving each other a high five and the hawaii state flag

Hawaii’s religious exemption from vaccine mandates is safe — at least for now. Under pressure from constituents, state lawmakers voted yesterday to table a bill that would have repealed the exemption.

House Bill 1118 was part of the “governor’s package,” a set of proposed bills that make up Gov. Josh Green’s legislative agenda.

The bill, introduced in January in the House and Senate, aimed to curb the growing rates of non-medical exemptions in the state over the last 10 years.

However, the proposed legislation encountered stiff pushback from the public and grassroots organizations in Hawaii, who responded with letters, public statements and rallies opposing the bill.

Constituents submitted more than 2,000 written statements to state lawmakers opposing the bill and just over 100 supporting it.

When the bill came up for discussion in Tuesday’s legislative session, Democratic Rep. Chris Todd moved to “recommit” it back to committee, effectively tabling it. Rep. Dee Morikawa, House majority leader, seconded the motion, which then passed.

The bill will not continue to the Senate floor.

Rep. Diamond Garcia, House minority floor leader, who opposed the bill, told The Defender it was defeated because the “people of Hawai‘i sent a clear message: medical freedom is non-negotiable.”

He added:

“HB1118 was an assault on our First Amendment rights and an attempt to coerce families into medical tyranny. But when the people rise, politicians listen. The overwhelming public opposition forced House leadership to retreat because they knew they didn’t have the votes.

“This is a victory for the people of Hawai‘i, who stood up against government overreach and made their voices impossible to ignore. The fight isn’t over, but yesterday proved that when we apply the heat, they feel it.”

Kim Haines, former head of Children’s Health Defense’s Hawaii Chapter, said that Hawaiians came out in force to oppose the bill and that people from across the country also reached out to support them.

“I am so honored and proud to be a part of the Hawaiian people who took a stand respectively, collectively, and with great strength and conviction,” she said. “It truly is a win for grassroots activism in Hawaii. Our collective voice truly can make a difference! “

She said the American people “have had enough of the government reaching into their bodies and into the bodies of their children.”

Gary Cordery, former gubernatorial candidate and founder of the Aloha Freedom Coalition — formed in 2020 in response to the state’s COVID-19 lockdown and mandate policies — told The Defender his group received reports from representatives that their phone banks and individual representative’s phone lines “were flooded.”

“It’s a win for the people really,” Cordery said. “It’s really a win for the people and the expression of their will, and actually just engagement in conversation.”

Aloha Freedom Coalition, together with 14 other local organizations, held a day-long rally on Feb. 20, while legislators were in session discussing the bill. Several legislators stopped by to speak, Cordery said, and the rally was so loud that the congressional Sergeant at Arms came down and asked them to lower the volume because it was disrupting the session.

“The legislators could hear us,” he said, so they knew “the people were there and that it mattered. People were paying attention.”

Haines also noted the significance of defeating a bill that was part of Green’s legislative package, as such bills typically make it to the House and Senate floors for a vote.

Green, an emergency medicine doctor, previously served as lieutenant governor and led the state’s COVID-19 response during the pandemic, heading up a pandemic response that local organizers told The Defender was one of the most draconian in the country, often requiring vaccine passports.

Green recently made national headlines, appearing in mainstream media and in political ads smearing Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during his confirmation hearings for secretary of Health and Human Services.

Green is a Democratic governor in a state with a Democratic majority in both the House and Senate.

Haines emphasized it will be important for the people of Hawaii to “stay vigilant.”

Attorney Sujata Gibson, who was advising grassroots groups, agreed. “We have to stay vigilant.” Still, she said, “This is a big win and a testament to the power of activism.”

Gibson said:

“Many legislators commented that they were swayed by the sheer number of public comments against this bill, as well as the fear that the repeal would be tied up in lawsuits.

“Those on the ground in Hawaii deserve big kudos for their amazing work and results.”

 

 

 

2025-03-04 from the U.S. Govt Oversight Committee: “For example, the Biden-Harris Administration spent $2.5 million taxpayer dollars to study the fertility of transgender mice.”

 Uncategorized  No Responses »
Mar 042025
 

Scroll down – – there’s  some info and a video,  5 minutes long.  From “X”    Rep. Nancy Mace

The link to the video is

Oversight Committee
@GOPoversight

🚨 Rep. Nancy Mace (

@RepNancyMace

) Opens Hearing on the Oversight of Taxpayer Funded Animal Cruelty “Late last year the White Coat Waste Project exposed that more than $10 million dollars in taxpayer funds were spent creating transgender mice, rats, and monkeys. “These DEI grants funded painful and deadly transgender experiments that forced lab animals to undergo invasive surgeries and hormone therapies at universities across the country. “For example, the Biden-Harris Administration spent $2.5 million taxpayer dollars to study the fertility of transgender mice.”

108.3K

Views

Sandra Finley

 

2025-03-04 Theresa Tam’s emails reveal unethical experiment on Inuit infants

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Mar 042025
 

With thanks to Rebel News and Senior Reporter  Tamara Ugolini

Dear Sandra,

A series of bombshell emails has just been released implicating Canada’s outgoing Chief Public Health Officer, Dr. Theresa Tam, in overseeing a series of experimental drug trials on Inuit infants without parental or community consent.

This information first came to light through an Access to Information request by Bret Sears, who uncovered a staggering 450,000-page treasure trove of emails detailing a secretive research program led by one of Canada’s chief architects behind the Orwellian COVID-19 response.

The program aimed to study the efficacy of an AstraZeneca drug to reduce RSV-related hospitalizations, but ultimately failed to achieve its goals.

Independent investigator Donald Best reviewed many of these emails. He found that despite concerns raised by health-care workers about the lack of informed consent and the absence of Inuit community involvement in the decision-making process, the trials continued.

Click here for my full report.

This was nothing but an unethical and appalling experiment on vulnerable babies.

And despite the failures, the drug, known as PVZ, is still being recommended for “infants and young children with health conditions that make them vulnerable to severe RSV disease.”

This information has been buried in secrecy for years. It adds to the alarming pattern of medical experiments conducted on Canada’s Indigenous communities and Canadians at large at the hands of Canada’s Public Health Agency.

These findings leave us with an important question: How far did these unethical practices go, and who, if anyone, will be held responsible?

Yours truly,

Tamara Ugolini

P.S. To support this kind of work and learn more about the novel modified mRNA injections, please visit NoMoreShots.ca. There you can also help us call on Minister Mark Holland to revoke market authorization for the COVID shots. Click here to find out how.

2025-03-04 Informed skepticism, with thanks to Lyle

 Culture and Ethics, Empowerment, PHILOSOPHY  No Responses »
Mar 042025
 

 

 

Wow, a short  video of Carl Saigon explaining, almost 40 years ago, the absolute necessity of encouraging informed scepticism.

Sandra speaking:   remove the ”    PLUS    ”   from the URL to make it work.   I can’t post the URL without them.

https://youtube.com/    PLUS    shorts/      PLUS   Sn8EkqOxpvg?si=nVyeGW2USnydNrYD

 

2005-11-29 Smart Regs – COMPLIANCE – Canadians are learning non-compliance. The Government is undermining the rule of law.

 Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials)  No Responses »
Mar 032025
 

The rule of law is critical to democracy.   Understand what contributes to the under-mining of the rule of law.

GDR = Government Directive on Regulating

I have submitted the following to the PCO (Privy Council Office), responsible for the GDR which is part of so-called “Smart Regulations”.   (This was part of a public consultation process.  2005)

EMAIL YOUR INPUT to SMART Regulations to:  info@regulation.gc.ca   DEADLINE:  December 23rd, 2005

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

 INSERT UPDATE:

2022-11-10 Egregious info that comes from the Commission of Enquiry into the Invocation of the Emergency Act in Canada (covid)

=============================

Dear Daniel, Samir, and Ben,  (PCO)  (Privy Council Office)

. . .    (3)  REGARDING THE STATE OF COMPLIANCE   (Canadians are learning non-compliance)

PROPOSE:  test the effectiveness of the GDR document by running actual events through it.

The GDR states:

page 2, line 77:  Regulations are a form of law – they have binding legal effect …

page 10, line 475, Under  Planning for Compliance:

Departments and agencies are responsible for facilitating compliance by designing regulation from the perspective of those who must administer or comply with it.

That is most of what the GDR says about compliance.

—————————————

PUT THE GUN REGISTRY AND THE 2006 CENSUS THROUGH THE GDR:

Canadians are learning non-compliance.  We need to understand why that is, and then build the regulatory framework to guard against it, if possible.

RECENT EXAMPLES OF NON-COMPLIANCE

(1)  The ability of the Canadian Government to regulate was seriously undermined by the Gun Registry.  There are very high levels of non-compliance, a thumbing of the nose at the Government.

(2)  When citizens see the amount of corruption in the Government there is further loss of respect and the ability to regulate suffers another great setback.  There is a high level of non-compliance with Income Tax regulation, a form of resistance or passive agressive behaviour by citizens reacting to corruption in Government.  Why should we pay taxes when hundreds of millions of dollars of that money are used to line the pockets of racketeers?

(3)  I suspect we are headed into unprecedented levels of non-compliance with the 2006 Census.  The Government went ahead with the contracting-out of census work to the American military company, Lockheed-Martin, in spite of great opposition from Canadians.

(4)  The regulatory function in Health Canada through its subsidiary agency, the PMRA (Pest Management Regulatory Agency), is in disarray.

Municipalities and one province (Quebec) have stepped in and taken over part of the regulation of pesticides.  This is 77 municipalities with many more to come, now that the Supreme Court has refused to hear the appeal of the Toronto pesticide bylaw.  The bylaw stands.

Problems with compliance are exacerbated:  why should citizens comply with regulations when the Federal Government refuses to regulate industry?  In 4 consecutive reports beginning in 1988 the Auditor General’s Department (Sustainability section) told the Government that the PMRA was not doing its job; no correction came about,  municipalities (citizens) had to step in.  THEY started passing laws to regulate the chemical companies.

It is noted that in every community where there has been a pesticide bylaw battle whether successful or not, the battle involves putting information into the hands of citizens.  Every battle means yet more people become aware of Government agencies such as the PMRA whose clients are the chemical industry with the concommitant lack of regulation.  The lack of regulation is explained by John Kenneth Galbraith, see below “(3) STATE OF GOVERNANCE.”

(5)  A large portion of the cases taken to court by the Sierra Legal Defence Fund (UPDATE:  now renamed Eco-Justice) are against Government, for failure to enforce its own regulations.

Non-compliance by industry is over-looked in some industries.  The situation is exacerbated by Government policy to reduce funding to Government departments, while simultaneously money is routed to corporations through public-private partnerships, contracting out, etc.

The non-compliance examples fall into two categories, EQUALLY SERIOUS:  the failure of the Government to regulate industry and the increasing non-compliance by citizens.

Run the Gun Registry and the 2006 Census through the GDR.  Does it, or CAN it, address non-compliance?  What lessons are to be learned?  Can someone, somewhere, come up with some form of ingenuity to address serious issues around non-compliance?

————————-

CONTEXT in which the GDR is being developed will provide authenticity to the document.

Communities of people require social ingenuity that enables them to acknowledge problems, put problems squarely on the table, to be resolved.

If you only know how to skate around the problems, you can never expect the problems to be resolved.  They await crisis.  The regulatory regime is on its way to crisis, from the examples mentioned, and from the fact that it has been totally ineffective in halting the march to an environment that is incapable of sustaining life.

HOW do we get the reality of the situation onto the table?  The GDR addresses compliance, but not authentically.  It does not speak truly to the situation surrounding compliance.

If you want support for the GDR, the document has to be authentic.

At the public meeting in Saskatoon, Ben (from the PCO) alluded to context in his presentation but did not elaborate.  He spoke of the GDR “relative to the realities of our time.” Those “realities” are the context that needs to be stated in the GDR.

 

GDR, page 5, lines 195 to 198 read:

When assessing public policy issues, departments and agencies are expected

to:

–  analyze and document the issue AND ITS CONTEXT, including its immediate and long-term impacts on health, safety and security, the quality of the environment, and the economic and social well-being of Canadians; …

Surely, if departments and agencies are expected to document context, then the Government already recognizes the value of a statement of context, and PCO must follow its own directives.  The GDR requires a statement of context.

 

You achieve compliance without force IF people embrace the laws and regulations.  The draft GDR states “Regulations are a form of law – they have binding legal effect …”.  As the gun registry and 2006 census reveal, this statement is vacuous if a large number of people choose non-compliance.

If you have had three years of training at a law school you will be more inclined to believe the statement about “binding legal effect” than if you have not received that training.  The drafters of legislation and regulation have been trained at law schools; the thinking that permeates regulatory documents may therefore be based on a shaky premise or belief in the superiority of the law.  There is a hint of threat behind the words “this is the law … (you will go to jail if you don’t comply)”.

In my experience people are creative.  Canadians expect fairness, a level playing field.

I have the sense that you think you are the only ones issuing orders.  And you have the right to issue orders.   You have the expectation that we will obey – – it’s  rule of law.   You make me nervous with your “Smart Regulations” and “Government Directive on Regulating (GDR)”.

———————-

CONTEXT,  DRAFT

At this time (2005), in Canada:

1)  STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT.  Climate change is a known threat. The pressure on water resources is mounting.  A world standard for gauging threats to biodiversity exists.  Many species face a high risk of extinction in the near future.

2) STATE OF HEALTH.  There are rising levels of disease related to environmental toxins.

3) STATE OF SCIENCE.  Confidence in science has been seriously eroded by corporate purchase and manipulation of “science” and scientists.  Some 6,000 scientists including 48 Nobel laureates, 62 National Medal of Science recipients, and 135 members of the National Academy of Sciences have signed the Union of Concerned Scientists’ (UCS) statement, “Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policy Making”.

3) STATE OF GOVERNANCE.   Unacceptable levels of CORRUPTION exist.  “Public Private Partnerships” have been promoted since 1982.  Government is a part of industry through entities such as BioTech Canada and other public-private partnerships.  From John Kenneth Galbraith’s, The Economics of Innocent Fraud – Truth for our Time, published in 2004:

… As the corporate interest moves to power in what was the public sector, it serves, predictably, the corporate interest. That is its purpose. …One obvious result has been well-justified doubt as to the quality of much present regulatory effort. There is no question but that corporate influence extends to the regulators. … Needed is independent, honest, professionally competent regulation … This last must be recognized and countered. There is no alternative to effective supervision. …

(4) GOVERNMENTS AND CITIZENS OPERATE IN A 4-YEAR TIME HORIZON, with little incentive to take long-term perspectives.

(5) ECONOMIC MODEL IN USE: In 2005, the Governments in Canada use out-dated and misleading accounting procedures. They do not include depletion of assets (natural resources) and cost of rehabilitation in economic evaluations. Businesses have to account for depletion of assets (depreciation). GDP does not. Such a model enables one to justify economic activity that is plunder with no thought for the ability of the economy to function in the future. Businesses could not last if they took this approach. Nor can a national or provincial economy in the long term.

Enlightened jurisdictions recognize the need for GDP to reflect resource depletion and rehabilitation costs if it is to be a helpful tool. There is pressure on Governments to adopt “Full Cost Accounting”, preferably referred to as accounting for the costs and benefits of “externalities”.

(6) KNOWLEDGE LEVEL: In 2005, we don’t know a lot. If our state is one of ignorance, we should proceed with caution.  The Precautionary Principle for sustainable development arises out of the Bruntland Report, or Our Common Future, the report made by the World Commission on Environment and Development in 1987.

(7) LEGAL ENVIRONMENT IN 2005. In 2001 from the Globe & Mail (excerpts):

. .   the Supreme Court of Canada for the sixth consecutive time came down on the side of environmental protection in a precedent-setting decision. … “The protection of the environment has become one of the major challenges of our time.” (words from Supreme Court decision). “…the Supreme Court upheld the law, noting that environmental protection is a “fundamental value in Canadian society.”. “in the Voisey’s Bay nickel mine, a Newfoundland court issued one of the most strongly worded environmental judgments in Canadian legal history, emphasizing “the urgency of controlling the destruction of the Earth’s environment.”

All Canadians and their Governments are bound by the decisions of the Supreme Court.

(8)  CORPORATE WORLD

The movie “The Corporation” has contributed to people’s willingness to challenge the role of the corporation in society.

Corporate power is a major cause of health problems, according to the October/December 2005 special issue of the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health. Contributions to the issue reveal how corporate structure results in pressure to influence science and place the public at risk from pesticides, lead, asbestos, toxic municipal sewage sludge, and other harmful substances.”

(9)  RELATIONSHIPS

In 2005 it is recognized that we live in a time of great disconnection.

People continue to move to urban centres where “the neighbours” are not known.  People are disconnected from food sources. There is a failure to recognize our relationship to the natural world, that survival is dependent upon the gifts we are given:  water, air, seeds, children.  We abuse that which would be recognized as sacred if we were intelligent beings.  Our ignorance is reflected in our language:  water, trees, energy sources are “resources” to be exploited, not gifts to be cherished.

(10)  SOCIETAL STRUCTURES

We are in a period of de-construction and re-construction.  The institutions in the society that do not serve us well are being taken apart and re-defined.  There is increasing movement away from hierarchical structures to relationships based on equality.

The control of information by “credentialed” authorities is challenged by the access to information afforded by the internet.  Titles used to address people are falling into dis-use, for good reason – – corruption creates distrust.  Deference is not automatic.  There is a proliferation of non-government organizations that seek to organize and inform people around issues.

Leadership is not centred in political parties but is being provided by growing numbers of people outside government.

e.g.   CONTEXT, to be included in a GDR document.

=======================================

THOUGHTS REGARDING “CONTEXT” IN DECISION-MAKING

A decision process is unsound if it fails to address context.

The principle can be applied generally, but using this excerpt from the Great Sand Hills example:

The CONTEXT in which the Great Sand Hills exist in 2005 should be a separate item in the Reporting Document because it is a crucial consideration, a determinant.

The conclusions I would reach about a child in a refugee camp in Ethiopia could be starkly different from those reached in relation to a child raised in Disneyland Villa because of only one consideration: the context in which their lives are set is dramatically different. Failure to delineate context would be a serious error.

Other examples of the importance of context: decisions about prairie resource allocation would be very different in a contextual setting of 1830 compared to the conditions that will exist in 2030. Decisions related to women could be very different in the context of a fundamentalist Muslim community versus Hollywood.

The Scoping Document identifies some items of context. But what would constitute a comprehensive list? Of what is context composed? … off the top of my head – factors that affect a decision outcome because they constitute the environment in which the decision is made:

– legal context

– system of governance (a decision made in an oppressive regime will be different from the same decision made in a democracy) (decisions made in a corrupted system of governance will not be the same as those made in a virtuous system.)

– time in history

– levels of awareness (is it an Age of Enlightenment or one of relative ignorance?)

– community values

– ecological context

The CONTEXT in which a decision is made needs to be spelt out. It greatly affects the decision and what becomes of the decision. One benefit of addressing CONTEXT is that some items of context can be changed.

The terms-of-reference of a report can pre-determine the outcome to support wrong-headed policy. Conversely, the terms-of-reference can acknowledge and give appropriate weight to factors that contribute to a wholesome decision-making process. The inclusion of “context” in the terms-of-reference serves a legitimate need and will contribute to sound decisions, thereby to solid public policy.

2025-03-02 COVID VACCINE LOTS IN CANADA  (B.C.) identified as source of Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI)

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Mar 022025
 

People in BC, especially,  should know bout the toxic vaccine lots.  But it will be the same across the country.

Court cases (e.g.  vrs Bonnie Henry (Chief Medical Health Officer) and others)  MUST proceed.

Please start conversations and forward information.   It is the only way to secure freedom in the face of this tyranny.

TOXIC VACCINE LOTS IN CANADA  (B.C. in particular, because that’s where the FOI was filed)

AEFI  =  Adverse Events Following Immunization

I recall early on in covid,  people in the U.S. came to realize that vaccine lots had different levels of power to do harm.  They grew community networks to identify where the harms (and deaths) were coming from.  And identify the manufacturer and associated vaccine lot number.   Health workers could at least be told WHICH vaccine lot numbers should be destroyed so they could not do more harm.

The following is similar work in Canada.  Data drawn from FOI requests (Freedom of Information).

Look at what was reported in “Public Facing” locations,  versus  internally, within the system.

Or, how about this?

Bad batches not destroyed.   This example – –

Table showing the number of cases of anaphylaxis reported for lot# EP6017  – – look at the gap, April 8 to September 15.

EP6017 anaphylaxis cases formed a plateau from March 11th to April 8th, 2021, suggesting that the batch is exhausted, so you would think. But no, three more cases of anaphylaxis turned up between April 9th and September 15th, 2021. Given that anaphylaxis is a serious AEFI that occurs within 24 hours, this shows that despite their knowledge of the toxicity of this batch, the public health authorities failed to remove EP6017 from circulation.

Every time you read the word  “Anaphylaxis” in the appended information,   KNOW WHAT IT MEANS:

Anaphylaxis, also called allergic or anaphylactic shock, is a sudden, severe and life-threatening allergic reaction that involves the whole body.  

The reaction is marked by constriction of the airways, leading to difficulty breathing. Swelling of the throat may block the airway in severe cases. Gastrointestinal symptoms, such as severe abdominal pain, vomiting and diarrhea, may also occur. Histamines, the substances released by the body during an allergic reaction, cause the blood vessels to expand, which in turn causes a dangerous drop in blood pressure. Fluid can leak into the lungs, causing swelling (pulmonary edema). Anaphylaxis can also cause heart rhythm disturbances. Any allergen can cause this reaction, but the most common ones are insect bites, food and drugs. , also called allergic or anaphylactic shock, is a sudden, severe and life-threatening allergic reaction that involves the whole body. The reaction is marked by constriction of the airways, leading to difficulty breathing. Swelling of the throat may block the airway in severe cases. Gastrointestinal symptoms, such as severe abdominal pain, vomiting and diarrhea, may also occur. Histamines, the substances released by the body during an allergic reaction, cause the blood vessels to expand, which in turn causes a dangerous drop in blood pressure. Fluid can leak into the lungs, causing swelling (pulmonary edema). Anaphylaxis can also cause heart rhythm disturbances. Any allergen can cause this reaction, but the most common ones are insect bites, food and drugs.    

(https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/anaphylaxis#:~:text=Anaphylaxis%2C%20also%20called%20allergic%20or,the%20airway%20in%20severe%20cases.)

– – – – – – –  –
Last note before the real thing:   WHAT IS V-safe?

Overview

V-safe is one of several different safety systems CDC uses to closely monitor the safety of vaccines in the United States. V-safe lets you share with CDC how you or your dependent feel after getting a COVID-19 or RSV vaccine.

After you sign up, V-safe will send you confidential check-ins via text message or email to ask how you feel after vaccination. Completing check-ins and sharing how you feel, even if you don’t experience side effects after vaccination, helps CDC’s vaccine safety monitoring efforts.

V-safe originally launched in December 2020 to monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines and later expanded to include mpox and RSV vaccines.

(V-safe, as on the Health Canada website where, to find “Deaths”, you have to know to go to the bottom of the page on “Safety” where you will find the word “Deaths”.   That information is on a different page, not associated with Safety.)

– – – – – – –  – –

READ ON!   With thanks to Lex Acker and Peter McCullough,  via Dianne.

Morning Sandra.

Have you seen the below from Dr. Peter McCullough”, it is quite telling to say the least!

From: Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH from FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse)
Sent: Sunday, March 2, 2025 5:42 AM     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­

FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse) cross-posted a post from Truth, Investing, and Freedom

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPHMar 2 · FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse)

Colleagues

Please see this important release on toxic vaccine lots in Canada and the coverup by British Columbia officials as Dr Hoffe and others worked to expose the problem.

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

Review of FOI F23-1799 and BC Public Health’s Handling of COVID-19 Vaccines AEFI – Part 1

Lex Acker

Mar 2

READ IN APP

Background

In April 2023, Lee Turner, of Doak Shireff Lawyers LLP, took over conduct of the defence of Dr. Charles Hoffe vs. the College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC. Mr. Turner subsequently filed a Freedom of Information (FOI) request (F23-1799) with the Provincial Health Services Authority (PHSA) to obtain data on Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI). FOI F23-1799 can be accessed at this link.

FOI F23-1799 was released in June 2024 and comprised over 1,300 pages of internal emails between BC CDC staff, Bonnie Henry, Reka Gustafson, and Monika Naus (then head of BC CDC), along with dozens of AEFI reports.

Upon reviewing FOI F23-1799, I noted key elements: discussions of AEFIs in emails, screenshots of non-public AEFI reports available through an intranet, and public-facing AEFI reports presented in chronological order. This arrangement made it possible to determine what BC public health officials like Bonnie Henry, the BC CDC and all 50+ medical health officers scattered over BC health authorities knew and when they knew it.

I reached an unsettling conclusion: BC CDC had manipulated the definition of Serious Adverse Events Following Immunization to lower the reported rates of Serious AEFIs in public-facing reports, thereby concealing the true risks associated with COVID-19 vaccines. I publicly shared this finding on June 14, 2024, in a comment on Byram Bridle’s post titled Breaking News: BC Centre for Disease Control Caught Lying and Withholding Important Public Health Data.

While my expertise is not in medical science, I specialize in detecting and documenting corporate and institutional misconduct. My background is in financial statement analysis. I worked as a hedge fund research analyst and compliance officer for a boutique investment firm. I have about 15 years of independent financial research and analysis experience. My focus is uncovering white-collar fraud. I’m not a forensic accountant by any measure; I’m just someone with somewhat odd proclivities for large sets of unstructured data and enjoy immersing myself in new topics.

The Case Against Dr. Hoffe

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC cancelled its February 11, 2022 citation against Dr. Hoffe on February 5, 2025. According to one media outlet, this was done because of a “material change of circumstances.”

The College accused Dr. Hoffe of professional misconduct; specifically spreading misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines. Here’s an excerpt of the College’s accusations:

“… publicly expressing that the COVID-19 vaccinations cause microscopic blood clots that cause serious neurological harm, female infertility, and a high number of deaths that is not recognized by public health; …”

Many other doctors were publicly denouncing the COVID-19 vaccines and were persecuted by the College. However, the level of persecution against Dr. Charles Hoffe is particular. The College retained eight experts against Dr. Hoffe. Why is that?

In early 2021, Dr. Hoffe submitted a temporally- and vaccine lot-associated cluster of 11 AEFI reports to Interior Health, 10 of which involved Moderna lot #300042698, administered between January 18 and February 5, 2021.

As Dr. Hoffe began filing AEFI reports in early 2021—most notably in April and May— and went on public tours in BC warning the public about the harms of COVID-19 vaccines his actions posed a direct threat to a state narrative that sought to suppress information about vaccine-related harm. His findings challenged the political and ideological foundation underpinning the mass vaccination program and the totalitarian controls over the population that came along with it.

The evidence in FOI F23-1799 suggests that Bonnie Henry, the BC CDC, all health authorities, and all 50+ Medical Health Officers in BC were fully aware of these issues. Dr. Hoffe’s real “offence” was exposing what the BC government concealed from the public since early 2021. Dr. Hoffe’s AEFI reports constituted a cluster of AEFI associated with unexpected harms which required public health authorities to investigate and disclose to the public.

This post, and a few more to come, will cover my findings and analysis of how BC public authorities handled the COVID-19 vaccine AEFIs.

BC Public Health Officials Early Knowledge of Harms Associated with the COVID-19 Vaccines

Higher AEFI Rates Associated with Higher mRNA Content

January 28th, 2021 – P. 18, FOI F23-1799:

Above, is the upper half of an email to Bonnie Henry where Monika Naus, Medical Director of the BC CDC, states: “A history of anaphylaxis to a dose of the vaccine is a contraindication to receipt of future doses.” This is important to keep in mind as I will relate that statement to data in non-public AEFI reports further down.

Monika Naus, briefed Bonnie Henry and Martin Lavoie, Chief Medical Health Officer of Interior Health, on the observation that ‘cellulitis’ events occurred at “an appreciably higher rate” with the Moderna vaccine compared to Pfizer. However, she seems to downplay the significance of these reported cases.

Monika Naus explained that the higher rate of AEFIs associated with Moderna was consistent with its higher mRNA content. Her statements indicate an awareness that, since Pfizer and Moderna vaccines share similar structures, the key difference lies in mRNA dosage. Below is the lower half of Monika Naus’ email to Bonnie Henry.

Above, Monika Naus reports to Bonnie Henry the death of an inmate and two temporally associated thrombocytopenia reports. A few months later, the BC CDC will deny in public-facing AEFI reports that they received thrombocytopenia cases. Monika Naus stresses with capital letters that this is NOT being seen in the US analytic data comparing rates, indicating that she’s worried and that these findings in BC were unexpected. The link at the bottom of the above email is to slide deck containing V-Safe data.

Misleading Public Reporting of Thrombocytopenia and Serious AEFIs

In the above email of January 28th, 2021 to Bonnie Henry, Monika Naus refers to two cases of temporally associated thrombocytopenia. Later, on p. 206 of F23-1799, the non-public AEFI report of March 25th, 2021, showed 3 cases of thrombocytopenia.

May 1st, 2021 – P. 287, FOI F23-1799:

Below, the public-facing BC CDC AEFI report from December 13th, 2020, to May 1st, 2021 stated:

·        “No safety signals have been identified in the reports received in BC to date”

·        “Serious events have not been reported at rates higher than expected compared to background rates.”

·        “There have been no reports of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) reported in BC to date;”

The above-highlighted statements from the public-facing BC CDC AEFI report of May 1st, 2021, are misleading when compared to the non-public BC CDC AEFI reports.

March 25th, 2021 – P. 205, FOI F23-1799:

Below,

·        The non-public BC CDC AEFI report shows 523 Total AEFI, 144 Serious AEFI, 94 Anaphylaxis AEFI and their respective rate per 100,000 doses are 84.37, 23.23, and 15.16.

·        Serious AEFI represent 27.5% of Total AEFI.

·        The COVID-19 vaccine Serious AEFI rate is unexpectedly 15.7 times greater than the historic flu vaccine Serious AEFI rate (background rate). This is an obvious safety signal.

·        The total AEFI rate of the historic flu is 6.5 per 100,000 doses

·        The Serious AEFI rate of the historic flu is 1.48 per 100,000 doses

Pandemic of the Newly Injected

In the Monika Naus email of January 28th, 2021, there’s a link to a CDC slide deck that is no longer available for some reason. I managed to recover it. Its 7th slide shows AEFI from the V-Safe database that took New York Attorney Aaron Siri 18 months to obtain via the US courts. The slide shows US AEFI data as of January 14th, 2021, and the slide deck was published on January 27th, 2021.

Above is the sample size, which makes the numbers below extremely significant. The “All vaccines” red rectangle in the table below means All COVID-19 vaccines.

The above statistics were compiled from self-reporting recipients of the COVID-19 vaccines within 7 days after receipt of the vaccine. This is what you can expect within 7 days. I wonder if this is why Public Health Officials in BC and around the globe required you to wait between 14 days and 21 days before they would categorize you as being vaccinated?

*** The V-Safe data in the table above was in the possession of Bonnie Henry and the BC CDC since January 27th, 2021. ***

Comparing the AEFI rates between the first and second doses of Pfizer, it is evident that toxicity and harms increase with additional doses. We also see that when comparing dose 1 of Pfizer and Moderna, Moderna is more toxic than Pfizer. If the above level of risks had been disclosed to the public, it would have likely caused massive vaccine hesitancy in most sane people.

You can imagine that a large percentage of the population started having one or more of these very common reactions very early in the COVID-19 vaccine rollout and, believing the vaccines to be safe, attributed them to COVID-19 itself.

*** The COVID-19 vaccines caused a massive immediate surge in demand for healthcare. MASS INJURIES ***

The works of Denis Rancourt and Ed Dowd are what immediately come to my mind in support of mass injuries. Ed Dowd pointed out that the US Department of Labor maintained statistics on disabled people. Coinciding with the COVID-19 vaccine rollout we see a massive surge of people self-reporting as disabled. Here are the monthly year-over-year changes in disabilities observed by Ed Dowd.

The purpose of the non-sensical requirement that people needed to wait 14-21 days to be considered vaccinated was to shift the origin of the sudden massive demand for healthcare from the newly injected to the remaining unvaccinated and support propaganda designed to cause the public to demand and embrace restrictions on their personal freedom.

*** This massive sudden surge in demand for healthcare was propagandized as the pandemic of the unvaccinated. There never was a pandemic of the unvaccinated, it was a pandemic of the newly injected. ***

Proof of mRNA Toxicity and Harmfulness

Above, I highlighted the evidence that supports the conclusion that Monika Naus was aware in January 2021 that the AEFI rates increased with increased mMRA content. Below, we see data that was in the possession of BC public health officials demonstrating the mRNA toxicity and harmfulness.

February 4th, 2021 – P. 42, F23-1799:

As explained by Monika Naus, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines differ mainly by their mRNA content, 30 and 100 micrograms respectively. We can now think of Pfizer as a control for Moderna. Let’s crunch some ratios:

mRNA content of Moderna vs. Pfizer: 100 / 30 = 3.3

Total AEFI rate of Moderna vs. Pfizer: 315.40 / 73.54 = 4.3

Serious AEFI rate of Moderna vs. Pfizer: 75.79 / 23.22 = 3.3

This evidence suggests that mRNA is indeed a harmful substance. I first uncovered evidence to support this conclusion in 2021 when I calculated excess mortality from Canadian obituary data in the How I Became an Anti-Vaxxer in Q3 2021 post.

Monika Naus Warned Bonnie Henry Twice on March 11th, 2021

On March 11th, 2021, Monika Naus sent at least two emails to Bonnie Henry warning of her concern over serious AEFIs.

March 11th, 2021 – P. 151, F23-1799:

Monika Naus briefed Bonnie Henry that there was a safety signal for Bell’s Palsy, noting 4 cases vs. 2 expected relative to the flu vaccine. Monika announces that she is working on producing a report to be shared with the public. Monika’s email shows that MHOs (Medical Health Officers) also have access to the non-public BC CDC AEFI reports.

Monika Naus Warned Bonnie Henry of a Toxic Lot

March 11th, 2021 – P. 43, HTH-2021-14817:

Monika Naus briefed Bonnie Henry on a toxic lot that affected 12% of distributed vaccines in BC as of March 11th, 2021.

The 11 anaphylaxis AEFI per million dose rate (1.1 per 100,000) Monika Naus cites to Bonnie Henry is a benchmark of what can be expected. This email shows knowledge of a toxic Pfizer lot (EP6017) distributed throughout BC that has a calculated anaphylaxis AEFI rate of 40 per 100,000 doses. On March 11th, 2021, 294849 Pfizer doses had been distributed in BC. This affected 35,382 people in BC (12%).

Also, note that 15 of the 18 anaphylaxis cases were female which clearly shows a disproportionate risk to females of working age. The depth of the evidence demonstrating that BC public health officials were aware of the disproportionate COVID-19 vaccine harm to females will likely be covered in a future post.

Known Toxic Lots

Pfizer Lot EP6017

Recall that on January 18th, 2021, Monika Naus enunciated a standard of care and prudence by stating: “A history of anaphylaxis to a dose of the vaccine is a contraindication to receipt of future doses.”

On March 11th, 2021, Monika Naus warned Bonnie Henry that Pfizer lot EP6017 was showing an unexpectedly high rate of anaphylaxis. One of the rarest, but potentially deadly serious AEFI.

From all the non-public facing BC CDC AEFI reports in F23-1799, I compiled this table showing the number of cases of anaphylaxis reported for lot# EP6017:

EP6017 anaphylaxis cases formed a plateau from March 11th to April 8th, 2021, suggesting that the batch is exhausted, so you would think. But no, three more cases of anaphylaxis turned up between April 9th and September 15th, 2021. Given that anaphylaxis is a serious AEFI that occurs within 24 hours, this shows that despite their knowledge of the toxicity of this batch, the public health authorities failed to remove EP6017 from circulation.

On September 15th, 2021, EP6017 had a total count of AEFI of 71 and a rate of 126.48 AEFI per 100,000 doses. From this, we can infer that about 56,135 people received EP6017 in BC.

Other Toxic Lots

Pfizer lot# ER1742 is associated with 45 Serious AEFIs comprising 22 hospitalizations, 2 deaths, 23 anaphylaxis, and 22 anesthesia/paraesthesia. It was given to 222,258 people in BC as of September 15th, 2021.

Moderna lot# 3002179 is one of the 11 AEFI reports filed by Dr. Charles Hoffe. #3002179 had 14 serious AEFI reports comprising 6 associated hospitalizations. It was given to 84,063 people in BC as of September 15th, 2021.

Moderna lot# 300042698. 10 EAFI reports were filed against that lot by Dr. Charles Hoffe. #300042698 had 2 associated deaths, 10 Anaesthesia/paraesthesia, and one hospitalization. It was given to 20,903 people in BC as of September 15th, 2021.

·        The cluster of 10 unexpected AEFIs that Dr. Charles Hoffe reported to Interior Health is batch 300042698.

·        Batch 300042698 had:

o   A total AEFI rate of 328.5 per 100,000 doses

o   A serious AEFI rate of 72.46 per 100,000 doses

·        Batch 300042698 risk relative to the flu vaccine was 50.5x higher for any AEFI and 48.9x higher for Serious AEFI.

Moderna lot# 3001176 is associated with 15 serious AEFI reports comprising 6 hospitalizations. It was given to 59,973 people in BC as of September 15th, 2021.

Pfizer lot# EX0904 is associated with 24 Serious AEFIs comprising 7 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths. It was given to 119,227 people in BC as of September 15th, 2021.

Yet when Monika Naus prepared her public facing AEFI report concerning the Dec 13, 2020 to May 1, 2021 data, she made the following statements to the public:

·        “No safety signals have been identified in the reports received in BC to date”

·        “Serious events have not been reported at rates higher than expected compared to background rates.”

·        “There have been no reports of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) reported in BC to date;”

In a subsequent post, I will show the extremely high variability of AEFI rates across dozens of vaccine lots monitored by the BC CDC which shows there was great variability in the toxicity of the various vaccine lots which should have caused public health officials to alert the public and to recall the toxic lots.

Public Health’s Reaction to Dr. Hoffe Expressing Concerns about injuries suffered by his patients after being injected with Moderna lot# 300042698

It is worth noting how Bonnie Henry and senior officials at Interior Health reacted to Dr. Hoffe expressing to Bonnie Henry about concerns he had as a result of the injuries he was witnessing in his patients following their receipt of the Covid-19 vaccine. Dr. Hoffe sent an email to Bonnie Henry on April 7, 2021 at 8:01 p.m. thanking her for the work she had been doing and expressing concern about the terrible side effects he had been seeing from the covid vaccines in his medical practice. On April 8, 2021 at 10:17 a.m. Monika Naus forwarded a copy of Dr. Hoffe’s email to Carol Fenton Medical Health Officer for Interior Health asking if she had any insight into his concerns and confirm that she was checking for AEFI reports among residents of Lytton, B.C. where Dr. Hoffe was practicing. On April 8, 2021 at 10:45 a.m. Carol Fenton said in an email to Bonnie Henry, and Douglas Smith, Executive Director for IH, that she was “in the process of crafting a response with our communications department to try and mitigate the harm.” caused by Dr. Hoffe raising these concerns. She indicated that she was escalating the issue within Interior Health and was working with the College of Physicians and Surgeons. At 11:02 a.m. Bonnie Henry replied by email stating that she believed that Dr. Hoffe should be reported to the College. 25 minutes later, at 11:27 a.m., Douglas Smith confirmed that he had filed a formal complaint against Dr. Hoffe with the College “on behalf of the patients and communities affected by the actions of Dr. Hoffe.” It would appear that despite Bonnie Henry and Interior Health being aware of the toxicity of Moderna Lot# 300042698, and the increased level of harms being suffered across the province by those who had received a vaccine from that lot, and the fact that 10 of the 11 patients Dr. Hoffe had filed AEFI reports for had also received a vaccine from that lot, that his conduct in raising concerns was worthy of investigation and discipline for professional misconduct by the College.

Anaphylaxis Cases Management

Given Monika Naus stated: “A history of anaphylaxis to a dose of the vaccine is a contraindication to receipt of future doses.”, we should expect that a recommendation of no further immunization would be issued for each case of anaphylaxis. From all the non-public facing BC CDC AEFI reports I compiled this table shows the number of cases of anaphylaxis cases vs. the number of recommendations for no further immunizations.

On September 15th, 2021, Pfizer Lot EP6017 had tallied a total of 25 Serious AEFIs, 23 (92%) out of 25 were anaphylaxis cases. This is a public health hazard, and it should have been proactively disclosed to the public, or at the very least, every recipient who had received an injection from that lot should have received a letter from the Ministry of Health advising them that they have been exposed to a harmful substance and be followed by their family doctor accordingly.

We see that as of September 15th, 2021, just as the coercive vaccine mandates were being put in place, even if you had a case of anaphylaxis with the first dose, you had 68.6% chance of still being forced to take the second dose. The mere fact that the number of recommendations for no further immunization does not at least match the number of anaphylaxis cases, demonstrates that the COVID-19 vaccination rollout was never about public health.

Conclusion

The high percentages of non-serious AEFIs reported by V-Safe on January 27th, 2021, that Bonnie Henry and the BC CDC were aware of, can be translated into the per 100,000 doses rate and compared to the historic flu vaccine AEFI rates, the background rate benchmark setting the expectations.

A non-serious AEFI historic flu rate is derived as 5.15. (Total AEFI 6.63 – Serious AEFI 1.51).

Next, to calculate the relative risks of the very common AEFIs from V-Safe vs. the flu vaccine (background rate), I divided V-Safe rates per 100,000 by 5.15 and that tells the story of how much riskier, Relative Risk, the COVID-19 vaccines were known to be relative to the flu vaccine as of January 27th, 2021.

*** When AEFI rates are unexpectedly high relative to a background rate, that’s a safety signal. ***

By combining the BC CDC’s own data of Historic Flu AEFI rates with the rates of common and very common AEFIs from the V-Safe database, we see that within 7 days, with the COVID-19 vaccines, you were:

·        1381 times more likely to experience pain, and/or,

·        652 times more likely to experience fatigue, and/or,

·        574 times more likely to experience headaches, and/or,

·        445 times more likely to experience Myalgia, and/or,

·        225 times more likely to experience Chills, and/or,

·        223 times more likely to experience Fever, and/or,

·        215 times more likely to experience Swelling, and/or,

·        203 times more likely to experience Joint Pain, and/or,

·        174 times more likely to experience pain.

than you were with a flu shot.

Would anyone have agreed to be injected with a substance, if they were aware it had the the above harm profile?

Safe and effective.

Like

Comment

Restack

Originally posted on

Truth, Investing, and FreedomLex Acker

Subscribe

– Investigative works, sound investable ideas and investing situations better avoided for the freedom lovers and truth seekers. – Signs of corruption and fraud red flags – Expressions of conservative values

© 2025 Peter McCullough MD MPH
548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104
Unsubscribe
 Older Entries  Newer Entries