Thursday, June 4, 2026

Conspiracy Resource

Conspiracy news & views from all angles, up-to-the-minute and uncensored

vaers

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
https://vaers.hhs.gov

COVID-19

Scientists acknowledge COVID vaccines and containment protocols may have boosted excess mortality

Dutch researchers indicated in a new peer-reviewed study that COVID-19 vaccines and governmental containment policies may have boosted excess mortality in the West.

The study, published Monday in the peer-reviewed journal
BMJ Public Health, explored excess all-cause deaths in 47 Western countries from 2020 to 2022. It indicated that during this period, there were 3,098,456 excess deaths: 87% of the countries under review suffered excess mortality in 2020; 89% in 2021; and 91% in 2022.

The researchers made clear that excess mortality “includes not only deaths from SARS-CoV-2 infection but also deaths related to the indirect effects of the health strategies to address the virus spread and infection.”

What caught the researchers’ attention was not only the persistence of high excess mortality following the pandemic but that “the highest number of excess deaths [1,256,942] was recorded” in 2021 — the year containment measures were coupled with experimental vaccination.

In 2020, when Western citizens largely only had to contend with the virus, government-limited mobility rights and shuttered schools, churches, workplaces, restaurants, and parks, there were 1,033,122 excess deaths.

In 2022, when most containment protocols had been lifted and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines was in fast decline, researchers indicated there were 808,392 excess deaths.

‘This is unprecedented and raises serious concerns.’

These massive figures reflect the difference in the number of reported deaths in a country in a given year and the expected number of deaths under normal conditions. For a baseline, the Dutch researchers used Ariel Karlinsky and Dmitry Kobak’s linear regression estimate model, which draws on “historical death data in a country from 2015 until 2019 and accounts for seasonal variation in mortality and year-to-year trends due to changing population structure or socioeconomic factors.”

“Excess mortality has remained high in the Western World for three consecutive years, despite the implementation of COVID-19 containment measures and COVID-19 vaccines,” wrote the researchers. “This is unprecedented and raises serious concerns.”

“During the pandemic, it was emphasized by politicians and the media on a daily basis that every COVID-19 death mattered and every life deserved protection through containment measures and COVID-19 vaccines,” continued the researchers. “In the aftermath of the pandemic, the same morale should apply.”

The Dutch researchers noted at the outset of their study that while experimental COVID-19 vaccines and draconian containment measures may have been effective in protecting segments of the population — particularly those with comorbidities and the elderly — they nevertheless had “detrimental effects that cause inferior outcomes as well.”

“Although COVID-19 vaccines were provided to guard civilians from suffering morbidity and mortality by the COVID-19 virus, suspected adverse events have been documented as well,” wrote the researchers.

The secondary analysis of the placebo-controlled, phase III randomized clinical trials of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines showed that the Pfizer trial had a 36% higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group. The risk difference was 18.0 per 10000 vaccinated (95% CI 1.2 to 34.9), and the risk ratio was 1.36 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.83). The Moderna trial had a 6% higher risk of serious adverse events among vaccine recipients. The risk difference was 7.1 per 10,000 vaccinated (95% CI −23.2 to 37.4), and the risk ratio was 1.06 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.33).39. By definition, these serious adverse events lead to either death, are life-threatening, require inpatient (prolongation of) hospitalization, cause persistent/significant disability/incapacity, concern a congenital anomaly/birth defect or include a medically important event according to medical judgement.

Previous comparisons of established flu vaccines to the novel mRNA vaccines — which the Dutch researchers indicated have been classed in multiple French studies as “gene therapy products requiring long-term stringent adverse events monitoring” — have revealed the latter to carry a far higher risk of serious adverse reactions.

‘Both medical professionals and citizens have reported serious injuries and deaths following vaccination.’

COVID-19 vaccines have also been linked to various ailments, including heart disease, blood clots, hemorrhages, gut issues, thromboses, myocarditis, pericarditis, and autoimmune diseases. A number of these linkages have been well-demonstrated and even admitted by pharmaceutical giants,
as in the case of AstraZeneca.

The Dutch researchers indicated that some of the risks these experimental vaccines carry were realized overtime outside of clinical trials: “Both medical professionals and citizens have reported serious injuries and deaths following vaccination to various official databases in the Western World, such as VAERS in the USA, EudraVigilance in the European Union and Yellow Card Scheme in the UK.”

The researchers framed the dangers posed by the vaccines as even more troubling given the understanding that the threat posed by the virus was overblown.

The pre-vaccination infection fatality rate for persons over 60 was reportedly 0.03% and the rate was 0.07% for those over 70. It posed virtually no threat to people ages 19 and younger, who alternatively faced an infection fatality rate of 0.0003%.

Gordon Wishart, chief medical officer at Check4Cancer,
told the Telegraph, “The authors are correct to point out that many vaccine-related serious adverse events may have been unreported, and point to the fact that the simultaneous onset of excess mortality and Covid vaccination in Germany is worthy of further investigation on its own.”

Just as the vaccines were nowhere near as “safe and effective” as promised, the supposed health safety protocols appear to have had an inverse effect.

The study acknowledged that it is challenging to differentiate between the various causes of excess mortality, particularly because national mortality registries “not only vary in quality and thoroughness but may also not accurately document the cause of death,” and there was a lack of consensus in the medical community on whether to label deaths of persons infected with COVID-19 but not caused by the disease as COVID-19 fatalities.

However, they appeared confident enough to assert that “indirect effects of containment measures have likely altered the scale and nature of disease burden for numerous causes of death since the pandemic,” citing a study that indicated there was a “substantial increase” in American deaths attributed to non-COVID causes in the first two years of the pandemic.

American heart disease deaths were apparently 6% above baseline in 2020 and 2021. Diabetes deaths were 17% over baseline in 2020 and 13% over in 2021. Alzheimers disease mortality was up 19% in 2020 and 15% in 2021. Alcohol-related deaths were 28% over baseline in 2020 and up 33% in 2021. Drug-related deaths were 33% over baseline in 2020 and up 54% in 2022.

The study noted that “lockdowns, school closures, physical distancing, travel restructions, business closures, stay-at-home orders, curfews, and quarantine measures with contract tracing” had numerous adverse indirect effects such as “economic damage, limited access to education, food insecurity, child abuse, limited access to healthcare, disrupted health programmes and mental health challenges” that increased morbidity and mortality from other causes.

The researchers concluded by recommending policymakers and government officials to “thoroughly investigate underlying causes of persistent excess mortality and evaluate their health crisis policies.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More
COVID-19

Tidal Waves Don’t Discriminate

Guest Post by Lori Weintz From a Russell Brand video posted May 28, 2024: Quote from former CDC Director Robert Redfield: “[The Covid vaccines] really aren’t that critical for those that are under 50 or younger, but those vaccines saved a lot of lives…To be honest, some people got significant side effects from the vaccine. I … Continue reading “Tidal Waves Don’t Discriminate”

Read More
COVID-19

Google AI just estimated that as many as 1.1M Americans may have been killed by the COVID vaccines

Guest Post by Steve Kirsch The 8% rate of serious injury from the COVID vaccine in the official CDC V-safe data was confirmed in an independent polls of Americans. Extrapolating from that, you can estimate a mortality rate. Executive summary The 8% rate of serious side effects from the COVID vaccines can be used to … Continue reading “Google AI just estimated that as many as 1.1M Americans may have been killed by the COVID vaccines”

Read More
COVID-19

Warning: Pfizer wants to do for cancer what it did for COVID

Last year, Steve Deace and I wrote a book amassing the evidence for 21st-century Nuremberg trials of public officials who willingly promoted and mandated deadly biological products during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our case was strong even with what we knew at the time. The evidence that has come out since then makes that level of calamitous death and injury seem insignificant by comparison.

What if the deaths and injuries in the months immediately following the arrival of the COVID shots were just the opening act? A consensus has emerged that we’re in the midst of a cancer crisis. Pfizer itself is acknowledging it and seeks to capitalize on a cancer bomb for which the company may very well be partially responsible.

Until we start holding Republicans and Democrats bought out by special interests accountable, the arsonists will always be there to fight the new fire they started.

Aaron Hertzberg of TrialSite News has collected 36 case reports showing a potential correlation between an individual’s cancer diagnosis and being injected with one of the COVID shots. It’s hard to dismiss casualty in these cases because we now have a wealth of macro-epidemiological data that show an unmistakable link between a once-in-a-lifetime explosion of cancer and introduction of the vaccines.

Scientists in a host of publications have already identified multiple pathologies of how the vaccines either cause cancer or inhibit the body’s anti-tumor surveillance that protects us from cancer. In fact, the smoking gun is so obvious — but so taboo to acknowledge — that authors of one study published last month in the International Journal of Biological Macromolecules had to add a laughable caveat: “It is important to clarify here that mRNA vaccines do not cause cancer; but they could stimulate its development.”

From day one, Pfizer told us that genotoxicity and carcinogenicity studies of its mRNA shots were “not considered necessary.” Despite the tsunami of adverse events affecting every corner of the body and the revelation that the shots were contaminated with plasmid DNA and potentially access the nucleus of cells, they still have not done any such studies.

Now, we have the 2024 American Cancer Society report warning that colorectal cancer is the top cancer killer for men under 55. Doctors are reporting that colorectal tumors are more aggressive and more difficult to treat. As Dr. Pierre Kory noted, “Compared to pre-pandemic 2019, cancer deaths in 2023 rose strikingly in 15-to-44-year-olds: Uterine cancer, up 37%; colorectal, up 17%; liver, up 8%, and — suggestive of quickly growing disease — “unspecified” metastatic cancer, up 14%.”

Why would there be an explosion of sudden uncontrolled and untreatable cancers? We have a gene in our body known as P53 that helps block cancers and certainly keeps them at bay. Well, we now know that shots contain SV40, a cancer promoting protein, that binds directly to the P53 gene.

Between the SV40, uncontrolled spike proteins, modified nucleotides, and DNA contamination, scientists have identified multiple smoking guns that would explain the surge in aggressive cancers that is impossible to assign to chance.

Shockingly, Pfizer chairman and CEO Albert Bourla was invited on Fox Business a few weeks ago to brag that cancer is “our new COVID” and how the company plans to do to cancer what it did to COVID.

Well, aside from the shot causing an endless litany of death, disability, and injury, what exactly did Pfizer do to COVID? It turbo charged it — just like it appears to be doing with cancer!

Thanks to the work of Wouter Aukema in the Netherlands, as reported by British investigative journalist Sonia Elijah, we now have access to millions of adverse effect case reports in EudraVigilance, the European equivalent of VAERS. COVID-19 itself was listed as the most common side effect of the vaccines. This jives with numerous studies we reported on beginning in 2021 and 2022 showing that the more you inject, the more you infect.

The COVID shots seem to weaken the immune system and prime the system for more spike protein by using suboptimal antibody that creates evolutionary effects on the virus leading to what is known as “pathogenic priming” and “original antigenic sin.”

Several weeks ago, researchers at the Cleveland Clinic found that after monitoring 47,500 of its employees during the first part of 2024, there was a 46% greater risk of the vaccinated contracting COVID than the unvaccinated. They found “the more you inject, the more you infect” phenomenon playing out in the real world, as the risk increased with each successive dose. Those with three doses were 95% more likely to get infected than people who declined the shot. People with more than three doses were a whopping 151% more likely to get infected.

The authors concede this is one of many studies that show the same result, but, without evidence, they claim the shots still provide some short-term benefits even it if is undone in the long-term.

So, not only did the shots kill and main countless human beings, but they also perpetuated COVID to this day.

Yet, not only has the government declined to take the shots off the market and hold Pfizer accountable, the FDA is also greenlighting the company’s new, dangerous RSV shots and cancer treatments. Not a single drug regulator will even look at the cancer signals from the COVID shots as they approve Pfizer’s new RSV shots. The British Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency even admitted to Sonia Elijah las year that “there are currently no intentions to test the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine for the presence of fragmented DNA and SV40 enhancer.”

There is a reason why Biden has obsessed with cancer during his past two State of the Union addresses and why Bourla is bragging about cancer treatments replicating his “success” with COVID. Until we start holding Republicans and Democrats bought out by special interests accountable, the arsonists will always be there to fight the new fire they started.

Read More
COVID-19

Ex-CDC Director Says It’s High Time to Admit “Significant Side Effects” of Covid-19 “Vaccines”

(The Epoch Times)—Dr. Robert Redfield, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), said Thursday that many officials who tried to warn the public about potential problems with COVID-19 vaccines were pressured into silence and that it’s high time to admit that there were “significant” side effects that made people sick. Dr. […]

The post Ex-CDC Director Says It’s High Time to Admit “Significant Side Effects” of Covid-19 “Vaccines” appeared first on based underground.

Read More
COVID-19

Utah mom left ‘disabled’ after COVID-19 vaccine trial launches first US lawsuit against AstraZeneca

Prior to the pandemic,
Brianne Dressen of Salt Lake City was living the active life she always wanted. She went rock climbing with her husband, a chemist for the U.S. Army; ferried her two children to and from soccer games and piano practices; and taught preschool.

Everything came to a screeching halt in November 2020 — not as a result of the union-driven school closures, the lockdowns, or the outcome of the election, but with her participation in an AstraZeneca vaccine trial.

“I walked into the clinic fine, and walked out the beginning of a nightmare I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy.”

The experimental vaccine allegedly left the 42-year-old Utah mother with a debilitating injury.

Dressen cannot bring a product liability action against the company on account of the
federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act. She can, however, possibly ding the British-Swedish pharmaceutical giant for breach of contract, which is exactly what she aims to do.

Dressen filed a
lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah Monday alleging that she developed a debilitating neurological condition as a result of the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine and that the British-Swedish pharmaceutical giant failed to cover the cost of her medical care as promised.

When presented with Dressen’s complaint, Daniel Horowitz, the host of “Conservative Review with Daniel Horowitz” on the Blaze Podcast Network and author of “Rise of the Fourth Reich: Confronting COVID Fascism with a New Nuremberg Trial So This Never Happens Again,” told Blaze News, “It is shocking how we now have thousands of academic and case studies of injuries affecting every organ system, yet victims remain alone with little legal recourse for compensation.”

“We have VAERS, V-Safe, documents from the vaccine manufacturers, and European Medicines Agency reporting, all showing catastrophic levels of injury, yet there is no critical mass of a political movement in any country at this point to repeal unbridled indemnity of these criminal enterprises,” continued Horowitz. “It’s also peculiar how AstraZeneca was taken off the market, but the mRNA shots, which are even worse, remain funded and promoted by government.”

Background

The Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was a viral-vector vaccine developed in collaboration with Oxford University and produced for various companies by the
Serum Institute of India.

While 32,000 Americans like Dressen participated in vaccine trials in the homeland and the Biden administration agreed to share up to 60 million doses with other nations, the AstraZeneca vaccine was never rolled out in the United States. It was, however, administered billions of times worldwide.

It quickly became clear that the vaccine was not as “safe and effective” as health authorities throughout the Anglosphere had guaranteed. After all, there were numerous reports of otherwise healthy recipients experiencing abnormal bleeding, low blood platelets, blood clots, and even dying.

German and Nordic researchers
determined that some recipients were developing a clotting disorder called “vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia,” which produced antibodies that activated platelets and led to clots.

Despite a growing number of likely victims, AstraZeneca
suggested there was “no evidence of an increased risk of pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or thrombocytopenia, in any defined age group, gender, batch or in any particular country.”

The company’s claims have aged like milk.

Last year, Jamie Scott, a father of two left with a permanent clot-related brain injury, filed suit against the company. His complaint was followed by dozens more and ultimately a class-action lawsuit.

Several months after Scott sued AstraZeneca, the company admitted in a February court document that “it is admitted that the AZ vaccine can, in very rare cases, cause [thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome]. The causal mechanism is not known.”

The following month, the company withdrew its “marketing authorization” in the European Union. That application went into effect last week. The Telegraph
reported that AstraZeneca is expected to remove the vaccine from all other markets where it was approved.

‘Hollowed out’

Dressen’s
lawsuit, reportedly the first to be launched stateside against AstraZeneca, claims the company offered various written promises to participants in its vaccine trial, including financial reimbursement for each completed visit to the test clinic for various procedures; financial reimbursement for each completed phone call linked to the study; and compensation for study-related injuries.

“At the moment the substance entered Bri’s blood, a solemn contract had been formed.”

“Defendants defined ‘research injuries’ as ‘[i]njuries that have been caused by the vaccine, tests or procedures,'” said the lawsuit. “Defendants promised that ‘Sponsor will pay the costs of medical treatment for research injuries, provided that the costs are reasonable, and you did not cause the injury yourself.'”

“At the moment the substance entered Bri’s blood, a solemn contract had been formed,” said the complaint. “Her performance was complete and Defendants’ promises were irrevocable.”

When things went south, the lawsuit claims the company effectively left Dressen hanging.

“I was a completely hollowed out version of who I once was.”

Within an hour of receiving the shot, Dressen claims she experienced tingling in her arm. The paraesthesia apparently was not temporary or localized. It soon spread to her other arm.

“That evening other progressively worrying symptoms emerged: blurred vision, double vision, headache, sound sensitivity, a loud ringing in the ears (tinnitus), nausea, vomiting, fever, and chills,” said the lawsuit.

In the weeks that followed, a prickling sensation reportedly spread to Dressen’s legs. She indicated she lost 20 pounds from constant vomiting while this and her other symptoms worsened.

“I walked in to the clinic fine, and walked out the beginning of a nightmare I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy,” recalled Dressen. “My little girl’s voice was too painful for my ears. My little boy’s hand was too painful for touch. There was no break, no reprieve, no escape. No answers, no help, only questions, and fear of what was overtaking my body more and more each day as new symptoms piled on.”

“I was a completely hollowed out version of who I once was,” added Dressen.

In June 2021, a team of neurologists from the National Institute of Health reportedly diagnosed Dressen as having “Post Vaccine Neuropathy.”

According to the lawsuit, Dressen is still “disabled” three years later; “a shadow of her former self: unable to work, unable to do any athletic activity, unable to parent the way she had, and unable to drive more than a few blocks at a time.”

Dressen
told the Telegraph that the worse part is that her children, now aged nine and 11, can’t remember the kind of person their mother was before the injury.

“It really sucks. The worse part, the biggest punishment of all of this, is the impact on my kids,” said Dressen.

Painful and costly

Dressen’s lawsuit claims that AstraZeneca ignored multiple requests for support until finally coughing up a meager $1,243.30, “a minuscule fraction of the medical bills and lost wages, among other financial costs, that Bri had incurred and will continue to incur.”

After all, Dressen’s biweekly medication supposedly ran her $3,500 per session. One of her current medications would cost her over $430,000 a year. With the help of insurance, she is presently paying roughly $119,000.

“The way we have been and continue to be treated is simply appalling.”

In order to access the $1,243.30, Dressen would have to release AstraZeneca of further responsibility for her care.

“The way we have been and continue to be treated is simply appalling,” Brian Dressen, the plaintiff’s husband, is quoted as saying in the complaint.

The Telegraph reported that Utah law enables complainants who sue for breach of contract to claim for damages and costs resulting from the alleged breach. While Dressen is not suing for a specific amount, she could possibly have AstraZeneca on the hook, not only for her legal and medical bills, but for additional damages — including for lost income and emotional distress.

A spokeswoman for the company told the Telegraph that AstraZeneca would not comment on ongoing litigation. She did, however, say, “Patient safety is our highest priority. From the body of evidence in clinical trials and real-world data, the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine has continuously been shown to have an acceptable safety profile and regulators around the world consistently state that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of extremely rare potential side effects.”





Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More