Take This Jab and Shove It

New reasons to be concerned about the mRNA vaccines

The latest installment of the “Twitter files” just came out. It reveals Twitter’s systemic censoring and suppression of vaccine skepticism. According to the report: “Many medical and public health professionals who expressed perspectives or even cited findings from accredited academic journals that conflicted with official positions were … targeted. As a result, legitimate findings and questions about our Covid policies and their consequences went missing.” In this case, the evidence is compelling.

I feel compelled to explore the murky situation with Covid and the mRNA vaccines, once again. I intend to do this without meticulously reviewing mountains of evidence — to write a bit off the cuff. I don’t pretend to be a scientist or statistician – like all of us, I seek coherence, patterns of meaning, to inform the choices I make in my own life. Hence, I can’t look away.

In past work, I investigated the once-suppressed lab leak hypothesis, which seems the most likely origin of Covid. I discovered that “gain of function” research was a means for the military to continue the research and development of potential bioweapons, despite international agreements to ban such research. I ended up taking the Johnson and Johnson shot. I felt pressured into it after I returned to New York City and found the city closed to anyone without proof of vaccination. A year ago, I reviewed RFK’s book on Anthony Fauci. I also wrote about Alex Berenson’s work.

A former New York Times journalist covering the pharmaceutical industry, Berenson remains one of the toughest critics of the vaccine program. He just wrote a piece reviewing two scientific studies that suggest the more boosted you are, the more likely you will get infected with Covid. “People who had received three or more shots were more than three times as likely to be infected as those who hadn’t received any,” he writes. Another new piece looks at a new peer-reviewed study that indicates repeated booster shots actually lessen one’s protection against reinfection. 

In a very convincing new article, Berenson writes about Dr Kerryn Phelps, a former president of the Australian Medical Association. Phelps was a major booster of Australia’s vaccination program, which was relentless. She is now sounding the alarm about the vaccines after they caused both her and her wife serious harm. Berenson writes: 

Both she and her wife, Jackie Strickler-Phelps, suffered severe and long-term injuries following Pfizer jabs... Her wife continues to suffer “nerve pains, altered sense of smell, visual disturbance and musculoskeletal inflammation” 18 months after her first Pfizer shot, Phelps wrote. She personally has suffered a racing heart, fevers, shortness of breath, and “blood pressure fluctuations.”...

Serious vaccine injuries are now an open secret among Australian physicians, many of whom have suffered firsthand, Phelps claimed:

I have spoken with other doctors who have themselves experienced a serious and persistent adverse event including cardiological, rheumatological, autoimmune reactions and neurological consequences…The burden of proof seems to have been placed on the vaccine injured rather than the neutral scientific position of placing suspicion on the vaccine in the absence of any other cause and the temporal correlation with the administration of the vaccine.

A number of skeptical scientists and pharmaceutical insiders – including Geert vanden Bossche, Robert Malone, and Michael Yeadon – warned, before the vaccination campaign was underway, that these still-experimental vaccinations might cause long-term negative health consequences. They worried the vaccines might, in themselves, create new variants, permanently compromise people’s immune systems, or cause other as-of-yet-unknown health conditions. This seems to be the case with Phelps and her wife. Also significant, yet under-studied, are the effects on menstrual cycles, miscarriages, and sperm counts.  

We don’t know whether the Coronavirus vaccines — particularly the mRNA vaccines — have done more harm than good, on balance. We may never know. Among establishment scientists, many still support the ongoing vaccination program. Generally, the supporters are not as charismatic or loudmouthed as the naysayers. Dr Peter Hotez is one example; Dr Alastair McAlpine is another. Yet considering the troubling information that continues to come out, it is clear the vaccines should never have been mandated, particularly to younger and healthier people. Also, natural immunity through past infection should have been accepted as an alternative to vaccination. If the vaccines do cause complex, endemic health problems, this will benefit the same pharmaceutical companies who will develop drugs to treat these new conditions.