Sin: More Deadly Than Any Virus's False "Antidotes"

Although At the "Mercy" of the Merciless, part one, At the "Mercy" of the Merciless, part two, and At the "Mercy" of the Merciless, part three could have been entitled as parts of “Sin: More Deadly Than the Coronavirus” series, I decided that I should retire that venerable title, which dates back to March of 2020, as the focus has shifted in recent years to the false “antidotes” that were developed under former President Donald John Trump’s warped “Operation Warp Speed” and the genocidal toll they have wrought human health and morality.

To wit, although the Trump poisoned jabs that he continues to insist as part of his delusional world in which “Trump never makes mistakes” have “saved” millions of lives have, quite in fact, killed millions of people of all ages around the world, we have witnessed the incredible phenomenon of the rash of the “sudden deaths” of teenagers and young adults that has never occurred before in the history of the world.

As I noted in a recent conversation with Dr. Paul Byrne, who is eighteen years my senior, there was no such phenomenon of young, highly conditioned athletes dropping dead on practice fields or fields of play during athletic contests as has been happening regularly since the deployment of the genocidal, poisoned jabs three years ago this month. Look, as one who has a student manager (the one in charge of equipment and statistics) of high school varsity and junior varsity baseball, basketball, and football teams, the only players I ever saw carted away and taken to a hospital were those in football games who suffered fractures of various kinds.

My contemporaries, who are all now between the ages of seventy-five and seventy-two years of age, never dropped dead during practice or during games. No one, other than the few instances of students who were taking illegal drugs or involved in car accidents, died “suddenly” between 1965 and 1969 at Oyster Bay High School on Long Island. The sort of sudden deaths” that have occurred in the past three years since the warped “Operation Warp Speed” introduced its various morally tainted poisons into the arms of unsuspecting victims who had been promised immunity from the SARS-CoV-2 virus simply did not occur fifty-eight years ago, and it was only after seventy-five people died from the swine flu virus vaccine in 1976 that the vaccination campaign was shut down. Now, however, the Pharmaceutical and Medical Industrial Complex, aided and abetted upon their propaganda arms in the mainslime media. which is very dependent upon the pharmaceutical companies for advertising dollars, covers up the deaths caused by the Wuhan Virus vaccines and report the sudden deaths of athletes and entertainers without the slightest bit of journalistic curiosity as to a possible connection with the bioengineered vaccines that were designed to accomplish some of the transhumanist goals of the globalist “reset” to protect the environment from God’s rational creatures who have been given dominion by Him over it.

For example, author John Leake, who works with Dr. Peter A. McCullough to expose the facts concerning the Wuhan Virus’s origins, the adverse effects of the vaccines, and the efforts of what they call the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex to cover-up those facts, called out the typical intellectual dishonesty of The New York Times concerning their downplaying the undeniable linkage between the Wuhan Virus vaccines and the death of one young man while claiming that there have been only a little over two hundred such deaths when the truth is that there have been millions in the past three years:

Yesterday [December 13, 2023] the New York Times published a long and detailed report on the death of a 24-year-old man shortly after receiving his second COVID-19 vaccine. To quote the most relevant section:

Shortly after receiving his second dose, on Sept. 17, George Jr. started feeling pain in his heels, according to medical records and his father’s account. By early October, his fingers started going numb, and he had difficulty holding onto objects.

By mid-October, his father was so concerned that he drove him to the emergency room. Among other things, George Jr. had the markers of an upper respiratory infection: sinus congestion, a sore throat and a cough. An X-ray showed no abnormalities or fluid in his lungs, according to a summary of the visit from the coroner’s report. He said he didn’t have chest pain or shortness of breath, according to the coroner’s investigation, two common symptoms among myocarditis patients Doctors diagnosed him with a sinus infection and bronchitis and prescribed antibiotics. He also started taking NyQuil.

A week later, George Jr. was rushed back to the emergency room after coughing so much that he started vomiting. Doctors found no obvious lung problems, his heart wasn’t enlarged, and there were no signs of cardiac issues, according to the coroner’s report.

If there were clear signs of myocarditis, doctors would most likely have monitored George Jr. and prescribed drugs, like blood pressure medications, beta blockers or corticosteroids.

Eight days after his emergency room visit, George Jr. collapsed and died. His body was transported 40 minutes east, to Binghamton, for an autopsy at Lourdes Hospital.

The medical examiner at Lourdes found that the heart muscle, the myocardium, was losing some of its strength and sagging. Parts of the heart, when examined under a microscope, were inflamed. Both are clues that point toward myocarditis.

While the reporter frankly acknowledges that myocarditis was indeed “a known risk,” from the shots, he hastens to add:

the overall numbers are small — there were 224 verified cases of myocarditis among vaccinated children and young adults in the United States from late 2020 to mid-2022, out of the nearly seven million vaccine doses that were administered, according to one study.

The piece is a perfect example of reporting an incident while at the same time falsely minimizing its significance for the broader community. This propaganda technique conveys the impression that the issue is being addressed instead of concealed while at the same time concealing the true scope of the problem.

At no point in the report does the author consider any of the following questions:

1). Are cases of vaccine-induced myocarditis being overlooked, ignored, and misdiagnosed?

2). Are treating physicians making a diligent effort to LOOK for myocarditis in patients such as the subject of this report?

3). Are all unexpected deaths like the subject of this report being thoroughly investigated by Medical Examiners?

In its reporting about COVID-19 vaccine injuries and deaths, the New York Times should consider a notable historical precedent in recent American history—namely, the decades-long denial of the link between cigarette smoking and cancer by the tobacco industry and its hired gun medical experts. (NYT's Mendacious Reporting of VAX Death.)

The efforts to cover-up the truth while labeling those who are bringing the truth to public light as disseminators of “misinformation” is vast and seemingly without cease, although one commentary, published on The Hill website, did go where most other commentaries have failed to go, that is, to at least discuss the possibility of the linkage between the Wuhan Virus vaccines and the rise in mortality that has lowered life expectancies among all age groups:

Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Robert Califf recently took to X to mourn the “catastrophic” decline in U.S. life expectancy. 

But his post, which hit on smoking, diet, chronic illness and health care, ignored the obvious: People are dying in abnormally high numbers even now and long since COVID-19 waned. Yet public health agencies and medical societies are silent. 

Life insurers have been consistently sounding the alarm over these unexpected or, “excess,” deaths, which claimed 158,000 more Americans in the first nine months of 2023 than in the same period in 2019. That exceeds America’s combined losses from every war since Vietnam. Congress should urgently work with insurance experts to investigate this troubling trend. 

With the worst of COVID behind us, annual deaths for all causes should be back to pre-pandemic levels — or even lower because of the loss of so many sick and infirm Americans. Instead, the death toll remains “alarming,” “disturbing,” and deserving of “urgent attention,” according to insurance industry articles.

Actuarial reports — used by insurers to inform decisions — show deaths occurring disproportionately among young working-age people. Nonetheless, America’s chief health manager, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, opted in September to archive its excess deaths webpage with a note stating, “these datasets will no longer be updated.” 

Money, of course, is a motivating issue for insurers. In 2020, death claims took their biggest one-year leap since the 1918 influenza scourge, jumping 15.4 percent to $90 billion in payouts. After hitting $100 billion in 2021, claims slowed in 2022, but are still above 2019. Indemnity experts are urging the adoption of an early-warning program to detect looming health problems among people with life insurance and keep them alive.

Unlike in the pandemic’s early phase, these deaths are not primarily among the old. For people 65 and over, deaths in the second quarter of 2023 were 6 percent below the pre-pandemic norm, according to a new report from the Society of Actuaries. Mortality was 26 percent higher among insured 35-to-44-year-olds, and 19 percent higher for 25-to-34-year-olds, continuing a death spike that peaked in the third quarter of 2021 at a staggering 101 percent and 79 percent above normal, respectively. 

“COVID-19 claims do not fully explain the increase in incurred claim incidence,” the Society said. COVID-19 deaths dropped 84 percent from the first three quarters of 2021 to the same period in 2023.

To some extent, we know what is killing the young, with an actuarial analysis of government data showing mortality increases in liver, kidney and cardiovascular diseases, and diabetes. Drug overdoses also soared nationwide, but not primarily in the young working class.

Therein lies the most pressing question for insurers, epidemiologists and health agency officials. Why is the traditionally healthiest sector of our society — young, employed, insured workers — dying at such rates? Public health officials aggressively oversaw the pandemic response, for better or worse. Why aren’t they looking into this? 

In the United Kingdom, where post-pandemic excess deaths in similar demographics also persist, a government-funded independent inquiry is underway. “With each passing week of the COVID inquiry,” the BBC reported recently, “it is clear there were deep flaws in the way decisions were made and information provided during the pandemic.” 

the pandemic. This probe — by a high-level, unbiased commission — should focus on what worked and what did not.

Lockdowns limited access to education, social interaction and health care with documented harm to childhood developmentmental health and the economy. Treatment protocols dictated how doctors should deliver COVID care — primarily in hospitals and with expensive medicines — and limited early access to generic drugs that might have helped. 

Vaccines were given to more than 270 million people, among them babies, pregnant women and workers under employer mandates. The therapeutic’s “warp speed,” emergency use authorization must be part of any post-pandemic analysis, in light of more than 1 million reports of possible harm to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System and a new Yale University study validating a chronic post-vaccination syndrome. 

the pandemic. This probe — by a high-level, unbiased commission — should focus on what worked and what did not. (This is bigger than COVID: Why are so many Americans dying early?)

Dr. Peter A. McCullough, who was one of the most respect cardiologists and epidemiologists in the world prior to his efforts to expose the proven empirical link between the Wuhan Virus poisoned jabs and myocarditis and a whole host of other health problems, explained recently that many trained scholars have produced studies that have been submitted for peer review about their conclusions concerning autopsy results of people killed by the jabs’ adverse effects:

Epidemiology is the study of the distribution and determinants of disease. I graduated with a degree in this field from the University of Michigan. Nearly a year ago, Nicolas Hulscher, a current graduate student at U of M was credited with an approved project “Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths after COVID-19 Vaccination” with myself as the senior mentor.

The formal process of epidemiological investigation is rigorous and disciplined. In essence, we searched for and obtained every published autopsy report in PUBMED and then independently adjudicated each death from extracted data. Our conclusion was 73.9% of deaths after vaccination are either direct due or significantly contributed to by known mechanisms (myocarditis, blood clots, etc.) resulting from COVID-19 vaccines. The conclusion is supported by the data presented.

The peer-review process for this paper includes a review and acceptance of the paper to the University of Michigan School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Poster Session which was held November 17, 2023. Nic stood by the poster, described his study, and answered questions from students and faculty. The paper was vetted and well received.

Currently, the full length manuscript is listed on the European Commission preprint server while it goes through the publication process at a major journal. In my experience this can take up to 2-4 years.

I found it ironic that while our paper was making it through these steps, Health Feedback, the fact-check blogging site posted this false claim attached to our graphical abstract in social media.




Who wrote this? What are their credentials? What motivated Health Feedback to do this? Who directed them to our paper? The short answer is that our paper is devastating to the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex pulling the strings of an army of fact checkers, social media bots, editors, and publishers. They are hell-bent on blocking or discrediting the truth on vaccine side effects in order to push the global lockstep “safe and effective” false narrative.  (Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths after COVID-19 Vaccination.)

Facts mean nothing to the ideologues in control of so-called “fact checking.” The false narratives of the Kremlin (meaning government apparatchiks of both major organized crime families of naturalism and officials in the “public health community”) and the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex must be defended at all costs no matter how many unsuspecting human beings are suffering life altering illnesses and/or are dying in record numbers because of “vaccines” whose full genocidal effects may never be known until eternity and for which those responsible will be held to account by Christ the King at the time of their own Particular Judgments if they not repent and convert to the true Faith before they die.

Moderna worked overtime to censor all stories about any possible linkages between its own vaccines and long-term adverse health effects and/or sudden deaths by cardiac arrest, blood clots, or other cardio-vascular, pulmonary-related problems:

Moderna, known for its mRNA coronavirus vaccine, reportedly engaged in extensive surveillance and influence operations, attempting to remove criticism or pushback against its vaccine from online discourse.

UnHerd reports that Moderna, the biotech firm raised to prominence by its mRNA coronavirus vaccine, is now at the center of a complex and controversial situation. While it achieved a staggering $100 billion valuation during the pandemic, recent reports suggest the company ventured beyond pharmaceutical innovation into the world of surveillance and public influence.

According to the report from UnHerd, Moderna developed an intricate network of monitoring that it aimed to use to influence the public discourse on vaccines. Central to this operation is a collaboration with Public Good Projects (PGP), a drug industry-funded NGO, and former law enforcement officials, aimed at combating what the company considers to be vaccine misinformation. However, this initiative’s scope and methods have sparked significant concerns about the blurring lines between public health advocacy and corporate surveillance.

During the  pandemic, Moderna transformed almost overnight from a fledgling biotech firm to a household name, thanks to the widespread use of its mRNA vaccine. However, as the demand for vaccinations waned, so did Moderna’s earnings. In response, Moderna not only increased vaccine prices but also embarked on a marketing campaign to maintain its relevance in the public health sphere.

The company’s surveillance arm, led by Nikki Rutman, a former FBI analyst, monitors a vast array of mainstream and alternative media outlets. Utilizing advanced technology like Talkwalker’s “BlueSilk” AI, the team tracks vaccine-related conversations across millions of websites globally. High-risk alerts are raised for narratives that could potentially harm Moderna’s interests or bolster anti-vaccine sentiments.

This proactive approach to monitoring and influencing vaccine discourse extends to scrutinizing public figures like Elon Musk and Russell Brand. Moderna’s reporting on public figures’ comments on vaccines does not necessarily dispute their claims but flags them as misinformation if they are perceived to encourage vaccine hesitancy.

The partnership between Moderna and PGP, however, is particularly interesting. UnHerd claims that the companies initially collaborated on a program called “Stronger” in 2021-22, which aimed to identify misinformation and shape content decisions on social media, but that the relationship has grown between the pharmaceutical firm and the NGO. PGP, with its extensive access to Twitter data and influence in formulating pandemic-related speech policies, has been pivotal in guiding Moderna’s strategy. (Report: Moderna Engaged in Covert Operations to Control Online Criticism of Vaccines.)

This censorship has extended, of course, to blaming the “unvaccinated” for the spread of the Wuhan Virus even though it is impossible for an unvaccinated person to spread a disease to those the “vaccinated,: who are said to be immune from it, and despite the fact that the spike proteins within the vaccines are incubators for the virus itself and that the unvaccinated have become infected by vaccine shedding from the vaccinated.

Writer Igor Chudov explained this scapegoating as follows in a recent commentary:

I doubt that the “scientific discovery” of unwarranted and mean-spirited scapegoating of the unvaccinated surprises most of my readers, but the details of the “findings” are interesting.

However, this emphasis on vaccination has also given rise to a complex social phenomenon – the stigmatization and prejudice faced by those who choose not to get vaccinated against COVID-19. A recent study published in the Journal of Medical Ethics aimed to investigate whether the negative sentiments directed towards the unvaccinated can be considered a form of scapegoating.

“My colleagues and I have been studying the social divisions surrounding COVID-19 for some time. We have noticed that much of the existing research at that time focused on conflicts originating from people who discount COVID-19, believe in conspiracy theories, and generally undervalue the threat of the virus. We replicated many of those patterns in our own research as well,” said study author Maja Graso, an assistant professor at the University of Groningen.

The authors seem to be shocked by their discovery that much of the lies and misinformation came from the government and media:

“However, what we found to be missing was an address to misinformation and the consequences stemming from overestimating the threat. Consider, for instance, how in 2020, more than 30% of Americans believed that a COVID infection led to a 50% chance of hospitalization; it never did, nor was there ever evidence to suggest it might. Left-leaning individuals tended to over-estimate COVID harms to a greater degree than conservatives.”

The scientific study by Maja Graso et al. examined attitudes toward unvaccinated people by presenting a questionnaire with fictional characters: a vaccinated person named Katy and an unvaccinated person named Mark. Both Katy and Mark carried the COVID-19 virus and infected a vulnerable individual.

It turns out that, despite being in the identical position, the unvaccinated individual was selected for blame and targeted with extremely negative emotions:



You would expect me to rant against the above-mentioned left-leaning individuals. Instead, I would like to point out that “Trump supporters” were also prone to scapegoating and hatred towards the unvaccinated, although to a lesser extent: