Tuesday, May 6, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

Ad:

Vaccine critic in the EU Parliament: “Covid-19 was an act of biological warfare against humanity”

The criticized covid vaccinations

Published 31 May 2023
– By Editorial Staff
Dr David Martin spekas at the EU-parliament at the International Covid Summit III.

The high-profiled vaccine sceptic Dr David Martin, who describes himself as a financial analyst, author, commentator, professor and researcher, declared during the International Covid Summit in the European Parliament that covid-19 was in fact “a form of biological warfare” deliberately unleashed by the US government to create a global pandemic, benefit the pharmaceutical giants and promote mass vaccination programs.

In early May, the third edition of the International Covid Summit was held in Brussels, sponsored by the EU groups European Conservatives and Reformists and Identity and Democracy.

A large number of guests and speakers were invited, including American biochemist Dr. Robert Malone, who is also the inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology.

During the conference, experts, activists and EU parliamentarians discussed the possibility that covid-19 was deliberately used as a “weapon” to impose draconian control over citizens, shut down societies and benefit certain actors financially, as well as the seemingly deliberate manipulation of corona statistics by Western health authorities and the health risks associated with the controversial vaccines.

One of the participants was Dr. David Martin, a high-profile vaccine critic and debater, and what he had to say about the virus has shocked millions of people around the world. Martin argues that a coronavirus was first identified in 1965 and that powerful interests have worked for over 50 years to manipulate and modify the virus, turning it into a “biological weapon” that was deliberately released to harm humanity and benefit the pharmaceutical giants and other special interests.

Below the full transcript of Dr. David Martin’s controversial speech in the EU Parliament:

 


 

It is a particularly interesting location for me to be sitting today, given that over a decade ago I sat in this very chair right here in the European Union Parliament.

And at that time I warned the world of what was coming, during that conversation that was hosted at the time by the Green and EFA and a number of the other parties of the European Unions, of various representations.

We were having a conversation on whether Europe should adopt the United States policy of allowing for the patents on biologically derived materials.

And at the time I urged this body and I urged people around the world that the weaponization of nature against humanity had dire consequences.

Tragically, I sit here today, with that unfortunate line that I don’t like to say, which is “I told you so.”

But the fact of the matter is, we’re here not for a reprisal on past decisions. We’re here to actually, once again, come to the face of the human condition and ask the question, who do we want to be?

What do we want humanity to look like?

And rather than seeing this as an exercise in futility, which is very easy from time to time when you’re in the position I’m in, I actually see this not as an exercise in futility.

I see this as one of the greatest opportunities that faces us because we now have a public conversation, which is now front and center in people’s minds.

When this was an esoteric conversation about biological patents, nobody cared.

But when that conversation came home, then it became something people can care about.
So I’m actually quite grateful for this opportunity.

I thank the members of Parliament for hosting this.

I thank all of the translators who I apologize in advance.

I will use terminology that is probably very difficult to translate, so my apologies, and I’d also like to acknowledge the fact that many of you are aware of my involvement with this in large part due to the amazing work of my wonderful wife, Kim Martin, who encouraged me at the very early days of this pandemic to get on front of the camera and talk about all the information that I had been sharing among very small groups around the world.

And it was in fact her encouragement that put me in a place where many of you have heard what I have to say.

Ironically, the world that I came from that used to be very popular, my CNBC and Bloomberg presentations, which were televised on mainstream media around the world, was an audience that I lost.

I can confidently say Covid diminished my fame, but I can also confidently say that I’d rather stand among the people with whom I’m standing today than any of the folks that were part of that previous world. So, this is a much better place to be.

My role today is to set the stage for this conversation in a historical context, because this did not come in the last three years.

This did not come in the last five or six years.

This actually is an ongoing question that probably began here in Europe in the early stages of the mid 19 hundreds, but certainly by 1913, 1914, this conversation started right here in Central Europe.

The pandemic that we alleged to have happen in the last few years also did not happen overnight.

In fact, the very specific pandemic using coronavirus began in a very different time.

Most of you don’t know that Coronavirus as a model of a pathogen was isolated in 1965.

Coronavirus was identified in 1965 as one of the first infectious, replicatable viral models that could be used to modify a series of other experiences of human condition.

It was isolated once upon a time associated with the common cold.

But what’s particularly interesting about its isolation in 1965 was that it was immediately identified as a pathogen that could be used and modified for a whole host of reasons.

And you heard me correctly, that was 1965.

And by the way, these slides are public domain.

You’re welcome to look at every single reference.

Every comment that I made is based on published material.

So do make sure that you look at those references.

But in 1966, the very first COV Coronavirus model was used as a transatlantic biological experiment in human manipulation, and you heard the date 1966.

I hope you’re getting the point of what I’m saying.

This is not an overnight thing.

This is actually something that’s been long in the making.

A year before I was born, we had the first Trans-Atlantic coronavirus data sharing experiment between the United States and the United Kingdom.

And in 1967, the year I was born, we did the first human trials on inoculating people with modified coronavirus.

Isn’t that amazing?

56 years ago, the overnight success of a pathogen that’s been 56 years in engineering, and I want that to chill with all of you.

Where were we when we actually allowed in violation of biological and chemical weapons treaties?
Where were we as a human civilization when we thought it was an acceptable thing to do to take a pathogen for the United States and infect the world with it?

Where was that conversation and what should have been that conversation in 1967?

That conversation wasn’t had. Ironically, the common cold was turned into a chimera in the 1970s, and in 1975, 1976 and 1977, we started figuring out how to modify coronavirus by putting it into different animals.
Pigs and dogs.

And not surprisingly, by the time we got to 1990, we found out that coronavirus as a infectious agent was an industrial problem for two primary industries, the industries of dogs and pigs.

Dog breeders and pigs found that Coronavirus created gastrointestinal problems, and that became the basis for Pfizer’s first spike protein vaccine.

Patent filed. Are you ready for this In 1990?

Did you hear what I just said?

Operation Warpspeed.

I’m sorry.

Where’s the warp and the speed?

Pfizer 1990.

The very first spike protein vaccine for Coronavirus.

Isn’t that fascinating?

Isn’t it fascinating that we were, we were told that, well, the spike protein is a new thing.

We just found out that that’s the problem.

No.

As a matter of fact, we didn’t just find out it was not just now.

Now the problem, we found that out in 1990 and filed the first patents on vaccines in 1990 for the spike protein of Coronavirus.

And who would’ve thought Pfizer?

Clearly the innocent organization that does nothing but promote human health.

Clearly, Pfizer, the organization that has not bought the votes in this chamber, in every chamber of every government around the world, not that Pfizer, certainly they wouldn’t have had anything to do with this, but oh yes, they did.

And in 1990 they found out that there was a problem with vaccines.

They didn’t work.

You know why they didn’t work?

It turns out that Coronavirus is a very malleable model.

It transforms and it changes, and it mutates over time.

As a matter of fact, every publication on vaccines for Coronavirus from 1990 until 2018, every single publication concluded that Coronavirus escapes the vaccine impulse because it modifies and mutates too quickly for vaccines to be effective.

And since 1990 to 2018, that is the published science ladies and gentlemen, that’s following the science, following the science is their own indictment of their own programs that said, it doesn’t work.

And there are thousands of publications to that effect, not a few hundred. And not paid for by pharmaceutical companies.

These are publications that are independent scientific research that shows unequivocally including efforts of the chimera modifications made by Ralph Bairc in the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill.

All of them show vaccines do not work on coronavirus.

That’s the science, and that science has never been disputed.

But then we had an interesting development in 2002, and this date is most important because in 2002, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill patented, and I quote, an infectious replication defective clone of coronavirus.

Listen to those words …

Infectious replication, defective.

What does that phrase actually mean?

For those of you not familiar with language, let me unpack it for you.
Infectious replication.

Defective means a weapon.

It means something meant to target an individual but not have collateral damage to other individuals.
That’s what infectious replication defective means.

And that patent was filed in 2002 on work funded by NIAD’s Anthony Fauci from 1999 to 2002, and that work patented at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill mysteriously preceded SARS 1.0 by a year.
“Dave, are you suggesting that SARS 1.0 wasn’t from a wet market in Wuhan?”

“Are you suggesting it might have come from a laboratory in the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill?”
No, I’m not suggesting it.

I’m telling you that’s the facts we engineered SARS.

SARS is not a naturally occurring phenomenon.

The naturally occurring phenomenon is called the common cold.

It’s called influenza-like illness.

It’s called gastroenteritis.

That’s the naturally occurring coronavirus.

SARS is the research developed by humans weaponizing a life system model to actually attack human beings, and they patented it in 2002.

And in 2003, giant surprise, the CDC filed the patent on Coronavirus isolated from humans in violation once again of biological and chemical weapons, treaties and laws that we have in the United States, and I’m very, very precise on this.

United States likes to talk about its rights and everything else, and the rule of law and all the nonsense that we like to talk about, but we don’t ratify treaties about, I don’t know, defending humans.

We conspicuously avoid that we actually have a great track record of advocating for human rights and then denying them when it comes to actually being part of the international community, which is a slightly problematic thing.

But let’s get something very clear.

When the CDC, in April of 2003 filed the patent on SARS Coronavirus isolated from humans, what did they do?

They downloaded a sequence from China, and filed a patent on it in the United States.

Any of you familiar with biological and chemical weapons treaties knows that’s a violation.

That’s a crime.

That’s not an innocent, oops; that’s a crime.

And the United States Patent Office went as far as to reject that patent application on two occasions until the CDC decided to bribe the patent office to override the patent examiner to ultimately issue the patent in 2007 on SARS Coronavirus.

But let’s not let that get away from us, because it turns out that the RT PCR, which was the test that we allegedly were going to use to identify the risks associated with coronavirus, was actually identified as a bioterrorism threat by me in the European Union sponsored events in 2002 and 2003, 20 years ago that happened here in Brussels and across Europe.

In 2005, this particular pathogen was specifically labelled as a bioterrorism and bioweapon platform technology, described as such.

That’s not my terminology that I’m applying to it.

It was actually described as a bioweapons platform technology in 2005.

And from 2005 onwards, it was actually a bio warfare enabling agent.

It’s official classification from 2005 forward.

I don’t know if that sounds like public health to you, does it?

Biological warfare enabling technology that feels like not public health, that feels like not medicine, that feels like a weapon, designed to take out humanity.

That’s what it feels like, and it feels like that because that’s exactly what it is.

We have been lured into believing that EcoHealth Alliance and DARPA and all of these organizations are what we should be pointing to.

But we’ve been specifically requested to ignore the facts that over $10 billion have been funnelled through black operations, through the check of Anthony Fauci and a side-by-side ledger where NIAD has a balance sheet, and next to it is a biodefense balance sheet.

Equivalent dollar for dollar matching that no one in the media talks about, and it’s been going on since 2005. Our gain of function moratorium.

The moratorium that was supposed to freeze any efforts to do gain of function research.

Conveniently, in the fall of 2014, the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill received a letter from NIAD saying that while the gain of function moratorium on coronavirus in vivo should be suspended, because their grants had already been funded, they received an exemption.

Did you hear what I just said?

A biological weapons lab facility at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill received an exemption from the gain of function moratorium so that by 2016 we could publish the journal article that said SARS Coronavirus is poised for human emergence in 2016 and what, you might ask Dave, was the coronavirus poised for human emergence?

It was WIV ONE.

Wuhan Institute of Virology Virus One.

Poised for human emergence in 2016 at the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, such that by the time we get to 2017 and 2018, the following phrase entered into common parlance among the community, there is going to be an accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen.

The operative word, obviously in that phrase, the word release, does that sound like leak?
Does that sound like a bat and a Pangolin went into a bar in the Wuhan market and hung out and had sex?

And, and lo and behold, we got SARS Cov-2. No accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen was the terminology used.

And four times in April of 2019, seven months before the allegation of patient number one, four patent applications of Moderna were modified to include the term accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen as the justification for making a vaccine for a thing that did not exist.

If you have not done so, please make sure that you make reference in every investigation to the premeditation nature of this, because it was in September of 2019 that the world was informed.

That we were going to have an accident or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen so that by September, 2020 there would be a worldwide acceptance of a universal vaccine template.

That’s their words right in front of you on the screen.

The intent was to get the world to accept a universal vaccine template, and the intent was to use coronavirus to get there.

Let’s, let’s read this because we have to read this into the record everywhere I go.

“Until an infectious disease crisis is very real present and at the emergency threshold that is often largely
ignored to sustain the funding base beyond the crisis.”

He said, “we need to increase the public understanding for the need for medical countermeasures, such as a pan influenza or pan coronavirus vaccine.”

“A key driver is the media and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process.”

Sounds like public health.

Sounds like the best of humanity.

No.

Ladies and gentlemen, this was premeditated domestic terrorism stated at the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2015, published in front of them.

This is an act of biological and chemical warfare perpetrated on the human race, and it was admitted to in writing that this was a financial heist and a financial fraud.

“Investors will follow if they see profit at the end of the process.”

Let me conclude by making five very brief recommendations.

The last slide, nature was hijacked.

This whole story started in 1965 when we decided to hijack a natural model and decide to start manipulating it.

Science was hijacked when the only questions that could be asked were questions authorized under the patent protection of the CDC, the FDA, the NIH, and their equivalent organizations around the world.

We didn’t have independent science.

We had hijacked science, and unfortunately there was no moral oversight in violation of all of the codes that we stand for.

There was no independent, financially disinterested independent review board ever empanelled around coronavirus.

Not once, not once, not since 1965.

We do not have a single independent IRB ever empanelled, around Coronavirus.

So, morality was suspended for medical countermeasures, and ultimately humanity was lost because we decided to allow it to happen.

Our job today is to say, no more gain of function research, period.

No more weaponization of nature period.

And most importantly, no more corporate patronage of science for their own self-interest unless they assume 100% product liability for every injury and every death that they maintain.

Thank you very much.

 

Dr David E. Martin

 


 

The full part 1 of the International Covid Summit III can be seen below Dr. David Martin’s speech begins at 12.55.

 

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

After the shots – now the COVID vaccine is headed for the lungs

The criticized covid vaccinations

Published today 7:23
– By Editorial Staff
Initially, 350 participants are taking part in the clinical trials - but it is hoped that the vaccine will be tested on many more Canadians.

The COVID vaccine AeroVax is not to be injected – but inhaled according to a method that will be tested in Canada with government funding. This is despite previous vaccines being linked to millions of reported side effects and vaccine injuries, including heart muscle inflammation, blood clots, and sudden deaths.

At McMaster University in Ontario, Canada, researchers have launched a phase 2 study of a new COVID vaccine that is not administered by injection but is instead inhaled.

The vaccine, named ChAd-triCoV/Mac, will now be tested on 350 participants from across the country, with $8 million in government funding, and researchers say they hope the new vaccine will provide stronger protection against infection than previous injection-based vaccines.

While the current, needle-based COVID-19 vaccines have prevented a tremendous amount of death and hospitalization, they haven’t really changed a lot of people’s experience with getting recurrent infections, claims Fiona Smaill, professor in the Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine and one of the study’s leaders.

We’re looking to change that by providing robust protection directly at the site of infection, she declares.

Targets three virus proteins

The new vaccine differs from previous COVID vaccines in several ways. In addition to being administered as an aerosol inhalation, it targets three different proteins in the structure of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. According to the researchers, this should improve protection against any future variants of COVID.

When a vaccine is inhaled, the body’s immune system reacts differently than when it is injected, which McMasters claims is more effective in preventing the infection itself.

Results from preclinical studies, together with unpublished data from the phase 1 study, suggest that the inhaled vaccine elicits a stronger immune response than traditional injections because it targets the airways where the virus first enters the body.

For those already vaccinated – but not recently ill

AeroVax is intended for people who have already received at least three doses of an mRNA vaccine. To participate in the study, participants must not have had COVID-19 or been vaccinated in the three months prior to registration. Participants must be between 18 and 65 years of age, free of lung disease, and able to attend all on-site testing sessions.

The study includes 350 participants from across Canada. Two-thirds will receive the vaccine and one-third a placebo. None of the participants know which group they belong to, which the researchers say is crucial for an objective evaluation.

Randomization allows for objective comparison between those who received the vaccine and those who didn’t, which can tell us a lot about the level of protection the vaccine could provide and its side effects, Smaill continues.

“Ensures the safety of participants”

The study is led by researchers at McMaster’s Michael G. DeGroote Institute for Infectious Disease Research, and all development – from laboratory design to testing – is taking place in Canada.

Every medicine or vaccine that we use and trust today has at one point gone through similar clinical trials processes, says Matthew Miller, director of the institute and a member of the research team.

This is a highly regulated process with extensive oversight that ensures the safety of participants and will generate critical data to inform the next steps in development, he adds.

If the results are promising, the researchers plan to move on to a Phase 3 study with a larger group of participants – a step toward approval and market introduction.

Previous COVID vaccines were usually administered with a syringe. Photo: Canstockphoto

Millions of side effects

In this context, it is worth mentioning that since the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines began, millions of side effects and vaccine injuries, including deaths, have been reported globally – ranging from fever and nerve damage to blood clots, heart muscle inflammation, and sudden death.

Young men have shown an increased risk of heart inflammation, which has led to certain vaccines being withdrawn or restricted in several countries, and many have come forward to testify about long-term vaccine injuries that affect their ability to work and their quality of life – but their stories have been silenced or dismissed by the healthcare system.

Critics argue that authorities and vaccine manufacturers prioritized rapid distribution over transparency and safety, and that the long-term effects are still very poorly understood.

The vaccine is also believed to have had virtually no effect on the spread of infection, and US health authorities were eventually forced to admit that vaccinated people could carry as much of the virus as unvaccinated people. In Sweden, too, healthcare providers concluded that the vaccine did not stop the spread of COVID-19.

Slovak Prime Minister issues warning on Covid vaccine

The criticized covid vaccinations

Published 24 April 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Until further analysis is completed, Fico wants to pause all new vaccine purchases and payments.

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico is calling for an immediate halt to state purchases of COVID-19 vaccines.

Fico refers to a domestic research report claiming that the experimental mRNA vaccine contains very high levels of DNA and other substances not disclosed by pharmaceutical companies.

The Prime Minister points out that a commission, led by orthopedic doctor Peter Kotlar of the ruling Slovak National Party (SNS), submitted a report in October suggesting that mRNA vaccines can affect human DNA and that they have not been adequately tested.

The report initially led to consideration of a total ban on the vaccines in Slovakia. Kotlar, who also described the COVID-19 pandemic as an “act of bioterrorism” and a “fabricated operation”, accuses vaccine manufacturers Moderna and Pfizer of turning vaccinated people into “genetically modified organisms”.

In a video clip posted on X, Robert Fico says it would be “extremely irresponsible” to ignore the Commission’s findings. He says that in March he instructed the Ministry of Health to set up a working group to investigate the claims made in the report, but admits that this process could take time. Therefore, he now wants the Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAV) to also conduct a comprehensive quantitative analysis of DNA levels and other substances in the vaccines.

– Peter Kolar’s research team states that the vaccine samples used in Slovakia contain extremely high levels of DNA and other substances whose presence was not disclosed by the manufacturer.

Although vaccination rates against COVID-19 are extremely low in Slovakia, the population deserves to be warned about these serious findings, Fico continued, underlining that the government should also inform the public about the report’s findings.

“Should not procure or pay for additional vaccines”

The Prime Minister also points out that under a 2023 agreement, Slovakia is obliged to purchase nearly 300,000 doses of vaccine in 2025 and 2026, at a cost of almost €6 million. However, he wants the government to postpone any new purchases and payments until further analysis is completed.

– Until the results of the additional quantitative analysis are delivered, the government should not procure or pay for additional vaccines from this manufacturer.

It should be noted that the report has faced fierce criticism from the country’s opposition parties and former Health Minister Zuzana Dolinkova has questioned both the report’s conclusions and the authors’ competence. In the end, Dolinkova chose to resign from her post, citing the government’s support for ‘anti-vaxxers’ and lack of prioritization of healthcare as reasons for the decision.

Mr. Fico stresses that it is important not to jump to conclusions but it is also crucial to take the report’s findings seriously:

– It is about protecting the health of the population and ensuring transparency, he says.

Comment: An entire world was injected – but the silence about the long-term side effects is total

The criticized covid vaccinations

Early warnings about the long-term risks of experimental mRNA vaccines were dismissed as conspiracy theorists and quacks. In hindsight, most evidence suggests that their fears were justified and new findings indicate that the vaccines can cause long-term changes in the genetic structure of the body.

Published 18 April 2025
– By Jenny Piper
A German study shows that the COVID-19 vaccine can affect the genetic structure of the body, triggering inflammatory reactions, autoimmune conditions and in some cases cancer.
{ $opinionDisclaimer }

Even at the beginning of the mass vaccination hysteria, I often wrote about the risks of taking the mRNA vaccine shots because the long-term side effects of this fast-acting so-called vaccine are unknown and will only become apparent in a few years.

Whistleblowers from within the pharmaceutical industry had also flagged this very aspect early on – that it is designed to seek out possible weaknesses in people’s immune systems, where it accelerates the development of cancer, autoimmune diseases and cardiovascular diseases. This was of course dismissed as quackery and conspiracy theories, which is why the vast majority of the population rolled up their sleeves at least twice.

Now, a new peer-reviewed study from Germany on mRNA-based Covid-19 vaccines shows that they can cause long-term changes in the body’s genetic structure – changes that in turn can trigger inflammatory reactions, autoimmune conditions and, in some cases, cancer.

19 researchers at leading German institutions conducted the study, which was published in Molecular Systems Biology at the end of March. It shows a possible link between mRNA vaccines and epigenetic changes in immune cells, specifically linked to a protein called histone 3 lysine 27 acetylation (H3K27ac), a protein that has been associated with leukemia and brain tumors.

Histones act as “coils” around which the DNA strand is wound, helping to give DNA its three-dimensional structure. Changes in these proteins affect how genes are expressed. The looser the histones are, the more actively the DNA is transcribed, which in some cases can stimulate tumor growth.

The researchers analyzed how the chromosomes of macrophages (a type of white blood cell) are affected by mRNA vaccination. The results showed persistent epigenetic changes in these cells, which could explain some post-vaccination inflammatory diseases.

Histone modifications – where the structure of DNA is altered without changing the DNA code itself – can play an important role in how genes are expressed. In this case, the researchers found a change in H3K27ac that persisted for months after vaccination, raising concerns about possible long-term effects on the immune system.

According to the researchers, changes in H3K27ac can be linked to several cancers, including gliomas (brain tumors) and leukemia. Other studies, including those from China and Poland, have also linked this particular type of histone modification to cancer.

Several scientists and experts have commented on the study.

Alex Berenson, an independent journalist, says the results show how mRNA vaccines can affect chromosomes in a way that is associated with brain tumors and leukemia.

Nicolas Hulscher, an epidemiologist, says the study adds to a growing body of evidence that mRNA vaccines can disrupt the balance of the immune system and lead to chronic inflammatory conditions.

Jessica Rose, Ph.D., immunologist and biochemist, points out that it is already known that repeated injections cause immunological changes and that these changes can reach stem cells and affect the long-term functioning of the immune system.

Other studies have shown that the levels of synthetic DNA in some vaccine doses (from Pfizer and Moderna) have been well above permissible limits – in some cases up to 470 times higher than regulatory guidelines allow.

The fact that so-called turbo cancer has risen sharply in recent years is hardly a coincidence. Unfortunately, I think we have only seen the beginning of this – and the Swedish establishment has put a lid on the whole thing.

 

Jenny Piper

All Jenny Piper's articles can be found on her blog.

Study: Deaths after covid vaccine were in most cases due to the shot

The criticized covid vaccinations

Published 12 April 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Cardiologist Peter McCullough is one of the researchers behind the study.

In a new study, doctors infer covid vaccine as a direct or contributing cause in three out of four cases of 325 autopsies reviewed where individuals took the injections before death.

The researchers reviewed a total of 44 scientific articles with a total of 325 autopsy cases found of people who died after being injected with COVID-19 vaccine. To find the articles, search terms such as “COVID-19 Vaccine”, “SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine”, “COVID Vaccination”, “Post-mortem” and “Autopsy” were used.

In each case, three independent doctors reviewed the autopsy results to assess whether the COVID vaccine could be the direct cause or a contributing cause of death.

Among others, former cardiologist Peter McCullough is one of the researchers behind the study. McCullough has been a very strong critic of the covid policy including the mass vaccination campaign, and strongly urged, among other things, that people under the age of 50 and those who had the infection did not need to inject themselves with the covid vaccines.

Myocarditis and sudden cardiac death

The study, published in the peer-reviewed journal Public Health Policy and the Law, shows that in 74% of cases, at least two out of three physicians considered the COVID-19 vaccination to be a direct or contributing cause of death.

The most common causes of death were sudden cardiac death, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, VITT (vaccine-induced thrombosis), myocarditis, inflammatory syndrome and cerebral hemorrhage. Most deaths studied occurred within a week of vaccination.

Commenting on the study, Swedish physician Nils Littorin says the results are striking.

 

Translation of above tweet: “This is BIG! New medical study of autopsied deaths after COVID-19 vaccine shows that 74% of 326 cases were caused by the vaccine.
The heart and vascular system were the most common organ systems to be injured, followed by hematological and respiratory.” 

Call for in-depth studies

According to the authors, the patterns revealed by the study suggest a causal link between COVID-19 vaccination and increased mortality, while calling for much more extensive and in-depth studies in this area.

Further urgent investigation is required for the purpose of clarifying our findings”, the researchers write.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.