An NZDSOS scholar argues that we should consider that long Covid may be due to VAED rather than to Omicron.
The birth of the Omicron variant in November 2021 (if you adhere to viral theory) took place in South Africa. It was considered and reported to be essentially clinically irrelevant: ‘South African Doctor Who Alerted People On Omicron Variant: Nothing To Worry About. Symptoms ‘Unusual But Mild’.
The Gateway Pundit highlighted in its report that South African Dr. Angelique Coetzee told BBC over the weekend that patients infected by the Omicron variant of the COVID-19 virus have “extremely mild symptoms.” Though Coetzee did not disregard the need for more time and study to arrive at the seriousness of Omicron to people who are vulnerable to the virus.
The South African Medical Association debunked the global hysteria that has risen since Friday due to Omicron. Coetzee, who is chairwoman of the South African Medical Association, said in an interview with Sputnik News that those who are infected only require home treatment.
“It presents mild disease with symptoms being sore muscles and tiredness for a day or two not feeling well.”
Reported elsewhere at the start of December 2021, the mild Omicron variant was juxtaposed to the word ‘blessing’. The International Business News headlined, ‘Expert Says Omicron Variant May Be A ‘Blessing’: ‘Get Out Of Pandemic Card’. The article stated, ‘Prof. Tony Blakely of the University of Melbourne, said the new variant could “displace” the highly infectious Delta variant. He noted that Omicron is more transmissible than Delta but is a less severe strain of COVID-19′.
“This one should be more mild, but we don’t know exactly how much more mild it is, so that means that the hospitalization rate should be less severe. This might be a blessing if it displaces Delta. It might become our get out of the pandemic card.”
By February, Bill Gates himself had chimed in with his infamous, immortalised and stunning words,
“Sadly, the virus itself – particularly the variant called Omicron – is a type of vaccine,” said Gates. “That is, it creates both B-cell and T-cell immunity, and it’s done a better job of getting out to the world population than we have with vaccines,”
With these words in mind then, New Zealand was the beneficiary of the mildest Omicron variant and should have breathed a sigh of relief and wondered at the objectives of the last 2 years of lock downs, lost jobs, suicides, masks, anti-social distancing and mandates.
Unwittingly or not, the multiply-jabbed population of New Zealand suddenly found itself to be the experimental arm of a corporate globalist inspired novel intervention. The purpose of this experiment (we are still in) determines an approximate incidence of vaccine associated enhanced disease (VAED). The control group are the uninjected, and if a dose-response relationship exists with VAED, a proportional response is dependent on the number of injections and boosters.
With a larger part of its disease virgin population primed by multiple jabs a potential VAED consequence of the jabs becomes considerably more evident. Further, the absence of confounding by the pre-existing community presence of COVID in a disease virgin population potentially exposes more obviously potential deleterious consequences, sickness and death associated with the Pfizer, novel synthetic mRNA / lipid nanoparticle injections themselves.
The specter of vaccine associated enhanced disease has been discussed in a recent NZDSOS post. I myself referred to it in an NZDSOS post of March 31st, under the subheading, ‘The Unknowable Risk of Vaccine Associated Enhanced Disease’, where I wrote,
‘The absence of a readily made distinction between Delta infection (or Omicron or whatever other variant is said to occur), vaccine associated enhanced disease (VAED), immune anergy or antigenic original sin, all described euphemistically as “break through” cases, is a serious concern in that may promote a spurious justification for further “boosters.”’
‘In the absence of widespread community transmission, it is reasonable to think that a large proportion of the New Zealand population has been primed for the established risk of VAED. In all likelihood, an absence of political willingness to state, recognise and take responsibility for the potential incidence of VAED coupled with a medical inability to identify it, conveniently excludes it as an inherent problem that has an established association with this novel biotechnology. In so doing, a hitherto existing barrier to its continued use is removed’.
‘Pfizer clearly do not recognise it as a problem, even though it is established as such, and quite confidently, neither do the New Zealand Ministry of Health [who denied in an OIA response that there were any cases of VAEDs in NZ].
Despite the inability to recognise it, nevertheless these authors (funded by CEPI) stated for the Brighton Collaboration Vaccine – Associated Enhanced Disease Working Group’:
“No single or combination of specific confirmatory tests is available to diagnose VAED. As the clinical manifestations of VAED lies within the spectrum of natural disease – occurring more frequently and/or severely in vaccinated individuals – it is also difficult to separate vaccine failure (also called breakthrough disease) from VAED in vaccinated individuals.”
I wrote, yet earlier, March 7th, 2022 that
‘The absence of an easily made distinction between vaccine associated enhanced disease (VAED), also described euphemistically as a “breakthrough” case is a serious concern because it may promote a spurious justification for further “boosters,” with New Zealand government having made a Pfizer vaccine purchase commitment of 6 shots per capita.
Further, the absence of confounding by the pre-existing community presence of COVID in a disease virgin population potentially exposes more obviously potential deleterious consequences, sickness and death associated with the Pfizer, novel synthetic mRNA / lipid nanoparticle injections themselves.
Vaccine associated enhanced disease (VAED) is a thing.
It is potentially a big thing with the clinical-lite variant of Omicron in New Zealand. It is therefore reasonable to consider that a large proportion of COVID hospitalization in New Zealand may arise as a direct consequence of VAED.
The NZ government has donated $37 million as an “investor and partner” to the 2017 Davos-founded vaccine developer, the Coalition of Epidemic Preparedness (CEPI) as well as to the Brighton Collaboration (BC). The latter is the safety platform funded by CEPI (no conflict of interest here, or for our own Helen Petoussis-Harris who is one of BC’s scientific advisers). We need to keep in mind the concluding opinions of the consensus group of experts reporting to these groups, who opined two important views:
First, “the demonstration of some disease enhancement with any candidate vaccine after viral challenge in animal models should not necessarily represent a no-go signal for deciding whether to progress into early trials in clinical development of a COVID-19 vaccine”; and second, “Continuous monitoring of this risk during clinical trials in an epidemic context will be needed.”
Given the absence and any acknowledgement of absence of any ability to discern VAED, ie. “No single or combination of specific confirmatory tests is available to diagnose VAED“, quite how the community of global corporate experts propose this ‘continuous monitoring’ should be undertaken remains a mystery. Except that Omicron affected New Zealand has now handed them an answer on a silver platter, or put better, the lid of a coffin. Presumably as they study our hospitalisation rates and injected status with the clinical-lite backdrop of Omicron.
Further, as alluded to earlier, our disease virgin population revealed the deleterious consequences of the novel injections without the confounding of COVID. The observations seen here in NZ are neither a pleasant nor reassuring endorsement of the NZ Ministry of Health and their NZ mainstream media sycophants, who chant the mantra, “safe and effective” as uncritical automatons.
What does the data show regarding temporal relationships between the mass population injection schedule and the dependent variables of injection precipitated death and hospitalisation rates?
The below data table contains the quantitative numerical values for these data. Hospitalisation data and injection status were provided by the NZ MoH subsequent to an OIA in January 2022 and following a complaint to the Ombudsman as a result of the MoH failure to provide the requested data in a timely manner.
The above Data Table is represented graphically below.
The vertical y-axis is without scale to permit the superposition of all variables against the dates of injections, exposing more clearly any temporal relationship.
The total cumulative number of date-known and date-uncertain civil recorded deaths was given as 438 people. Some values were discarded given the level of date uncertainty, leaving a total number of 404 people. It is acknowledged that several limitations may be associated with this data, and while this may be the case the temporal association remains sound. The citizens database is publicly available at NZDSOS.com. This database is likely a manifest under-reporting given that many reasons may exist why a family or loved one of the deceased would not report their loss and its reasonable attribution.
The purpose of the graphic representation is to demonstrate any temporal relationship to the sequence of mass injections given to the NZ population. It is not a reflection of the quantitive magnitude of variables, hence the removal of the vertical y-axis scaling.
First and most obvious is the number of associated deaths occurring immediately after the first injection, which rose with an increasing gradient indicative of the increasing numbers receiving their first injection. It also appears clear that accompanying the first injections of February 2021, the associated deaths rose rapidly and with an increasing rate. By July 2021 the numbers peaked at 55 dead (July month), after which a steep decline was observed.
While a decline continued, the rapid rate of decline was arrested in August 2021 by the introduction of the second Pfizer injection, indicating a second rise in novel injection associated deaths. Keep in mind that NZ ‘cases’ (7 day monthly average) do not escalate in any meaningful manner until February 2022. Also keep in mind that all of the variables were quantifiably small in numerical terms until January 2022, with the exception of injection associated death, which was observed to increase yet a third time, after the instigation of the first booster (third injection) in November 2021 together with the injection mandate, rising to approximate well over 400 unnecessary, preventable departed souls. Meanwhile the community transmission of Omicron still barely registered, thereby reducing any possibility that the association of the injection with death was confounded by the presence of disease.
It is acknowledged here that while the numerical values may appear small, a single unnecessary death for a condition with an 89 – 99.99% chance of recovery (a preponderance residing at 99%+) appears morally, ethically and medically intolerable. This is even before consideration of the concomitant devastating personal, family and community grief, and inevitable adverse economic and social impact. These are magnified by a pathologically stubborn and most irrational denial of any possibility that the Pfizer novel experimental mRNA / lipid nanoparticle injections, with an abysmal record of historical research success were suddenly deemed “safe and effective” within the space of a few short months. A questionable and underpowered clinical trial of 2 months preceded examination of ‘safety’ in which 9 pages listed over a thousand ‘adverse events of interest’ resembling the index of a text book of clinical pathology.
By January 2022, the rates of hospitalisation for the injected in NZ are seen to rise steeply, confirming not only the ineffectiveness of the injections in preventing the severity of disease but indicating the potential infliction of a substantial hospitalised amplification of a clinical-lite condition, in other words, VAED. It matters little whether single, double or triple injected, the collective number hospitalised compared to the uninjected is well over double and increasing daily right now. Those double and triple injected fare considerably worse. As anticipated, a clear association between injection and death declines as clinical disease necessitating hospitalisation (VAED) supervenes and ‘long-COVID’ is born, another injection related injury.
One caveat established from early studies is that the individual response (immunological, reactogenic and systemic adverse event) to the mRNA lipid nanoparticle Pfizer cocktail was unpredictable. So just to be clear, this is an imposed game of State sponsored Russian roulette at the end of a needled barrel of Pfizer juice. You hit the jackpot by simply remaining alive and well, able to easily and quickly bounce off the ropes after being tapped by the flea-weight variant.
Those who took the shot(s) may wind up wearing immunological lead boots and gloves, sustaining suppressed innate immunity through an interferon 1-α damaged signaling pathway leading to reactivation of latent viral infections and the reduced ability to effectively combat future infections. In addition, their body’s ability to prevent and detect cancer transformation within cells with a consequent potential for vaccination to promote those transformations becomes a potential new reality. Finally, the mRNA vaccination potentially disrupts intracellular communication, inducing cells taking up spike mRNA to produce high levels of spike protein, with potentially serious inflammatory consequences. This may occur within organs, for example, the liver: hepatitis; nerves: neuritis and aberrant transmission, aberrant neurological sequelae; brain: seizures, tremor, loss of motor control and integration, difficulties with speech, disordered bodily sensation and perception. There is a long list. Just ask Pfizer.
There are doubtless many reasons for individual unpredictability. Individual mRNA epigenetics about which almost nothing is known, the degree with which the injection was vascularised becoming a systemic inoculation instead of remaining intramuscular (an absence of the rigorous practice of injection draw-back technique); and an individual’s ability to withstand the marked inflammatory provocation afforded by the lipid nanoparticles; and finally, their ability to clear these toxic components from their systems are a few of the many reasons. In cases where S1 spike protein persists for months after injection with manifest inflammation and pathology, it seems clear that what was hitherto confidently declared impossible, namely that the synthetic mRNA could undergo reverse transcription and become incorporated into some cellular DNA, has in fact taken place.
The manifest resistance in exploring all of these disastrous and culpable issues, while at the same time hearing a continuation of the same WHO corporate globalist jabba jabba mantra, this time for ‘monkey-pox’, is surely a monstrous red flag to any sane and thinking individual?
Conclusion ~ In NZ there exists a clear safety signal and it is reasonable to suggest that it is being ignored. It should not be ignored. It must not be ignored. It cannot be ignored. Injection of the Pfizer novel synthetic mRNA / lipid nanoparticle conglomerate and its ‘boosters’ should cease immediately. A Royal Commission and even perhaps a novel Citizens Commission should be convened to review the travesty of ethics, science and medicine that appears to have occurred.
It seems abundantly clear from these data that a ‘safety signal’ exists, one that is clearly manifest in the recurring temporal relationship between receiving the injection and death, and the incidence of hospitalisation in the absence of significant community transmission and the presence of the variant with the lightest clinical touch. This is an intolerable and unforgivable situation, arguably highlighting the consequences of the politicisation of medicine, science and medical bureaucracy together with their respective institutions, colleges and universities. It appears to extend even to the law, with the condoned and intentional change of the established Medicines Act to expand the limited use of an experimental Emergency Use Authorisation (its equivalent NZ motion) into a monstrous ad hoc public health experiment, devoid of formal scientific control group.
Expanding a novel experimental injection of synthetic mRNA into a routine State and institutionally sanctioned public health medical intervention while simultaneously retaining the scientific rigour of a scientific experiment when evaluating post hoc safety signals and adverse events is a bizarre double standard. It amounts to the suppression of adverse events while maximizing public uptake of the injection under an illusion of routine practice. It is the legal balance of evidence that would be more appropriately applied to usual clinical practice, not the scientific rigour of a running experiment.
This double standard demonstrates that the authorities not only consider the injection an enforced global experiment, it also signals the installation of an intentionally severe systematic under-reporting bias. Couple this to a relentless media message of “safe,” and an obvious absence of any planned cessation of the delivery of novel injections, noting that CEPI has funded Clover BioPharmaceuticals to schedule 15 billion novel trimeric injections by 2026, this will not stop until we physically arrest the people, the processes and their institutions.
Furthermore, it is reasonable to conclude that VAED is a condition afflicting a significant number of people in NZ, and a number that continues to grow by the day. It is also contended that so called, ‘long COVID’ is a manifestation of VAED and an injection injury. Labelling it as a generic corollary of post-viral myalgic encephalomyelitis, Royal Free Disease, chronic fatigue, or post viral fatigue syndrome is at best obfuscation and at worst, outright deflection.
Finally, people will come to look back upon this political and medical debacle and consider whether they were conned, coerced or just cancelled. They may wonder in their anger and sadness how a dystopian single source of truth and an apparently endless stream of that unique brand of Cindy cindness ever persuaded even one thinking individual let alone the legion of supposed intellectual heavyweights and their virtue signalling institutions.
Conned, Coerced or Cancelled? Take your dose of cindness … or else.