Mainstream Science Mulls ‘Global Moratorium’ on COVID Vaccines as Cancers Rise, Boosters Flub

by Greg Piper

 

Calling for governments to enact a “global moratorium” on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines could have been a death sentence for a scientist’s career not long ago. Now it opens the door to a prestigious science publisher.

The Springer Nature medical journal Cureus, sibling to Nature and Scientific American, published a peer-reviewed paper by high-profile mRNA vaccine critics last month, showing the growing mainstream openness to data and arguments once nitpicked if not ignored by publishers and suppressed by academia and Big Tech.

The feds have struggled to keep interest high in each new formulation of the COVID vaccines, with fewer than 12% of minors, 22% of adults and just 41% of those 65 and up taking the 2023-2024 vaccines, according to the latest weekly National Immunization Survey.

The dam of The Science, which once limited the flow of research questioning the integrity of trial data and wisdom of one-size-fits-all vaccination recommendations to a trickle, now struggles to stop a worldwide deluge as new cracks emerge seemingly every week.

While early reports from the mRNA trials said the novel vaccines “could greatly reduce COVID-19 symptoms,” re-analysis of Pfizer’s trial data “identified statistically significant increases” in serious adverse events (SAEs) in the intervention group, which then became unmistakable after emergency use authorization, the Cureus paper says.

“The risk-benefit imbalance substantiated by the evidence to date contraindicates further booster injections and suggests that, at a minimum, the mRNA injections should be removed from the childhood immunization program until proper safety and toxicological studies are conducted,” the paper also states.

U.S. approval of mRNA vaccines “on a blanket-coverage population-wide basis had no support from an honest assessment of all relevant registrational data and commensurate consideration of risks versus benefits,” the authors wrote.

They include multiple cancelation targets: cardiologist Peter McCullough, MIT senior research scientist Stephanie Seneff, vaccine researcher Jessica Rose, and tech entrepreneur and Vaccine Safety Research Foundation founder Steve Kirsch, a philanthropist once courted by Democratic presidential hopefuls.

The feds were so concerned about one of those SAEs, heart inflammation, that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention drafted an alert about a surprisingly high number of post-vaccination myocarditis reports to send to its Health Alert Network.

HAN is the agency’s “primary method of sharing cleared information about urgent public health incidents with public information officers; federal, state, territorial, tribal, and local public health practitioners; clinicians; and public health laboratories,” it says.

The myocarditis alert was never sent, however, apparently out of fear of spooking the public, according to The Epoch Times, which posted a 1,433-page batch of heavily redacted emails it obtained. It said the two-page draft alert was completely redacted.

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., told the Times the refusal to send the alert was “not only inexcusable, it’s malpractice.”

The ranking Republican on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee’s investigations subcommittee has long pressed the feds to release their COVID vaccine safety data.

Sara Oliver, an officer in the CDC’s Epidemic Intelligence Service, had been keeping Pfizer and Moderna updated for several days in late May 2021 on internal discussions about “communication options” for telling the public about the SAE, which she said targeted “adolescents and young adults.”

“The pros and cons of an official HAN are what the main discussion are right now,” she told an unidentified employee of one of the vaccine makers May 25. “I think it’s likely to be a HAN since that is CDC’s primary method of communications to clinicians and public health departments, but people don’t want to appear alarmist either.”

The CDC told Moderna on May 22, 2021, the agency was mulling whether to cite a “possible causal relationship” – that its vaccine can cause heart inflammation.

The alert was canceled after the FDA weighed in, according to the Times. And the CDC instead posted a “clinical considerations” page that said myocarditis patients seeking medical care in “most cases […] have responded well to medications and rest and had prompt improvement of symptoms.”

The FDA added its own myocarditis warnings to the mRNA vaccines a month later.

Cancer doctors in the U.K. and Australia are flummoxed by a rise in relapses as well as new cancer cases among those under 50, according to oncology professor Angus Dalgleish of St George’s Hospital Medical School in London, known for his pioneering HIV work.

The American Cancer Society said last month that U.S. cancer mortality overall had fallen by more than 4 million deaths since 1991, but six of the top 10 cancers are rising, pushing “the projected number of new diagnoses to over 2 million (2,001,140) for the first time.”

Dalgleish said the rise is happening in his melanoma clinic apart from typical related factors such as “severe depression due to bereavement, divorce or bankruptcy.” His colleagues are “very concerned about a sudden big increase in young patients with colorectal cancer,” the former U.K. Independence Party candidate wrote in the U.K. publication The Conservative Woman last week.

The only commonality among patients is a recent COVID booster, Dalgleish said, warning of a “covid booster cancer time bomb.”

He theorized vaccines could imperil cancer patients because of reports that “T cell responses are suppressed after the boosters” as well as the so-called IgG4 class switch observed to follow repeat jabs, when the body shifts to noninflammatory antibodies that moderate rather than neutralize infections.

“As many cancers are controlled by effective T cell led immunity, the sudden perturbation of this control would clearly explain the development of B cell leukaemia and lymphomas, melanoma renal cell cancers and colorectal ones, all tumors which can respond to immunotherapy,” Dalgleish wrote.

Yet more research has confirmed the IgG4 class switch, previously observed by German and Dutch research terms.

While claiming without evidence that COVID vaccines are “effective prophylactic measures for reducing virus transmission rates,” the Louisiana State University researchers found that “spike-specific IgG4 levels” in uninfected Pfizer recipients were “markedly elevated” after the booster but not the two-dose series.

The 16 healthy participants were monitored over 420 days for evidence of natural infection – antibody responses to the nucleocapsid protein – to ensure the measured response came from the jabs alone, the authors wrote in the journal Vaccines, published by Swiss open-access publisher MDPI.

“Although strong neutralization responses were detected in two- and three-dose vaccine sera [blood], these rapidly decayed to pre-immune levels by four and six months, respectively,” they said.

“Our data reflect the poor durability of vaccine-induced nAb [neutralizing antibody] responses” that strongly predict protection against symptomatic infection, the paper says. “The induction of IgG4-switched humoral responses may permit extended viral persistence” — failure to clear infections.

– – –

Greg Piper has covered law and policy for nearly two decades, with a focus on tech companies, civil liberties and higher education.

 

 

 

 

---

---