100% Vaccinated and Christmas Canceling Surge: The Gibraltar Situation

Gibraltar, the British territory situated on the southern tip of the Iberian Peninsula is a tiny, compact place at just 2.6 square miles. Bordered to the north by Spain, Gibraltar is the most protected place on the planet as 100% of its population have been immunized against COVID-19—predominantly with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine known as BNT162b2. But in a situation that seems to play out over and over despite full vaccination, a serious surge of SARS-CoV-2 infections has Gibraltarians canceling Christmas events as residents are “strongly” discouraged from having guests over despite universal vaccination status. This is due to a government edict that started when a few breakthrough cases quickly “became even more exponential in the last few days,” leading to re-activated public health rules to stop transmission. A confluence of factors are likely involved, but a fundamental culprit appears to be the waning effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine or its “durability.”

As the government announced recently, there are 359 active COVID-19 cases including 5 hospitalizations, which mirrors a general surge of cases throughout Europe. Since the onset of the pandemic, this British territory of 34,000 people reports 6,634 COVID-19 cases with 98 deaths. 

Ranked as the most vaccinated spot on the planet, back in April the Wall Street Journal celebrated that life was getting back to normal thanks to the universal vaccines. A majority of the vaccination has been with the mRNA-based BNT162b2 from Pfizer-BioNTech. However, as TrialSite has learned from several studies, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine wanes in effectiveness over time. By month 6 the durability of the vaccine is in question, and after month seven one study revealed there was a negligible benefit.  Hence, this is why there is an intense focus on boosters in many wealthy nations.

Christmas Cheer Gives Way to Pandemic Protection

So many people here were looking forward to a normal holiday season. Unfortunately, one would have hoped that with a 100% vaccinated population, Christmas 2021 would be not only merry but sociable. But unfortunately, COVID-19 breakthrough cases lead the government here to cancel a number of functions, including official Christmas parties, official receptions, and similar gatherings reports the government.

Once Again, a Hospital Rejects Ivermectin and a Patient Dies

An unfortunate situation has repeated itself in Florida. In Palm Beach Gardens, a woman diagnosed with COVID-19 died 12 weeks after being admitted to the hospital. Her husband unsuccessfully sued Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center in an effort to get the doctors to use ivermectin. The lawsuit was filed last month.

According to an Associated Press article, Tamara Drock died this past Friday. Her husband Ryan had filed suit against the hospital to force the doctors treating Tamara to use ivermectin. The judge in the case, James Nutt, rejected the suit, saying, “allowing judges to countermand doctor’s decisions could set a dangerous precedent.” The judge and the hospital appear to be following the Food and Drug Administration guidelines, which say that “ivermectin has not been authorized or approved for use in preventing or treating COVID-19 in humans or animals.”

TrialSite News has done several stories on similar situations—most recently in Illinois, where a judge allowed an unvaccinated doctor to administer ivermectin to a patient. When the Illinois patient was admitted to the hospital, he was immediately put on a ventilator and given a 50% chance of survival. Apparently, treatment with ivermectin saved his life.

The judge in the Florida case urged the two sides to come to an agreement that fell apart after a doctor agreed to administer ivermectin, but at a dosage the patient’s lawyer said was too low. The owner of Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center, Tenet Healthcare, hasn’t commented on the case.

Subscribe to the Trialsitenews "Ivermectin" Channel

No spam - we promise

TrialSite has tracked the use of ivermectin, citing the drug’s effectiveness against COVID, specifically in India, where the drug has been used in several states effectively combating covid. Furthermore, TrialSite continually asks the question: if ivermectin is an efficient form of fighting COVID, why is it not approved by the FDA and continually labeled and derided as a “horse de-wormer”? Also, doctors have signed a letter claiming that JAMA’s study of ivermectin was flawed. 

Ryan Drock Tamara’s husband, who was infected with COVID, wants to get a law passed. “I’m hoping they name a law after her, so no one has to go through this. If she had walked out of the hospital, she could have had the medication.”

Unfortunately, with the constraints of the medical industry, this situation may happen again. 

Does the SARS-CoV-2 Spike in Vaccines Weaken DNA Damage Repair & Adaptive Immunity?

Recently, scientists working out of Sweden probed the SARS-CoV-2 spike’s ability to damage DNA in SARS-CoV-2 infected hosts. A troubling prospect, the study authors focused on the lack of adaptive immunity associated with severe COVID-19 patients. Clinical microbiologist Hui Jiang working out of both Umeå University and The Wenner–Gren Institute, Stockholm University, as well as Ya-Fang Mei, the virologist lead at Umeå University, found in a laboratory study using in vitro cell lines that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein “significantly inhibits DNA damage repair,” necessary for the adaptive immunity for recovering from severe cases of the illness. This occurs as the spike protein associated with the novel coronavirus “localizes in the nucleus and inhibits DNA damage repair by impeding key DNA repair protein BRCA1 and 53BP1 recruitment to the damage site.” The pair hypothesize: could they have discovered how COVID-19 impedes the infected patient’s adaptive immunity? More disturbingly, does this breakthrough point out that the possible side effects of full-length spike-based vaccines?

Both Hui Jiang and a Ya-Fang Mei sought to better understand the mechanism making SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVD-19, so adversely impactful on the human adaptive immune system in severe cases. TrialSite provides a brief breakdown for the audience based on subscriber requests.

What can happen to severe cases of COVID-19?

In severe cases, SARS-CoV-2 adversely impacts human adaptive immunity. Meaning the virus hijacks and dysregulates the patient’s “cellular machinery to replicate, assemble and spread progeny viruses.” Studies reveal that patients infected with COVID-19 had impacted lymphocyte number and function. Additionally, in severe cases, COVID-19 patients produce fewer T cells, helper T cells, and suppressor T cells. Moreover, scientists have found that in severe infection, the disease delays IgG and IgM levels, which, combined with the previous elements, indicates the degradation of the human adaptive immune system.

What was the study question that both authors pursued?

What was the mechanism by which COVID-19 suppresses adaptive immunity?

Subscribe to the Trialsitenews "COVID-19" Channel

No spam - we promise

What are two critical host surveillance systems?

Immune and DNA repair systems are primary systems that higher organisms such as humans depend on to defend against a diverse array of threats and tissue homeostasis.

The authors share that mounting evidence suggests that the two systems depend on each other’s, particularly during lymphocyte development maturation.

Key investigational question

Do SARS-CoV-2 proteins hijack the DNA damage repair system and consequently endanger adaptive immunity in vitro?

What do the two scientists from Umeå University discover?

First, the authors’ study generates evidence to support the hypothesis that adaptive immunity is adversely impacted because the spike protein hijacks the host DNA damage repair machinery. The authors’ findings suggest that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein significantly impedes V(D)J recombination. 

So how is this relevant to a common understanding of risks with COVID-19?

If these findings are accurate, we already know from clinical observations that the risk of severe illness or death increases with age and that the elderly face the highest risk from the pathogen. Perhaps this is due to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein weakening the DNA repair system of the elderly. This would hamper V(D)J recombination and adaptive immunity.

How might COVID-19 vaccines compound the problem?

The Sweden-based research team suggests that the “full-length spike-based vaccines may inhibit the recombination of V(D)J in B cells. First, Hui Jang and Ya-Fang Mei write that another study backs the premise that “a full-length spike-based vaccine-induced lower antibody titers compared to the RBD-based vaccine.”

They propose a different approach with the COVID-19 vaccine, suggesting “that the use of antigenic epitopes of the spike as a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine might be safer and more efficacious than the full-length spike.”  

What is the potential bombshell finding in this recently published study?

The authors propose ways in which SARS-CoV-2 suppresses the “host adaptive machinery.” Combined with this is the problematic implication that these side effects carry over to full-length spike-based vaccines.

What needs to happen?

Researchers must better understand how SARS-CoV-2 develops and unfolds in the human body and gain an improved understanding of the impact of the current crop of vaccines.

Lead Research/Investigator

Hui Jiang, Ph.D., Umeå University; The Wenner–Gren Institute, Stockholm University

Ya-Fang Mei, Umeå University , Virology Department Head  

Don’t Vaccinate Kids: Urgent Message From Doctors’ Summit

Leading experts on flawed U.S. COVID policy issued an urgent warning at a summit Saturday: Young children will be harmed in an ill-advised rush to vaccinate a population with very little chance of severe infection from the virus.

“The real risk for healthy kids is about zero — it does appear to be lower than the flu,” said Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA technology on which the vaccine is based. Inoculating 28 million children 5 to 11 years old, Malone told attendees of the Florida Summit on Covid, could lead to “a thousand or more excess deaths.”

“That’s a thousand kids,” he told the audience of 800 doctors, nurses and advocates. “It’s a thousand kids too many.”

Subscribe to the Trialsitenews "Vaccine" Channel

No spam - we promise

In addition to other pressing COVID issues, the summit addressed three central questions about childhood vaccination. Do young children need vaccination against COVID? Are the vaccinations safe? Are unvaccinated children a threat to adults? On each, they found the government’s near-universal vaccination policy wanton and unsupported.

“Children don’t get severely ill. Children don’t die from this infection,” said Dr. Paul Alexander, a clinical epidemiologist and former senior advisor on pandemic policy in U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “We’ve been fed a lot of misleading information.”

Though harshly criticized for keeping schools open, “Sweden had not a single death of a child from COVID,” said Dr. Richard Urso, a Texas ophthalmologist citing published data.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control counts 576 U.S. children under 18 who succumbed to COVID from Jan. 1, 2020 to Nov. 3, 2021, among 60,811 who died in that period. But the CDC figures offer no perspective on whether another illness or COVID caused the deaths. In a study of 48,000 COVID-infected children under 18, no deaths were reported among those without comorbidities like leukemia or obesity. In other words, healthy kids did not die, suggesting vaccines are not needed for them.

‘Willful blindness’

With the risk of serious illness low, panelists said the potential toll of vaccinating was unacceptably high, pointing to thousands of officially downplayed but real side effects and deaths. The risks to children include – but aren’t limited to – serious inflammation of the heart called myocarditis, which has been reported at three to six times the expected rate in vaccinated adolescents. A CDC study reported 14 vaccine-related deaths and 849 serious reactions in children 12 to 17 years old.

“There will be children lost with the vax — far more than ever happened with COVID,” said Dr. Peter McCullough, a widely published cardiologist and leading voice on a rational pandemic response. Doctors are guilty of “willful blindness” to vaccine hazards, he said, having “bought into this…dream that this vax if both safe and effective. It is shattering their dreams that it is not sufficiently safe.” 

The summit met just after the Pfizer vaccine was recommended by the CDC and as rollout began in pharmacies and clinics.

In Florida, where debate on vaccine mandates is vigorous, summit organizers see child vaccination as a line not to be crossed in a state that could set an example for the nation. They hope to stop the expanded vaccine program with an executive order by Gov. Ron DeSantis or legislation in an upcoming emergency session called to address vaccine mandates.

“We need to pull out all the stops,” Dr. John Littell, an Ocala physician who spearheaded the summit, told me. “We’ve only begun to fight for our children.”

With virtually universal media support, pressure is intense to vaccinate the pint-sized.  On Twitter, the Muppet character Big Bird told of doing his duty for the public good. “I got the COVID-19 vaccine today!” he tweeted on the day of the summit. “My wing is feeling a little sore, but it’ll give my body an extra protective boost that keeps me and others healthy.”

Pfizer video, meantime, widely shared on social media, showed “superhero” boys and girls, in capes, masks and wings, celebrating vaccination. Mouthing words written by a pharmaceutical giant, they praised other kids who took the needle for their “courage,” willingness to “try new things” and “helping the whole entire world.” Another video, of 13-year-old Madeline De Garay injured after vaccination during a trial, tells quite a different story but, sponsors say, was rejected for airing as a television ad.

‘One and done’

The six-hour summit included a premier lineup of COVID doctors who, based on treatment experience and available science, also raised two other urgent concerns:

The effective suppression of physician freedom to treat early COVID with ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, fluvoxamine and other drugs that could keep patients out of hospitals and save lives.

The protective value of having had COVID, which offers immune benefits that panelists said exceed – and forego the need for — vaccination.

“Natural immunity is robust; it’s complete; it’s durable,” Dr. McCullough told the group. “If it was possible to get it again, it would’ve happened hundreds of millions of times. It’s one and done.” Just 100 or so cases have been reported in the literature, he said, but there is confusion over whether they were actually second infections.

“With COVID, you develop immunity to 50 or so proteins” that spur production of antibodies, Malone said in his talk. “With the vaccine, you develop immunity to one structural protein,” namely the spike protein. “It’s a huge difference.”

“Don’t let them tell you that recovered-from-COVID does not lead to long-lasting immunity,” Dr. Ryan Cole, an Idaho pathologist, told the group, pitting a report on 106 science articles in favor of infection-acquired immunity against a single CDC “pretend paper” saying vaccines offer more protection.

The implications of natural immunity are enormous. The CDC estimates that 120 million Americans – a third of the population — have had COVID. If their immunity was recognized, that would dramatically reduce the lucrative market for vaccines and boosters – what many panelists believe motivates the rush to jab. More than 200 million Americans will have been infected after the Delta wave, McCullough estimates, broadening that population greatly. 

Physicians at the summit left room for some to be vaccinated, including people whose compromised health puts them at risk for severe illness. Malone supports vaccination for high-risk groups, though he told me, “That may change as additional data become available.”

As it stands, however, the vast majority of Americans would be vaccinated under government recommendations that, if mandated by workplaces, schools and municipal governments, leave few exceptions.

‘Unmitigated corruption’

While the urgency of vaccinations took center stage, the failure to treat people at the first sign of COVID – and its immense consequences — was cited as the product of a corrupt, Pharma-controlled system and government.

In a stirring talk, Pierre Kory, president of Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance and a voice for early treatment, pointed to a litany of methods that science journals, media and government have used to effectively deny care with inexpensive “repurposed” drugs like ivermectin.

Among them: Refusal to publish pro-treatment scientific papers and retraction, under pressure, of others. Insistence on pricey randomized control trials while not funding them. A double standard that has Merck’s expensive molnupiravir poised to become a prime outpatient drug, based on one pharma-sponsored trial, while tossing aside dozens of studies favoring ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and other potential treatments. Rejection of the clinical experience of hundreds of doctors who have seen early treatment drugs keep people out of hospitals and coffins. 

Having had “a front-row seat on the war on ivermectin,” Kory described in two words the reason for the monumental failure to treat COVID: “Regulatory capture.” In short, the alphabet agencies – NIH, CDC, FDA – aren’t making the decisions.  

“It’s well described that all of those agencies are literally run by Pharma,” he said. “If you want to keep your job, you let the leaders do what they do.” This has led, he said, to unmitigated and repeated acts of corruption, which are hurting public health.”

‘Get sicker’

 While Kory has strongly supported ivermectin – and several doctors in the audience said they had great success with it – he and others said there are other perhaps two dozen compounds that could help early. Nonetheless, public health leaders are silent on recommending any. Among them: aspirin, budesonide, colchicine, curcumin, melatonin, nitazoxanide, quercetin, zinc and vitamins C and D. Even a highly favorable trial on fluvoxamine has failed to earn the government’s endorsement.

“They tell you to go home and get sicker and come back and see us when you’re really sick and your body’s damaged,” Malone said. “Ask yourself, ‘does this make sense?’”

At the same time, speakers dismissed the unsupported contention that unvaccinated children are a threat to adults — who even when vaccinated can themselves get and spread COVID. “Children are not superspreaders,” said Urso. Further, said Malone, “It’s not the kids responsibility to protect the elders.”

It is, however, the responsibility of public health agencies to live up to protecting the public. Instead, said Dr. Bruce Boros, owner of three urgent care centers in the Florida Keys, they thwart doctors at every turn.

“We’re getting the shit kicked out of us, there’s nowhere to go,” he told me.

“The CEOs and administrators of hospitals are threatening us. You’re going to be fired. You must walk in lockstep with our standard of care.”

After recounting harrowing experiences in New York City ICUs early in the pandemic, a critical care physician, Dr. Mollie James, concluded with this: “Doctors must not be blocked from prescribing life-saving medicine in the hospital. Doctors must not be blocked from giving life-saving treatment outpatient.”

***

Mary Beth Pfeiffer is an investigative journalist and author of two books; she has written more than 20 articles on early treatment of COVID since March of 2020. Follow her on Twitter: @marybethpf

Doctors Targeted for Punishment? Be Careful with Discussing Ivermectin or Critiquing the COVID-19 Vaccines

Doctors a heads up—if you express your own opinion and if that deviates from a federally established party line then you will lose your license and ability to practice medicine and earn an income.  That is just what happened to Dr. Mary Bowden who was employed with the Houston Methodist Hospital.  Because she repeatedly defended ivermectin on Twitter the Houston-based hospital has suspended the doctor’s privileges.  She is just the latest physician to face punishment for deviating from an established script.

Doctors should understand that if they do not follow what is established by groups such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) or the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and of course the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FD) they may just lose their license, at least temporarily. 

As reported initially in Business Insider Dr. Bowden found herself under scrutiny when she was repeatedly posting tweets showcasing the positive data points with the anti-parasite drug.  Bowden also went on the record criticizing COVID-19 mandates as “wrong.”

Recently published on CNNA Texas hospital suspends a doctor’s privileges for spreading ‘misinformation’ about Covid-19 – CNN  Steven Mitby, Dr. Bowden’s attorney, shared that the doctor isn’t against vaccinations at all and that “People should have a choice.”  Meanwhile Houston Methodist Hospital declared in a tweet (20) Twitter that the doctor used her account to “express her personal and political opinions about the COVID-19 vaccine and treatments.”

Subscribe to the Trialsitenews "COVID-19" Channel

No spam - we promise

Recently Sue McIntosh, a retired physician, voluntarily surrendered  Doctor Who Gave Out Fake COVID Exemption Forms Surrendered Medical License (businessinsider.com)  her medical license as she was giving patients “blank, signed COVID-19 exemption waivers.”

Waning Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness or Confounding by Indication? Dr-Ron-Brown

Confounding by indication occurs in an observational study when some patients have conditions that indicate a higher need to be prescribed the tested treatment than other patients. This could cause patient response to the treatment to differ based on patient conditions, thus confounding the study results: Confounding by IndicationFor example, in a recently published November 2021 Israel study, a group of people with more serious conditions had higher priority to receive the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine earlier in January and February compared to another group without serious conditions who received the vaccine later in March and April. Outcomes of both groups were then tested in June and July, and the incidence of breakthrough infections was found to be 51% higher in the Early Vaccinees group compared to the Late Vaccinees group, which increased to 126% higher when comparing the earliest vaccinees in January to the latest vaccinees in April: SARS-CoV-2-breakthrough infections to time-from-vaccine.

Subscribe to the Trialsitenews "Vaccine" Channel

No spam - we promise

These study results give the appearance that the effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine waned to a greater extent in the Early Vaccinees group over a period of six months compared to four months in the Late Vaccinees group. Even more vaccine waning was implied by the higher infection rates and longer difference in time-from-vaccine between the January and April vaccinees. But the authors of the study cautioned, “As chronically ill patients were given priority for vaccination, confounding by indication should be considered when interpreting the study results.”

In reality, vaccinees in the earlier group were at higher risk for COVID-19 infection to begin with. Therefore, due to confounding by indication, this study does not prove that effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine wanes over time.

Furthermore, with an absolute risk reduction of only 0.7% in the clinical trial, the Pfizer vaccine has hardly any efficacy at all. Therefore, any waning effectiveness of the vaccine expected within the population is practically nil. The same applies to the Moderna vaccine with an absolute risk reduction of only 1.1%: Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 Vaccine Trials.

Observational studies of vaccine effectiveness, like the Israel study, lack the controlled experimental conditions of randomized controlled trials. Effectiveness studies cannot prove causation and are highly susceptible to confounding and selection bias, even when researchers attempt to adjust the study results to control for known confounding factors like age, sex, comorbidities, etc.

On the other hand, randomization in a vaccine clinical trial neutralizes all known and unknown confounding factors by equally distributing these influences between the vaccine and placebo groups, so the only differences in the group outcomes are due to the efficacy of the vaccine alone.

Unfortunately, reporting clinical trial outcomes is also suspect to bias, which cannot be controlled through randomization if the trial’s absolute risk reduction is not reported, as occurred in the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine clinical trials.

BREAKING: AI-powered DoD data analysis program named “Project Salus” SHATTERS official vaccine narrative, shows A.D.E. accelerating in the fully vaccinated with each passing week

An AI-powered Dept. of Defense program named “Project Salus,” run in cooperation with the JAIC (Joint Artificial Intelligence Center), has analyzed data on 5.6 million Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 or older. Data were aggregated from Humetrix, a real-time data and analytics platform that tracks health care outcomes. Legal analysis from Thomas Renz of Renz-Law.com is included in a breaking video interview, below.

The alarming findings show that the vast majority of covid hospitalizations are occurring among fully-vaccinated individuals and that outcomes among the fully vaccinated are growing worse with each passing week. This appears to fit the pattern of so-called Antibody Dependent Enhancement, where the treatment intervention (mRNA vaccines) is worsening health outcomes and leading to excess hospitalizations and deaths.

These data, presented here, shatter the official Biden / Fauci narrative that falsely claims America is experiencing, “a pandemic of the unvaccinated.” The data show that the pandemic actually appears to be accelerated by covid-19 vaccines, while unvaccinated individuals are having far better outcomes than the vaccinated.

Furthermore, according to these data (shown below), the single best strategy for avoid post-vaccine infections and hospitalizations is natural immunity derived from a previous covid infection.

The full analysis is entitled, “Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against the Delta variant among 5.6M Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older” and is dated Sep. 28, 2021. The presentation of these data consists of 17 slides, which are available at the Humetric website in slide form, also posted on Natural News servers in this PDF version which is more convenient for viewing and printing.

From the JAIC Project Salus document:

In this 80% vaccinated 65+ population, an estimated 60% of COVID-19 hospitalizations occurred in fully vaccinated individuals in the week ending August 7th.

By August 21st, 71% of covid-19 “cases” were occurring among fully vaccinated individuals:

In this 80% vaccinated 65+ population, an estimated 71% of COVID-19 cases occurred in fully vaccinated individuals.

These data reveal that as the Delta variant approached a 97% infection rate, “cases” and hospitalizations among fully vaccinated individuals showed striking increases with each passing week.

Key findings of the DoD / JAIC / Project Salus / Humetrix analysis

Throughout the slides, “VE” refers to vaccine effectiveness. “Breakthrough” means a failed vaccine, where a fully vaccinated person is diagnosed with covid. Many of those people require hospitalization and ICU treatments (see the slides below).

Some of the key findings of the Project Salus analysis include:

  • The effectiveness of mRNA vaccines is confirmed to wane over time.

  • With each passing week, those vaccinated with mRNA vaccines show an increased risk of vaccine failure / covid infections requiring hospitalization. From the analysis: “Odds ratio increasing to 2.5 at 6 months post vaccination.”

  • Natural immunity works: A prior covid infection greatly reduces the odds of a vaccinated person needing hospitalization from a subsequent infection.

Vaccine failure dramatically worsens within 5-6 months after being vaccinated

One slide from the analysis reveals that so-called “breakthrough” infections — vaccine failures — increase with time, showing a near doubling of breakthrough infections among those vaccinated 5-6 months ago vs. those vaccinated only 3-4 months ago.

These data end at August 21st, 2021 but the trend does not appear to be flattening. As more data are added to this analysis each week, it seems almost certain that breakthrough infections rates will continue to rise over time in vaccinated individuals. We do not yet know what will happen in 9 months after vaccination, but these data show cause for serious concern.

The following chart reveals that both Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are showing the same pattern of worsening “breakthrough” infection rates over time. Notice the upward trend of all the bars in this chart, meaning both mRNA vaccines are producing the same increase in infections among the fully vaccinated:

Once the Delta variant took hold, 71% of COVID-19 “breakthrough” cases occurred among the fully vaccinated

As the following chart shows, 71% of COVID-19 “cases” were breakthrough cases (vaccine failures) once the Delta variant reached 90% spread across those infected.

Understand that the authors of this document state that those who are jabbed are not considered “vaccinated” until two weeks after they received the injections, which means that infections, hospitalizations and deaths which occurred from 0 – 14 days are ignored in this data set.

In reality, that means the percentage of “fully vaccinated” people responsible for breakthrough infections, hospitalizations and deaths is substantially higher than what is shown in these data. If they are claiming a 71% rate, it may in reality be more like 80% or even 90%, but we don’t know for sure because they are hiding all negative health outcomes for the first two weeks after the vaccines are administered (by claiming those people are “unvaccinated,” which is a deliberate deception being used to try to hide the harmful effects of vaccines).

Ethnic groups hit hardest: Native Americans, Hispanics and Blacks

Finally, a horrifying slide in the data set reveals that one of the highest risk factors for being hospitalized after being vaccinated is simply being of Native American descent. According to the data in this slide, Native Americans face around 50% higher odds of being hospitalized after being vaccinated, compared to other ethnic groups such as Whites.

Hispanics face a slightly lower risk which appears to be around 40% higher odds. Blacks face around 25% higher odds.

Why is this the case? The gain-of-function properties which were engineered into the SARS-CoV-2 biological weapon — via Fauci, Daszak and the NIH — target ACE2 receptors which exist in higher densities in targeted organ systems of many minority groups such as Native Americans, Hispanics and Blacks. This has led many observers to conclude that the covid spike protein — which is generated in the bodies of those who take mRNA vaccines — is a race-specific bioweapon designed to achieve depopulation of minority groups. Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, has engaged in many efforts to bring this to the attention of his followers, for example. These data provided by the DoD / JAIC / Project Salus document shown here appear to support the plausibility of such theories.

Other factors that greatly increase a person’s odds of being hospitalized after receiving vaccinations include kidney failure (ESRD), morbid obesity, chronic liver disease or receiving chemotherapy.

Natural immunity offers documented protect against future hospitalization

Finally, the data presented in this document shows that natural immunity — listed as “prior covid-19” substantially decreases the risk of hospitalization after receiving covid-19 vaccines. (See slide above.)

What this means is that the best way to ensure the safest outcome of a covid vaccine is to experience a covid infection before getting vaccinated. This dramatically reduces your risk of negative health outcomes.

Then again, if someone has already had covid, why would they need a vaccine in the first place? If anything, these data show that anyone choosing to receive covid-19 vaccines is making the wrong choice if they desire to avoid infections, hospitalizations or deaths.

Natural immunity, once again, is revealed as the most effective status that reduces negative outcomes.

Conclusion

In conclusion, these data from the DoD / JAIC absolutely shatter the false narrative of Biden, Fauci, Walensky and other “authorities” who are still attempting to gaslight the American people into thinking that hospitals are filled with unvaccinated people. In reality, the vast majority of hospitalizations and deaths are occurring among those who were fully vaccinated, according to the 5.6 million people studied in this particular data set (Medicare).

Importantly, post-vaccine health outcomes are worsening over time, meaning that the vaccines appear to be gradually damaging the immune system over subsequent months, making vaccinated individuals far more vulnerable to subsequent infections.

This is the very definition of ADE (Antibody Dependent Enhancement), about which many analysts such as Dr. Sherri Tenpenny have warned. Now, it appears that ADE is no longer merely a theory but rather a confirmed phenomenon reflected in official Medicare data.

Attorney Thomas Renz told Natural News today that these data should immediately result in not just the FDA’s revocation of mRNA vaccine EUA and approval status, but that the FDA, Fauci and Big Pharma’s top executives should be sued under RICO Act violations for racketeering and organized crime.