Pfizer and Clear Creek collaborate on SARS-CoV-2 PLpro inhibitors for COVID-19
Microscope and coronavirus illustration
Dec. 7, 2022
Pfizer Inc. and Clear Creek Bio Inc. have entered into a research collaboration and exclusive license agreement to advance the discovery and development of potential inhibitors of the SARS-CoV-2 papain-like protease (PLpro) for the oral treatment of COVID-19. PLpro is an essential enzyme, which, along with the main protease (Mpro), plays an important role in viral replication. Under the agreement, the two companies will work together to identify a PLpro candidate to progress into the clinic, at which time Pfizer will be solely responsible for further development and commercialization activities. Clear Creek Bio will receive an undisclosed upfront payment and will be eligible to receive additional potential milestone payments plus royalties on future product sales (Pfizer News Release).
Through this investigation of pediatric vaccine safety, the following findings are made:
1. Mercury is hazardous to humans. Its use in medicinal products is undesirable, unnecessary and should be minimized or eliminated entirely.
2. For decades, ethylmercury was used extensively in medical products ranging from vaccines to topical ointments as preservative and an anti-bacteriological agent.
3. Manufacturers of vaccines and thimerosal, (an ethyl-mercury compound used in vaccines), have never conducted adequate testing on the safety of thimerosal. The FDA has never required manufacturers to conduct adequate safety testing on thimerosal and ethyl-mercury compounds.
4. Studies and papers documenting the hyperallergenicity and toxicity of thimerosal (ethylmercury) have existed for decades.
5. Autism in the United States has grown at epidemic proportions during the last decade. By some estimates the number of autistic children in the United States is growing between 10 and 17 percent per year. The medical community has been unable to determine the underlying cause(s) of this explosive growth.
6. At the same time that the incidence of autism was growing, the number of childhood vaccines containing thimerosal was growing, increasing the amount of ethyl mercury to which infants were exposed threefold.
7. A growing number of scientists and researchers believe that a relationship between the increase in neuro-developmental disorders of autism, attention deficit hyperactive disorder, and speech or language delay, and the increased use of thimerosal in vaccines is plausible and deserves more scrutiny. In 2001, the Institute of Medicine determined that such a relationship is biologically plausible, but that not enough evidence exists to support or reject this hypothesis.
8. The FDA acted too slowly to remove ethylmercury from over-the-counter products like topical ointments and skin creams. Although an advisory committee determined that ethylmercury was unsafe in these products in 1980, a rule requiring its removal was not finalized until 1998.
9. The FDA and the CDC failed in their duty to be vigilant as new vaccines containing thimerosal were approved and added to the immunization schedule. When the Hepatitis B and Haemophilus Influenzae Type b vaccines were added to the recommended schedule of childhood immunizations, the cumulative amount of ethylmercury to which children were exposed nearly tripled.
10. The amount of ethylmercury to which children were exposed through vaccines prior to the 1999 announcement exceeded two safety thresholds established by the Federal government for a closely related substance–methylmercury.
While the Federal Government has established no safety threshold for ethylmercury, experts agree that the methyl mercury guidelines are a good substitute. Federal health officials have conceded that the amount of thimerosal in vaccines exceeded the EPA threshold of 0.1 micrograms per kilogram of bodyweight. In fact, the amount of mercury in one dose of DTaP or Hepatitis B vaccines (25 micrograms each) exceeded this threshold many times over. Federal health officials have not conceded that this amount of thimerosal in vaccines exceeded the FDA’s more relaxed threshold of 0.4 micrograms per kilogram of body weight. In most cases,however, it clearly did.
11. The actions taken by the HHS to remove thimerosal from vaccines in 1999 were not sufficiently aggressive. As a result, thimerosal remained in some vaccines for an additional two years.
12. The CDC’s failure to state a preference for thimerosal- free vaccines in 2000 and again in 2001 was an abdication of their responsibility. As a result, many children received vaccines containing thimerosal when thimerosal-free alternatives were available.
13. The Influenza vaccine appears to be the sole remaining vaccine given to children in the United States on a regular basis that contains thimerosal. Two formulations recommended for children six months of age or older continue to contain trace amounts of thimerosal. Thimerosal should be removed from these vaccines. No amount of mercury is appropriate in any childhood vaccine.
14. The CDC in general and the National Immunization Program in particular are conflicted in their duties to monitor the safety of vaccines, while also charged with the responsibility of purchasing vaccines for resale as well as promoting increased immunization rates.
15. There is inadequate research regarding ethyl-mercury neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity.
16. There is inadequate research regarding the relationship between autism and the use of mercury-containing vaccines.
17. To date, studies conducted or funded by the CDC that purportedly dispute any correlation between autism and vaccine injury have been of poor design, under-powered, and fatally flawed. The CDC’s rush to support and promote such research is reflective of a philosophical conflict in looking fairly at emerging theories and clinical data related to adverse reactions from vaccinations.
One study that compared the toxicology of ethyl and methyl-mercury was published in 1985 in the Archives of Toxicology, written by researchers from the Toxicology Unit of the Medical Research Council of England. The researchers exposed rats to ethyl and methyl-mercury to “compare total and inorganic mercury concentrations in selected tissues, including the brain, after the daily administration of methyl or ethyl-mercury and to relate these findings to damage in the brain and kidneys.” This study found that both ethyl and methyl-mercury caused damage to the brains and the kidneys. It also found that male and female rats were affected differently: “It has been well documented that one of the first toxic effects of methylmercury in rats is depressed weight gain or even weight loss . . . based on this criteria, ethyl-mercury proved to be more toxic than methylmercury . . . in both sexes . . . the concentration of total mercury (the sum of organic and inorganic mercury) and organic mercury was consistently higher in the blood of ethylmercury-treated rats . . . both alkymercurials damaged the dorsal root ganglia and 9.6 mg Hg/kg/day ethylmercury caused more damage than 8.0 mg Hg/kg/day methylmercury. Ethylmercury was more renotoxic than methyl-mercury . . . tubular dilation was frequently present . . . in kidneys . . . both damage and mercury deposits were more widely spread in ethylmercury-treated rats.”
While there is frequent reference to the paucity of science in understanding the harm that ethyl-mercury can do, there is more understanding in the scientific community than government officials have shared with the Committee.
The mercury amalgams in your mouth, the so-called silver fillings, contain 48 to 50 percent of elemental mercury.
These fillings continuously emit mercury vapor, which will go to the brain and is converted to mercuric mercury . . .
Certain fish contain methylmercury; again, very rapidly taken up from the GI tract, transported quickly to the brain, and converted very slowly to mercuric mercury . . . thimerosal, which again will be taken up by the brain and quickly converted to mercuric mercury–all three forms are neurotoxic.
“By neurotoxic, we mean it will damage nerves and it will damage brain tissues.”
“Let me just say as a final statement that there is no need to have thimerosal in a vaccine.”
In making a presentation to the Institute of Medicine’s Immunization Safety Review Committee, in July 2001, the former Director of the Environmental Toxicology Program at the National Institutes of Health, Dr. George Lucier, proffered the following conclusions:
Ethyl-mercury is a neurotoxin.
Infants may be more susceptible than adults.
Ethyl-mercury should be considered equipotent to methyl-mercury as a developmental neurotoxin. This conclusion is clearly public health protective.
Ethyl-mercury exposure from vaccines (added to dietary exposures to methylmercury) probably caused neurotoxic responses (likely subtle) in some children.
While the debate over whether ethyl or methylmercury is more toxic will probably not be resolved in the near future, a consensus appears to be emerging that exposure to these different types of mercury cannot be considered in isolation.
Rather, witnesses before the Committee stressed that in determining safe levels of mercury exposure, the cumulative level of exposure to all types of mercury must be considered.
Dr. Jeffrey Bradstreet made the following observation at the
July 19, 2002 hearing:
“More concerning to me in the Institute’s treatment of mercury problems, was the almost complete absence of regard for compounding effect of thimerosal on preexisting mercury
levels. The NHANES Study from the CDC had already established that perhaps one in ten children is born to mothers with elevated mercury burden.
The Committee repeatedly heard from government officials that merely exceeding the guideline was not cause for concern. One Merck official, in teaching a Grand Rounds session to staff in November of 1999, postulated that the minimum risk level would need to be multiplied by ten to reach a level at which harm would be expected through exposure. Dr. Roberta McKee of Merck wrote:
“A number of environmental and public health agencies have set a Minimum Risk Level (MRL) for toxic substances. An MRL for ingestion is conceptually equivalent to the Reference Dose of the US Environmental Protection Agency, the Acceptable Daily Intake of the US FDA, and the Tolerable Daily Intake of the WHO. Any exposure to the substance below the MRL is assured to be safe, while exposure to ten times the MRL is assumed to place one at risk of overdose. Exposure at or near the MRL is assumed to be safe but should trigger deliberate and careful review.”
Based on Dr. McKee’s explanation, many babies were exposed to levels of mercury that “placed one at risk of overdose,” and were exposed to amounts well over ten times the EPA’s scientifically validated reference dose. For example, at a recent Committee hearing, Chairman Dan Burton (R-IN) discussed his own family’s experience with vaccine injuries:
“My grandson received vaccines for nine different diseases in one day. He may have been exposed to 62.5 micrograms of mercury in one day through his vaccines. According to his weight, the maximum safe level of mercury he should have been exposed to in one day is 1.5 micrograms, so that is 41 times the amount at which harm can be caused.”
According to the analysis of Dr. McKee, based on the methyl-mercury ingestion guidelines, the Chairman’s grandson would have exceeded the “ten times the MRL” and therefore was placed “at risk of overdose.” In fact, with a 62.5 microgram exposure alone, the EPA, ATSDR, and FDA levels would have been exceeded by 10 times. Because the FDA chose not to recall thimerosal-containing vaccines in 1999, in addition to all of those already injured, 8,000 children a day continued to be placed “at risk for overdose” for at least an additional two years.
It should also be noted that none of the Federal guidelines on mercury exposure have been included specific provisions for safe exposure limits for infants and children. It is widely accepted that infants and young children would be five times more sensitive to the toxic effect of mercury or other neurotoxins than adults. “Exposures early in life are reasonably of greater health concern . . . because of greater brain organ susceptibility.” The FDA has conceded in recent years that many children received doses of ethylmercury through their vaccinations that exceeded the EPA’s minimal risk level for methylmercury.
However, it is also clear that many infants received doses of ethyl-mercury that exceeded the FDA’s higher threshold.
Whatever you may currently think about the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, it is a fact that more than 5.41 billion people worldwide have received a dose of some type of COVID-19 vaccine, equal to about 70.5 percent of the world population. In the United States as of October 17, 2022, 494.74 million “initial protocol doses” of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine have been administered, together with 138.16 million “booster” doses. 265.59 million US residents have received at least one dose, and 226.59 million have completed the initial vaccination protocol (see this link), out of a total population of 335.49 million (67.5%). In terms of the logistics of development, manufacturing and deployment of a novel injectable biologic product, this is undeniably a major achievement.
Of the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine doses administered in the United States as of October 19, 2022:
375.64M doses of Pfizer/Bio-N-Tech 237.61 doses of Moderna
Total U.S. of 613.25M mRNA vaccine doses administered.
In the European Union, the corresponding numbers are:
641.89M doses of Pfizer/Bio-N-Tech 153.16M doses of Moderna
EU total of 795.05M mRNA vaccine doses administered
Grand Total of 1 Billion
408.3 million doses of mRNA vaccines in these two regions.All this involves a novel technology, product and large scale manufacturing process which was created, passed non-clinical and clinical development and was massively manufactured, distributed and globally deployed in less than three years.
At a meeting of the Special Committee of the European Union Parliament held on 11 October 2022 to discuss the findings regarding COVID-19 pandemic and recommendations for the future, a Pfizer executive confirmed that the vaccine had never been tested for its ability to prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus before being put on the market. Data emerging since the introduction of the vaccine indicates that it is in fact unable to do so, thereby refuting the claim that the COVID-19 Passports provide any guarantee of protection. In other words, although governments throughout the world employed a wide range of propaganda and censorship methods to promote these products as both safe and effective at stopping the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection, there were no studies performed prior to this distribution which even tested how well the products would prevent the spread of COVID-19 disease. It is not an exaggeration to state that this massive deployment has been the largest clinical experiment performed on human beings in the history of the world.
All of the mRNA vaccine doses administered in the United States (to both citizens and military personnel) have been provided under “Emergency Use Authorization” (EUA), which is to say that although the FDA has licensed the Pfizer/Bio-N-Tech and Moderna vaccines for some age cohorts, the firms have elected to not manufacture, distribute, or market these licensed products in the United States. The reason for this is not clear, but appears to relate to both liability issues as well as conditions placed by the FDA involving additional clinical studies, safety monitoring (pharmacovigilance) and product disclosures once the products begin to be marketed.
From the standpoint of the vaccine manufacturers, EUA is a preferred pathway for marketing their products. A single purchaser (the US Government) provides complete liability indemnification, a guaranteed market with very little oversight, and manages both the distribution and marketing. In the case of all unlicensed products, the manufacturers are prohibited from marketing them, but under EUA the US Government has been doing this for them, and has been acting in coordination with corporate media, social media, and large technology firms to suppress any discussion of risks or limitations of the products. From the standpoint of the vaccine manufacturers, this is all profit and no risk; a perfect business model. Why would they ever want to consider taking up the burden of actually producing and marketing the licensed version of these products?
EUA is a process defined by US federal law (21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3 – Authorization for medical products for use in emergencies) which in the case of these mRNA-based products involves biological products which are not approved, licensed, or cleared for commercial distribution. Specifically, the statute authorizes “the introduction into interstate commerce, during the effective period of a declaration under subsection (b), of a drug, device, or biological product intended for use in an actual or potential emergency.” Continued “Emergency Use Authorization” of these vaccines requires “a determination by the Secretary of Homeland Security that there is a domestic emergency, or a significant potential for a domestic emergency, involving a heightened risk of attack with a biological, chemical, radiological, or nuclear agent or agents”. Once the domestic emergency has passed (ergo “a determination by the Secretary, in consultation as appropriate with the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary of Defense, that the circumstances described in paragraph (1) have ceased to exist”), “A declaration under this subsection shall terminate”. In other words, when there is no longer an emergency, the “Emergency Use Authorization” for the product will cease, and the vaccine products will return to their status as not approved, licensed, or cleared for commercial distribution. These products remain experimental, and are only to be used for a limited amount of time during an ongoing emergency.
“Pseudouridine likely affects multiple facets of mRNA function, including reduced immune stimulation by several mechanisms, prolonged half-life of pseudouridine-containing RNA, as well as potentially deleterious effects of Ψ on translation fidelity and efficiency.”
Based on the currently available information, it appears to me that the extensive random incorporation of pseudouridine into the synthetic mRNA-like molecules used for the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna SARS-CoV-2 vaccines may well account for much or all of the observed immunosuppression, DNA virus reactivation, and remarkable persistence of the synthetic “mRNA” molecules observed in lymph node biopsy tissues (Roltgen et al. 2022). Many of these adverse effects were reported by Kariko, Weissman et al in their 2008 paper “Incorporation of pseudouridine into mRNA yields superior nonimmunogenic vector with increased translational capacity and biological stability” (Kariko et al. 2008) and could have been anticipated by regulatory and toxicology professionals if they had bothered to consider these findings prior to allowing emergency use authorization and widespread (global) deployment of what is truly an immature and previously untested technology. Therefore, neither the FDA, NIH, CDC, nor BioNTech (which employs Dr. Kariko as a Vice President) nor Moderna can claim true ignorance. To my eyes, what we have seen is more appropriately classified as “willful ignorance”.
Based on my review of the scientific data, it is my opinion that the random and uncontrolled insertion of pseudouridine into the manufactured “mRNA”-like molecules creates a population of polymers which may resemble natural mRNA, but which have a variety of properties which are clinically relevant. These characteristics and activities may account for many of the unusual effects, unusual stability, and striking adverse events associated with this new class of vaccines. These molecules are not natural mRNA, and they do not behave like natural mRNA.
The question that most troubles and perplexes me at this point is why the biological consequences of these modifications and associated clinical adverse effects were not thoroughly investigated before widespread administration of random pseudouridine-incorporating “mRNA”-like molecules to a global population.
Biology, and particularly molecular biology, is highly complex and interrelated. Change one thing over here, and it is really hard to predict what might happen over there. That is why one must do rigorously controlled non-clinical and clinical research. Once again, it appears to me that the hubris of “elite” high status scientists, physicians and governmental “public health” bureaucrats has overcome common sense, well established regulatory norms have been disregarded, and patients have unnecessarily suffered as a consequence. These products do not use natural mRNA, and referring to them as mRNA vaccines is misleading. I recommend that, in the future, these products which employ a synthetic unnatural polymer which is not natural mRNA, should be designated using a different term, such as Ψ-mRNA genetic medicines.
CDC Members Own More Than 50 Patents Connected to Vaccinations
The CDC Immunization Safety Office is responsible for investigating the safety and effectiveness of all new vaccinations; once an investigation is considered complete, a recommendation is then made to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) who then determines whether the new vaccine will be added to the current vaccination schedule. Members of the ACIP committee include physicians such as Dr. Paul Offit, who also serves as the chief of infectious diseases at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Offit and other CDC members own numerous patents associated with vaccinations and regularly receive funding for their research work from the very same pharmaceutical companies who manufacturer vaccinations which are ultimately sold to the public. This situation creates an obvious conflict of interest, as members of the ACIP committee benefit financially every time a new vaccination is released to the market.
— Read on www.lawfirms.com/resources/environment/environment-health/cdc-members-own-more-50-patents-connected-vaccinations
VIDEO: Toxicology vs Virology – Rockefeller Institute and the Criminal Polio Fraud
Author F. William Engdahl is an award-winning geopolitical analyst, strategic risk consultant, professor and lecturer. In July 2022, he published a brilliant essay titled “Toxicology vs Virology” that exposed the Rockefeller Institute’s role in creating virology. Using Polio as an example, it outlines how fictional “viruses” are used to advance medical tyranny.
In his highly informative work he revealed:
Flexner’s fraudulent experiments
The corruption of the American Medical Association
How the Rockefellers controlled the Polio narrative
The real causes of Poliomyelitis
How it relates to COVID-19 and current globalist agendas.
One of the outcomes of the alleged new SARS Covid virus that publicly emerged in 2019 is that the medical specialization of virology has been raised to a stature almost Godlike in the media. Few understand the origins of virology and its elevation into a leading role in today’s medicine practice. For this we need to look at the origins and politics of America’s first medical research institute, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, today Rockefeller University, and their work on what they claimed was a polio virus.
In 1907 an outbreak of a sickness in New York City gave the director of the Rockefeller Institute, Simon Flexner, MD, a golden opportunity to lay claim to discovery of an invisible “virus” caused by what was arbitrarily called poliomyelitis. The word poliomyelitis simply means inflammation of the spinal cord’s grey matter. There were some 2,500 New Yorkers, mostly children, designated with some form of poliomyelitis, including paralysis and even death, that year.
Flexner’s Fraud
The most striking aspect of the entire polio saga in the USA during the first half of the 20th Century was the fact that every key phase of the business was controlled by people tied to what became the Rockefeller medical cabal. This fraud started with claims by the Director of the Rockefeller Institute, Simon Flexner, that he and his colleague, Paul A. Lewis, had “isolated” a pathogen, invisible to the eye, smaller even than bacteria, which they claimed caused the paralyzing sickness in a series of outbreaks in the US. How did they come to this idea?
In a paper published in 1909 in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Flexner claimed he and Lewis had isolated the poliomyelitis virus responsible. He reported they had successfully “passaged” poliomyelitis through several monkeys, from monkey to monkey. They began by injecting diseased human spinal cord tissue of a young boy who had died, presumably from the virus, into the brains of monkeys. After a monkey fell ill, a suspension of its diseased spinal cord tissue was injected into the brains of other monkeys who also fell ill.
They proclaimed that the Rockefeller Institute doctors had thus proven poliomyelitis virus causality for the mysterious disease. They hadn’t done anything of the sort. Flexner and Lewis even admitted that: “We failed utterly to discover bacteria, either in film preparations or in cultures, that could account for the disease; and, since among our long series of propagations of the virus in monkeys not one animal showed, in the lesions, the cocci described by some previous investigators, and we had failed to obtain any such bacteria from the human material studied by us, we felt that they could be excluded from consideration.” What they then did was to make a bizarre supposition, a leap of faith, not a scientific claim. They took their hypothesis of viral exogenous agency and made it fact, with no proof whatever. They asserted: “Therefore, …the infecting agent of epidemic poliomyelitis belongs to the class of the minute and filterable viruses that have not thus far been demonstrated with certainty under the microscope.“ Therefore?
Simon Flexner simply asserted it “must” be a polio virus killing the monkeys, because they could find no other explanation. In fact he did not look for another source of the illnesses. This was not scientific isolation. It was wild speculation: “…not thus far been demonstrated with certainty under the microscope.” They admitted this in a December 18, 1909 follow up in JAMA, titled, THE NATURE OF THE VIRUS OF EPIDEMIC POLIOMYELITIS.
The so-called “virus” they were injecting into monkeys was hardly pure. It also contained an undetermined amount of contaminants. It included “pureed spinal cord, brain, fecal matter, even flies were ground up and injected into monkeys to induce paralysis.” Until Jonas Salk won approval from the US Government in April 1955 for a polio vaccine, no scientific proof of existence of a virus causing poliomyelitis, or infantile paralysis as it was commonly known, had been proven. That is the case to this day. The medical world all took Flexner’s word that it “must” be a virus.
Rockefeller Institute, Flexner and the American Medical Association
The Rockefeller Institute was founded from the Standard Oil fortune of John D. Rockefeller in 1901, to be America’s first biomedical institute. It was modelled on France’s Pasteur Institute (1888) and Germany’s Robert Koch Institute (1891). Its first Director, Simon Flexner, played a pivotal and most criminal role in the evolution of what became approved American medical practice. The Rockefeller goal was to completely control American medical practice and transform it into an instrument, at least initially, for promotion of medical drugs approved by the Rockefeller interests. By then they were looking to monopolize medical drugs produced from their petroleum refining, as they had done with oil.
As Rockefeller Institute head, Simon Flexner, was publishing his inconclusive but highly acclaimed studies on polio, he arranged for his brother, Abraham Flexner, a school teacher with no medical background, to head a joint study by the American Medical Association (AMA), the Rockefeller General Education Board, and the Carnegie Foundation founded by Rockefeller’s close friend Andrew Carnegie.
The 1910 study was titled, The Flexner Report, and its ostensible purpose was to investigate the quality of all US medical schools. The outcome of the report was, however, predetermined. Ties between the well-endowed Rockefeller Institute and the AMA went through the corrupt AMA head, George H. Simmons.
Simmons was also the editor of the influential Journal of the American Medical Association, a publication delivered to some 80,000 doctors across America. He reportedly wielded absolute power over the doctors’ association. He controlled the rising ad revenues for drug companies to promote their drugs to AMA doctors in his journal, a highly lucrative business. He was a key part of the Rockefeller medical coup that was to completely redefine acceptable medical practice away from remedial or preventive treatment to use of often deadly drugs and expensive surgeries. As head of the AMA Simmons realized that the competition from a proliferation of medical schools, including then-recognized chiropractic, osteopathy, homeopathy and natural medicine, was lessening income of his AMA doctors, as the number of medical schools had increased from around 90 in 1880 to over 150 in 1903.
Abraham Flexner, former headmaster of a private school, toured various US medical schools in 1909 and recommended that fully half of the 165 medical schools be closed, as what he defined as “sub-standard.” This reduced competition from other approaches to healing diseases. They ruthlessly targeted then-widespread naturopathic medical schools, chiropractic ones, osteopaths as well as independent allopathic schools unwilling to join the AMA regime. Then Rockefeller money went to the select schools with a proviso that professors be vetted by the Rockefeller Institute and the curriculum focus on drugs and surgery as treatment, not prevention, nor nutrition, nor toxicology as possible causes and solutions. They had to accept Pasteur’s germ theory of disease, which claims one germ to one disease reductionism. Rockefeller-controlled media launched a coordinated witch-hunt against all forms of alternative medicine, herbal remedies, natural vitamins and chiropractic–anything not controlled by Rockefeller patented drugs.
By 1919 the Rockefeller General Education Board and the Rockefeller Foundation had paid out more than $5,000,000 to Johns Hopkins, Yale and Washington University in St. Louis medical schools. In 1919 John D. Rockefeller granted another $20,000,000 in securities, “for the advancement of medical education in the United States.” That would be comparable to about $340 million today, a huge sum. In short the Rockefeller money interests had hijacked American medical education and medical research by the 1920’s.
Creating Virology
This medical takeover, backed by the most influential doctors’ organization, the AMA, and its corrupt head, Simmons, allowed Simon Flexner to literally create modern virology under Rockefeller rules. The highly controversial Thomas Milton Rivers, as director of The Rockefeller Institute’s virology laboratory, established virology as an independent field, separate from bacteriology, during the 1920s. They realized they could manipulate far easier when they could claim deadly pathogens that were invisible germs or “viruses.” Ironically virus comes from Latin for poison.
Virology, a reductionist medical fraud, was a creation of the Rockefeller medical cabal. That highly important fact is buried in the annals of medicine today. Diseases such as smallpox or measles or poliomyelitis were declared caused by invisible pathogens called specific viruses. If scientists could “isolate” the invisible virus, theoretically they could find vaccines to protect people from harm. So their theory went. It was a huge boon for the Rockefeller cartel of pharmaceutical companies, which at the time included American Home Products which falsely promoted drugs with no proof of effect, such as Preparation H for Hemorrhoids, or Advil for pain relief; Sterling Drug,which took over the US assets including Aspirin of German Bayer AG after World War I; Winthrop Chemical; American Cyanamid and its subsidiary Lederle Laboratories; Squibb and Monsanto.
Soon virus researchers at the Rockefeller Institute, in addition to claiming discovery of the poliomyelitis virus, claimed to discover the viruses that caused smallpox, mumps, measles and yellow fever. Then they announced “discovery” of preventive vaccines for pneumonia and yellow fever. All of these “discoveries” announced by the Institute proved false. With the control of the research in the new area of virology, the Rockefeller Institute, in collusion with Simmons at AMA and his equally corrupt successor, Morris Fishbein, could promote new patented vaccines or drug “remedies” in the influential AMA journal that went to every member doctor in America. Drug companies refusing to pay for ads in the AMA journal were blackballed by the AMA.
Controlling Polio Research
Simon Flexner and the highly-influential Rockefeller Institute succeeded in 1911 in having the symptoms that were being called poliomyelitis to be entered into the US Public Health Law as a “contagious, infectious disease caused by an air-borne virus.” Yet even they admitted they had not proven how the disease enters the body of humans. As one experienced doctor pointed out in a medical journal in 1911, “Our present knowledge of the possible methods of contagion is based almost entirely upon the work done in this city at the Rockefeller Institute.” In 1951 Dr. Ralph Scobey, a critic of the Rockefeller rush to judgment on polio contagion, noted, “This of course placed reliance on animal experiments rather than on clinical investigations…” Scobey also pointed to the lack of proof poliomyelitis was contagious: “…children afflicted with the disease were kept in general hospital wards and that not a single one of the other inmates of the wards of the hospital was affected with the disease.” The general attitude at that time was summed up in 1911: “It seems to us despite the lack of absolute proof, that the best interests of the community would be conserved by our regarding the disease from a contagious standpoint.” (sic).
By having poliomyelitis symptoms classified as a highly contagious disease caused by an invisible, alleged exogenous or external virus, the Rockefeller Institute and the AMA were able to cut off any serious research for alternative explanations such as exposure to chemical pesticides or other toxins, to explain the seasonal outbreaks of illness and paralysis, even death, mostly in very young children. That was to have fatal consequences lasting to the present.
Enter DDT
In his 1952 statement to the US House of Representatives investigating the possible dangers of chemicals in food products, Ralph R. Scobey, M.D. noted, “For almost half a century poliomyelitis investigations have been directed towards a supposed exogenous virus that enters the human body to cause the disease. The manner in which the Public Health Law is now stated, imposes only this type of investigation. No intensive studies have been made, on the other hand, to determine whether or not the so-called virus of poliomyelitis is an autochthonous chemical substance that does not enter the human body at all, but simply results from an exogenous factor or factors, for example, a food poison.” Toxins as cause were not investigated, despite huge evidence.
During the 1930s with economic depression and then war, few new major outbreaks of poliomyelitis were noted. However, immediately after the end of World War II, notably, the polio drama exploded in dimension. Beginning 1945, every summer more and more children across America were diagnosed with poliomyelitis and hospitalized. Less than 1% of the cases were actually tested via blood or urine tests. Some 99% were diagnosed by merely the presence of symptoms such as acute pain in extremities, fever, upset stomach, diarrhea.
In 1938, with the support of presumed polio victim, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (March of Dimes) was founded to solicit tax-exempt donations to fund polio research. A German doctor and researcher, Dr Henry Kumm, came to the US and joined the Rockefeller Institute in 1928 where he stayed until joining the National Foundation in 1951 as Director of Polio Research. Kumm was joined at the National Foundation by another key Rockefeller Institute veteran, the so-called “father of virology,” Thomas M. Rivers, who chaired the foundation’s vaccine research advisory committee overseeing the research of Jonas Salk. These two Rockefeller Institute key figures thus controlled funds for polio research including developing a vaccine.
During the Second World War, while still at Rockefeller Institute, Henry Kumm was a consultant to the US Army where he oversaw field studies in Italy. There Kumm directed field studies for the use of DDT against typhus and malarial mosquitoes in the marshes near Rome and Naples. DDT had been patented as an insecticide by Swiss drug firm Geigy and their US branch in 1940, and first authorized for use on US Army soldiers in 1943 as a general disinfectant against head lice, mosquitoes and many other insects. Until war’s end almost all DDT production in the US went to the military. In 1945 the chemical companies looked eagerly for new markets. They found them.
In early 1944, US newspapers triumphantly reported that typhus, “the dreaded plague that has followed in the wake of every great war in history,” was no longer a threat to American troops and their allies thanks to the army’s new “louse-killing” powder, DDT. In an experiment in Naples, American soldiers dusted more than a million Italians with DDT dissolved with kerosene (!), killing the body lice that spread typhus. Rockefeller Institute’s Henry Kumm and the US Army knew that, as one researcher put it, “DDT was a poison, but it was safe enough for war. Any person harmed by DDT would be an accepted casualty of combat.” The US Government “restricted” a report on insecticides issued by the Office of Scientific Research and Development in 1944 that warned against the cumulative toxic effects of DDT in humans and animals. Dr Morris Biskind noted in a 1949 article, “As DDT is a cumulative poison, it is inevitable that large-scale intoxication of the American population would occur. In 1944, Smith and Stohlman of the National Institutes of Health, after an extensive study of the cumulative toxicity of DDT, pointed out, “The toxicity of DDT combined with its cumulative action and absorbability from the skin places a definite health hazard on its use.” Their warnings were ignored by higher officials.
Instead, after 1945, all across America DDT was promoted as the miracle new, “safe” pesticide, much like Monsanto’s Roundup with glyphosate three decades later. DDT was said to be harmless to humans. But no one in government was seriously scientifically testing that claim. One year later in 1945 as the war ended, US newspapers praised the new DDT as a “magic” substance, a “miracle.” Time called DDT “one of the great scientific discoveries of World War II.”
Despite isolated warnings of untested side effects, that it was a persistent, toxic chemical which easily accumulates in the food chain, the US Government approved DDT for general use in 1945. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), controlled by the Rockefeller-AMA-drug interests, established as “safe” a DDT content of up to 7 parts per million in foods, though no one had proven such. The DDT chemical companies fed the press with photos and anecdotes. Newspapers enthusiastically reported how the new miracle chemical, DDT, was being tested in the US against mosquitoes in the South believed carrying malaria, as well as “preserving Arizona vineyards, West Virginia orchards, Oregon potato fields, Illinois cornfields, and Iowa dairies.” DDT was everywhere in the USA in the late 1940s.
The US Government claimed DDT, unlike arsenic and other insecticides used before the war, was harmless to humans, even infants, and could be used liberally. Beginning 1945 cities like Chicago sprayed public beaches, parks, swimming pools. Housewives bought home aerosol spray DDT dispensers to spray the kitchen and especially childrens’ rooms, even their matrasses. Farmers were told to spray their crops and their animals, especially dairy cows, with DDT. In postwar America DDT was being promoted, above all by Rockefeller drug companies like American Home Products with its Black Flag aerosol DDT spray, and Monsanto. From 1945 through 1952 the US production of DDT increased tenfold.
As presumed cases of polio literally exploded across the USA after 1945 the theory was advanced, with no proof, that the crippling polio disease was transmitted, not by toxic pesticide chemicals like DDT, but by mosquitoes or flies to humans, most especially young children or infants. The message was that DDT can safely protect your family from the crippling polio. Officially listed polio cases went from some 25,000 in 1943 before US civilian use of DDT, to over 280,000 cases in 1952 at the peak, more than a tenfold increase.
In October 1945 DDT, which had been used by the US Army under supervision of Rockefeller Institute’s Henry Kumm as noted, was authorized by the US Government for general use as an insecticide against mosquitoes and flies. Dissenting scientists warning of toxic effects of DDT in humans and animals were silenced. Families were told DDT could save their children from the dreaded polio by killing the feared insects.
The US Department of Agriculture advised farmers to wash their dairy cows with a solution of DDT to combat mosquitoes and flies. Cornfields were aerial sprayed with DDT as well as fruit orchards. However it was incredibly persistent and its toxic effect on plants and vegetables were such it could not be washed off. Year-by-year from 1945 through 1952 the amount of DDT sprayed across the US increased. Notably, so too did the number of human cases of poliomyelitis.
Worst Polio Epidemic
By the beginning of the 1950s increasing attention was given in the US Congress and among farmers as to the possible dangers of such heavy pesticide use—not only DDT, but also the even more toxic BHC (benzene hexachloride). In 1951 Morton Biskind, a physician who had successfully treated several hundred patients with DDT poisoning, testified to the US House of Representatives on the possible link of paralytic polio to toxins, specifically DDT and BHC. He noted,
“The introduction for uncontrolled general use by the public of the insecticide “DDT” (chlorophenothane) and the series of even more deadly substances that followed, has no previous counterpart in history. Beyond question, no other substance known to man was ever before developed so rapidly and spread indiscriminately over so large a portion of the earth in so short a time. This is the more surprising as, at the time DDT was released for public use, a large amount of data was already available in the medical literature showing that this agent was extremely toxic for many different species of animals, that it was cumulatively stored in the body fat and that it appeared in the milk. At this time a few cases of DDT poisoning in human beings had also been reported. These observations were almost completely ignored or misinterpreted.”
Biskind further testified to Congress in late 1950, “Early last year I published a series of observations on DDT poisoning in man. Since shortly after the last war a large number of cases had been observed by physicians all over the country in which a group of symptoms occurred, the most prominent feature of which was gastroenteritis, persistently recurrent nervous symptoms, and extreme muscular weakness…” He described several case examples of patients whose severe symptoms including paralysis disappeared when exposure to DDT and related toxins was eliminated: “My original experience on more than 200 cases which I reported early last year has since been considerably extended. My subsequent observations have not only confirmed the view that DDT is responsible for a great deal of otherwise inexplicable human disability…” Also noted was the fact that polio cases were always most in summer months when DDT spraying against insects was maximum.
The Rockefeller Institute operatives and the AMA, via their agents in the US Government, created the 1946-1952 USA health emergency called polio. They did so by knowingly promoting the highly toxic DDT as a safe way to control the mythical insect spreaders of the feared disease. Their propaganda campaign convinced the American population that DDT was the key to stop spread of poliomyelitis.
Polio Suddenly Declines
Under leadership of the two Rockefeller Institute doctors, Henry Kumm and Thomas Rivers, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (NFIP) rejected critics such as Biskind and Scobey. Natural remedial treatment, such as using intravenous Vitamin C for the infantile paralysis, were rejected out of hand as “quackery.” In April 1953, leading Rockefeller Institute DDT consultant, Dr Henry Kumm, became Director of Polio Research for NFIP. He funded the polio vaccine research of Jonas Salk.
One courageous doctor in North Carolina, Dr. Fred R. Klenner, who had also studied chemistry and physiology, had the idea to use large doses of intravenous ascorbic acid—Vitamin C—on the hypothesis that his patients were victims of toxin poisoning and that Vitamin C was a powerful detox. This was well before Dr Linus Pauling’s Nobel Prize research on Vitamin C. Klenner had remarkable success within days for more than 200 patients in the summer epidemics of 1949 to 1951. The Rockefeller Institute and the AMA had no interest in the remedial prospects. They and the Rockefeller-controlled National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis were only funding polio vaccine development, based on the unproven Flexner claim that polio was a contagious virus, not a result of environmental poison.
Then beginning sometime in 1951-1952, as polio cases were at an all-time high, something unexpected began to appear. The number of cases diagnosed as polio in the US began to decline. The decline in polio victims was dramatic, year by year until 1955, well before the National Foundation and Jonas Salk’s polio vaccine was approved for public use and was widespread.
About a year before the sudden decline in polio cases, farmers, whose dairy cows were suffering severe effects of the DDT, were advised by the US Department of Agriculture to reduce DDT use. Rising public concern about how safe DDT was for humans, including publicized US Senate hearings on DDT and Polio in 1951 also led to a significant decline in DDT exposure into 1955, even though DDT was not officially banned in the US until 1972.
So-called “polio” cases fell by some two-thirds in that 1952-1956 time, in a remarkable parallel to the decline in DDT use. It was well after that decline, in late 1955 and 1956, that the Rockefeller-developed Salk polio vaccine was first administered in large populations. Salk and the AMA gave all credit to the vaccine. Deaths and paralysis as a result of the Salk vaccine were papered over. The Government changed the definition of polio to further reduce official cases. Simultaneously, cases of similar polio-like spinal cord nerve diseases– acute flaccid paralysis, chronic fatigue syndrome, encephalitis, meningitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, muscular sclerosis—rose notably.
Why it Matters
Over a century ago the world’s richest man, oil baron John D. Rockefeller, and his circle of advisors set about to completely reorganize how medicine was practiced in the USA and the rest of the world. The role of the Rockefeller Institute and figures like Simon Flexner literally oversaw the invention of a colossal medical fraud around claims that an invisible contagious extraneous germ, the polio virus, caused acute paralysis and even death in young people. They politically banned any efforts to link the disease to toxin poisoning, whether from DDT or arsenic pesticides or even contaminated vaccine poisoning. Their criminal project included intimate cooperation with the leadership of the AMA and control of the emerging drug industry, as well as of medical education. The same Rockefeller group financed Nazi eugenics at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes in Germany in the 1930s as well as the American Eugenics Society. In the 1970s they financed the creation of patented GMO seeds which were all developed by the group of Rockefeller chemical pesticide companies—Monsanto, DuPont, Dow.
Today this control of public health and the medical industrial complex is exercised by David Rockefeller’s protegé and eugenics advocate, Bill Gates, self-appointed czar over the WHO and world vaccines. Dr Tony Fauci, head of NIAID, dictates vaccine mandates without evidence. The fraud behind the polio virus scandal after World War II has been refined with use of computer models and other ruses today, to advance one alleged deadly virus after the other, from Covid19 to Monkeypox to HIV. As with polio, none of those has been scientifically isolated and proven to cause the diseases claimed. None. The same tax-free Rockefeller Foundation today, posing as a philanthropic charity, is at the heart of the global medical tyranny behind covid19 and the eugenics agenda of the World Economic Forum Great Reset. Their poliomyelitis virus model helped them create this dystopian medical tyranny. We are told, “trust the science.”
F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”
Let’s review what we do know about the new COVID gene alteration therapies that really distinguishes them from actual vaccines, shall we?
They don’t prevent you from getting COVID.
They don’t prevent you from spreading COVID.
They don’t limit the severity of COVID if you get infected.
In fact, they don’t do anything that vaccines are supposed to do. This raises aprofound question: what are they really supposed to do?
There happens to be an Israeli professor of history who has profoundly influenced Klaus Schwab and the global cartel of trans-humanist oligarchs — and he’s more than happy to tell you what the vaccines actually do. He’s the leading thinker, the arch-guru, of the Silicon Valley dictator set. His name is Yuval Hariri.
At one globalist conference, he explained exactly what the COVID pandemic was being used by the globalist elites to do: “COVID is critical because this is what convinces people to accept, to legitimize, total biometric surveillance. If we want to stop this epidemic — we need to not just monitor people, we need to monitor what is happening underneath their skin.”
Yuval Hariri has said similar things at many other conferences and lectures as well: “Maybe in a couple of decades, when people look back, the thing they will remember from the COVID crisis, is: this is the moment when everything went digital. This was the moment when everything became monitored — that we agreed to be surveilled all the time. Not just in authoritarian regimes but even in democracies. This was the moment when surveillance went under the skin.”
Do you see? COVID is not the “accidental” release of a bioweapon derived from a Chinese bat coronavirus — it’s actually an opportunity for governments and global corporations to create a total surveillance system around the world that will ultimately control every human being.
What do the COVID vaccines really do? They usher in the Age of Total Surveillance.
Professor Hariri explained this new and terrifying reality (that he wants to usher into the world) to the World Economic Forum in 2018 where our corrupt elites embraced the idea that they would be the immortal masters of the world while they enslaved the rest of us in their new “digital dictatorship.”
Professor Hariri is not alone in his depravity — just check out what DARPA is working on. Needless to say: DARPA (and the Pentagon more broadly) is not really in the healthcare business and couldn’t be less interested in “healing bodies” more effectively. This is simply the cover, the excuse, for the radical intrusion into every sphere of human life which can only be called: totalitarian techno-fascism.
Hariri is not really a humanist either— he doesn’t have any love for humanity. Nor is he really interested in the preservation of democracy. He is the psuedo-prophet of a one world government that would enslave humanity forever using a version of communist China’s social credit system to keep the masses under control.
For instance, Professor Hariri predicts a future where the machines we have created have no more use for humans (because of Artifical Intelligence) and so “by 2050 a new class of people might emerge – the useless class. People who are not just unemployed, but unemployable.” Why would we allow such a future? The premise of the question is not something Hariri explains for obvious reasons. Why would he? He’s on the side of the machines.
Technology is going to turn the Davos crowd into gods, and the working class into peasants to be eliminated as so many “useless eaters.” After all, we humans “should get used to the idea that we are no longer mysterious souls.” We are “hackable animals” so Hariri wants you to get ready to be hacked.
The best way to describe Hariri’s worldview is that he is a nihilist — but nihilism doesn’t really capture how dark and dangerous his thinking happens to be: “As far as we can tell from a purely scientific viewpoint, human life has absolutely no meaning. Humans are the outcome of blind evolutionary processes that operate without goal or purpose. Our actions are not part of some divine cosmic plan, and if planet earth were to blow up tomorrow morning, the universe would probably keep going about its business as usual. As far as we can tell at this point, human subjectivity would not be missed. Hence any meaning that people inscribe to their lives is just a delusion.”
People like Hariri who believe that nothing is real and that everything is permitted are the most dangerous people of all — traditional morality to them is simply a construct that only the weak obey. Hariri’s atheism wants to touch the abyss, and summon the darkness. Even his pessimism is pessimistic. For him, life has no meaning. Free will is an illusion. God does not exist. Religions are transparently absurd attempts to create meaning. Truth is a fiction — only power is real. Humanity is not to be pitied so much as controlled by a superior race of the wealthy and the powerful that (no surprise) enjoy paying exorbitant fees to hear Professor Hariri discuss their future as gods on earth.
Yuval Hariri has only one soft spot, and that’s for animals in our food supply. He’s a vegan apparently: “Domesticated chickens and cattle may well be an evolutionary success story, but they are also among the most miserable creatures that ever lived. The domestication of animals was founded on a series of brutal practices that only became crueller with the passing of the centuries.”
“Let’s enslave humanity, and spare the chickens” is a strange message because chickens and cattle are animals that should be spared in Hariri’s view — but then humans are animals too (Hariri says this again and again) but we don’t deserve any sympathy in the final analysis.
One can’t help but notice the obvious self-hatred contained in these elementary philosophical contradictions that any 5 year old child would notice instantly. Hariri is not a great thinker. He’s not even a sub-par historian. He’s the limp-wristed avatar of a globalist cabal (Bill Gates, Xi Jinping, Klaus Schwab, Larry Fink) that seeks to destroy Western democracies in order to rule behind the scenes like so many Wizards of Oz.
These people are, in other words, the enemies of all humanity.
The Trailblazing Patriot 