159 Comments

I don’t know if I should hit the like button. There should be more response options here. I hope you sue them to the ground.

Expand full comment

This is an interesting video by Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT concerning "science" journals.

https://youtu.be/spKTb3wMmJM

Expand full comment

Time well spent to view. THANK YOU. It’s good to have solid references when talking to climate change fanatics (idiots). I’m no scientist but I went a bit further and read some of Prof Lindzen’s paper referenced in the pod cast.

Really like the pod cast guy, Ammous. Smart man and reformed climate change cult member. This insanity is destroying ppls lives by wrecking economies and promoting policies that are absurd for the benefit of a few.

It will only stop when enough literate ppl get rational, factual information to counter the “narrative”.

Expand full comment

Great video thanks for the link...

Expand full comment

Sue for what exactly?

While the paper was retracted, it was NOT censored. Anyone can still read the whole thing in its entirety: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10810638/

It's unfortunate that PCM did not provide a reason for the retraction, but perhaps they will issue a statement soon, at still hasn't been that long yet. Speaking of long, the article itself is over 28,000 words! Although I didn't read the whole thing, this article rightfully brings to light the harms done by the fake injections, yet it still props the existence of the imaginary "COVID virus", of which there is zero evidence for...

Maybe karma is the real "reason" why Jessica's paper was retracted...

Dr Rose was compelled to "retract"...ahem....censor opposing viewpoints which logically challenged her presentation in her most important Substack article of all time. But I guess it was just an "accident" or something.

Dr Rose: "i didn't mean to remove the comments. whoops. got a report about some rude language." https://jessicar.substack.com/p/focused-take-down-of-the-bad-guys

What "report"?

Whatever....At least people can still read Dr Rose's retracted "scientific paper"!

Expand full comment

Sure, people can still read it.

But once retracted, it is no longer viable as a citation in other papers, which adversely affects the careers of the authors.

Expand full comment

Listening to the link above to a pod cast interview of Prof Lindzer from MIT by another ex Prof (Ammous)really explains the role of the scientific paper publishing industry. Learned a great deal about how that works although it supported what I have suspected for a number of years.

Breaking news: EVERYTHING is corrupted by bureaucrats. 😱

Expand full comment

That's a good question. What laws have they broken? Can they not publish whatever they like? Is it violating free speech? Have they impugned the reputation of the authors?

How Steve's team approach this will be interesting.

Expand full comment

Often, there are contractual obligations between authors and journals. Given what was said in the letter announcing the retraction, consideration could also be given to charges of fraud or even defamation.

Expand full comment

Thanks. I hope we learn more details about whatever was signed, if the journal published that retraction letter, and on what grounds Steve and co intend to sue. One would hope the likes of the good people at ICAN are advising them.

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

Thank you for your unwavering dedication to the truth and your strength in the face of ridiculous adversity. We all stand behind you 1,000,000%

Expand full comment

Absolutely. I am sick from all the big business/big goverment lies, NOT COVID. The vaccine cult just can’t accept facts. They do and should matter. I understand that many ppl just can’t believe that our government would run interference for the pharma industry but I haven’t trusted the government on any level for many years. I think ppl have mislead often enough that it’s easier to believe wild conspiracy theories more than the scientific community. When a handful of mega corporations own everything but trade as better known brands it’s hard to parse out who benefits though clearly profit far out weighs any meaningful concern for public safety.

Thank you and your colleagues for speaking truth.

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

Big Pharma must grant permission for such controversial papers. Your group only made one mistake, TRUTH.

Expand full comment

Oh yeah...that.

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

IYH For the non-SME a summary / analysis of the censored pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10810638/pdf/cureus-0016-00000052876.pdf and via my bespoke AI LLM analysis prompt sequence:

TL;DR

A review of registrational trial data and post-authorization studies found significant safety issues and lack of long-term assessment for COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, calling into question their risk-benefit profile. The paper presents the vaccine approvals and ongoing recommendations as abject failures by regulators to independently verify manufacturer claims, scrutinize trial conduct and data reporting, ensure scientific best practices, or respond to numerous safety signals - all while allowing mass vaccination campaigns to proceed unchecked. This implies a disturbingly unscientific and scandalous dereliction of duty.

Introduction

This review examined results from the Pfizer and Moderna registrational trials as well as post-authorization safety studies on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273). It aimed to evaluate their risk-benefit profile based on available evidence.

Approach

The review analyzed trial data, regulatory documents, and independent studies on vaccine efficacy, safety issues, quality control concerns, and potential mechanisms of adverse effects. It took a narrative approach to synthesize evidence from diverse sources.

Key findings

Trials showed increases in serious adverse events with mRNA vaccines compared to placebo but underreported harms. Post-authorization studies found many life-threatening conditions associated with the vaccines. Younger groups faced higher risks of heart inflammation with little COVID-19 benefit. Quality control issues included DNA contamination and batch variability. Mechanisms like immunological imprinting and pathogen selection pressure raise concerns on long-term efficacy and safety. Ongoing boosters risk immune dysfunction and may enhance viral resistance.

Evaluation

Given significant safety issues uncovered post-authorization and lack of long-term assessment, the review found that for most populations, especially younger groups, the potential harms of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines likely outweigh their benefits. Their deployment requires re-evaluation based on a comprehensive risk-benefit analysis.

Limitations and caveats

Some findings relied on observational data, which precludes determining causality. Adverse event reports have inherent limitations in determining proper magnitudes and rates. Further research is still needed on long-term outcomes and potential biological mechanisms of harm.

Surprising/concerning findings

Trial data underreported harms, obscured cardiac safety signals, and showed increased mortality trends with mRNA vaccines. Post-authorization studies linked mRNA vaccines to many severe conditions including heart attacks and strokes. Quality control issues uncovered contaminating DNA fragments and sequences in distributed mRNA vaccine batches.

Anticipated critiques and responses

Correlation does not equal causation for observational studies. However, biological mechanisms support potential causal links requiring investigation. Further controlled studies may clarify relationships.

Adverse event reporting has limitations but still provides important safety signals, and multiple large datasets converge on concerning patterns warranting investigation. Underreporting of factors likely means issues are underestimated.

Further research is still emerging but available evidence already calls into question the presented risks versus benefits, especially for lower-risk groups. A precautionary approach is warranted until safety profiles can be better characterized.

In summary, this review revealed significant evidence that calls into question the appropriate risk-benefit assessment of widely deployed COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, especially for lower-risk populations.

Prompt: Can you provide more details on the quality control issues with the mRNA vaccines?

Here are some more details on the quality control issues identified with the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines:

mRNA vaccine production was scaled up rapidly through a Process 2 method involving bacterial plasmid DNA vectors as the nucleic acid template for transcription of mRNA. This differed from the Process 1 method used in clinical trials.

Batches produced via Process 2 showed reduced mRNA integrity compared to Process 1 batches. No comparative safety analyses of Process 1 vs 2 batches were available. Batch-to-batch variability could thus impact safety.

Independent researchers found contamination of mRNA vaccine batches with double-stranded RNA (dsRNA), exceeding limits set by the EMA. DsRNA is known to trigger immune inflammation and has been linked to conditions like myocarditis.

Multiple analyses uncovered substantial contamination of distributed mRNA vaccine batches with residual DNA fragments, including plasmid DNA from the production process. Levels exceeded safety limits set by FDA and EMA.

DNA contamination included a Simian virus 40 (SV40) sequence present in Pfizer batches but absent from Moderna batches. SV40 is carcinogenic in animals and its DNA could theoretically integrate into the host genome.

Due to their instability, some mRNA vaccine batches contained extremely low levels of intact, readable mRNA. Variable mRNA integrity across batches could impact safety and efficacy.

Lack of public transparency on quality control practices and batch-specific analyses left crucial questions unanswered about potential contaminants and their health impacts across individual vaccine lots.

Complex multi-component mRNA vaccines may behave differently depending on production conditions and handling of individual vials, necessitating stringent manufacturing practices and lot-specific characterization - but such data was not accessible.

Prompt: What are the potential health impacts of the contamination found in the mRNA vaccine batches?

There are several potential health impacts that could result from the contamination found in mRNA vaccine batches:

DNA contamination: Residual DNA plasmids could theoretically integrate into the host genome, disrupting natural gene sequences and potentially contributing to cancer initiation or progression. DNA sequences like SV40 are also directly carcinogenic.

Inflammation and autoimmunity: Double-stranded RNA is a powerful trigger of innate immune responses and inflammation. This could potentially promote chronic inflammatory conditions, autoimmunity, and other adverse health effects if dsRNA contamination remains in vaccines.

Aberrant protein production: Contaminating DNA sequences like plasmid DNA or SV40 promoter elements present in vaccines could be transcribed into messenger RNA and translated into proteins not intended or assessed for safety, with unknown health consequences.

Viral reactivation: SV40 is suspected of acting as a co-factor in oncogenesis, increasing cancer risk when combined with other risk factors. It could also theoretically contribute to reactivation of dormant viral infections.

Genotoxicity: Residual DNA and any DNA sequences able to integrate pose a genotoxic risk if they disrupt host genes or alter regulation of cellular processes like growth, differentiation and apoptosis.

Immunotoxicity: Non-degraded DNA triggering innate immune sensors could potentially induce autoimmunity or immune dysfunction, especially if the contaminants spread systemically in the body.

Mutagenesis: Incorporation of foreign DNA sequences into the host genome could cause mutations by disrupting DNA, with risks of heritable effects if germline cells are affected.

Prompt: Anything scandalous in the paper, abject failures from regulatory agencies?

Yes, there are a few aspects of the paper that point to rather scandalous failures by regulatory agencies:

The paper found that Pfizer failed to disclose important safety data to regulators that would have been material to the EUA decision, specifically delays in reporting dates of deaths in the trial. This obscured an important cardiac safety signal.

Regulators did not require the 6-12 month follow up period recommended for identifying later adverse effects before authorizing the vaccines. They rushed the EUA based on very short term data.

The FDA only inspected 9 out of 153 clinical trial sites for Pfizer, failing to properly verify data quality and integrity. A later whistleblower raised issues with trial conduct.

Original trial reports significantly underreported harms, only focusing on a small "safety cohort" and not collecting comprehensive long term safety data as is usual.

Post authorization, over a million adverse events were reported to Pfizer but regulators did nothing. The paper argues this should have prompted reevaluation.

Regulators dismissed findings of increased harms from independent analyses of the trial data, failing to independently verify safety claims.

Contamination issues including carcinogenic DNA sequences were never properly addressed by regulators despite being known issues per their own past guidance documents.

No long term safety studies have ever been conducted as would be usual and important for novel genetic vaccines, despite massive deployment to billions of people globally.

Expand full comment

If we let them do this to us again then we deserve what we get. Those of you here with means, have to continue to expose these misanthropes and make examples of them. The public needs their eyes opened.

Expand full comment

Thank you Daniel. Copied and pasted to my facebook page.

Most people can read a summary.

What a good idea

Expand full comment

Enough evidence already exists, we don't need anymore, do we?

Expand full comment

IYH Terence (2nd c. BCE Roman playwright ) nihil dictum quod non dictum prius “nothing has been said that has not been said before (but because no-one is listening one has to say it again and again)"

Expand full comment

I understand this, like the mantra "safe and effective" but Joe Public doesn't read these papers. Anyone in government surely knows by now as will GPs and hospital medics. These people all need to speak up. The problem is all countries in huge debts to banks and I'm sure borrowing would be halted if anyone halted the depop/transhuman project. Or they are bought off, blackmailed, family threatened. This is the world we live in. Egypt just been given $10b by IMF to enable Israel to complete their genocide/ethnic cleansing of Gaza. US and UK assisting, The world is controlled by psychopaths.

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

I had just posted your presentation in the Kennedy Room to my tribe of unvaxxed. I mentioned how we as Canadians should be immensely proud of Dr Rose not only as an true ambassador for Canada who has consistently illuminated dozens of issues, problems, lies, and propaganda which occurred during the last 4 years … but also in her bringing to light the data and truth to the genetic war that has taken place against citizens worldwide.

The paper’s retraction, which is truly abhorrent, has been gathering a lot of attention in the concerned citizens community and is not unique as it seems there are an increasing number of retractions being carried out on other research papers or pre prints being stalled indefinitely.

History tells us that the first thing to go when authoritarian/ Marxist / Communist or Facist regimes start to grab control is free speech and truth based on data and science.

My sincere thanks to Dr. Rose and her supporters and colleagues for fighting the good fight during one of civilizations greatest periods of challenge and threat.

Expand full comment
author

yes, the paper is really popular and that is thanks to the people. there is enormous interest in the truth. can't fight that and win. :)

Expand full comment

You probably saw this already Dr. Rose …. It’s EXTREMELY damning for our so called Prime Minister and is definitely going to shake our US and NATO partners. This was why the very quick call for an election was issued nearly 3 years ago after the Winnipeg lab / Chinese scientists connection.

https://youtu.be/UM2jp6V0af8?si=Z5tHZ5QSE36eArxj

Expand full comment

Wow!!! Thanks for sharing... I have posted on my tiny social media accounts - LOL

Expand full comment

There is a good analysis of "The Winnipeg Incident" on

< hiddencomplexity .substack.com>

today.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

Oh to know with certainty who is calling those shots..(excuse the pun). Is it Gates, Soros, Rockefeller, DoD, DARPA, NIH? Hopefully Steve can use some of that cash in finding out?

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

Please get this info onto the Highwire with Del Bigtree.

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

GOD bless you JR - the TRUTH is on our side. Thank you for your commitment & courage in continuing to speak TRUTH to medical tyranny & being on the right side of history. Your work is OUTstanding ...

Expand full comment

Nothing to see here. Move along Citizen!

I wish I was surprised by this, but I am not. I read the details over on Tess Lawrie's substack. Still, I am amazed at the reach Big Pharma has and the ability they have to retroactively protect their butts. Even the study of already-completed trials, by credible scientists, publishing after lengthy review of the methodology and conclusions, can be retracted summarily.

Pfizer on Line 1, screaming, "We run this town!"

Expand full comment

What makes you so sure it's Pharma?

Expand full comment

It is not pharma...it is our very own DOD.

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

If we continue to play by their rules, we will continue to lose.

The rules of our society that we grew up with and that we are accustomed to, were set by the same people who are changing them now to their advantage. You can sue them, but if they also control the courts and ordered them to decide in their favor no matter what, then you are still not any further.

The only way to win is playing by our own rules. This way you control every aspect of the game, including the outcome. Now, this can be a bit tricky with the others trying to use the existing laws, rules and justice organizations against you. But there are loopholes, that we all know have been used by big corporations and the rich. So, you will do the same, use the loopholes. They can’t close the loopholes without hurting themselves.

To be more concrete, found an LLC, headquartered in a county where it is hard to get anyone sued or forced to do anything, e.g. taking down a website. Then create your own website for publishing scientific papers. Keep the servers in countries that won’t comply with orders to take down content, e.g. in Russia. Then widely spread the word about the new website in the scientific community. This will also have the nice side effect that you will separate the captured scientists from the non captured scientists.

It is like creating a parallel society, but with your rules. Then invite everyone into it. Over time the original society will cease to exist, because no one wants to participate. In the new society, the old rulers will have no power and no control.

Expand full comment
author

Great thinking. Now, for action.

Expand full comment

I really love your idea.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

"You should be VERY disturbed by this. "

I was VERY disturbed 3...4 years ago... now it is the "new normal" :P... I would have been shocked if they didn't censor the paper.

Expand full comment

350,000 downloads is a good omen.

Seeds germinate - never stop cultivating.

Expand full comment

What I find disturbing is your blog was the only Substack Stripe payment processing would not allow to go through.

Very disturbed by your revelation here as well.

Expand full comment
author

doesn't surprise me. watching carefully with many others.

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

Oh just fk all the way off. Keep fighting, Jessica! You are an inspiration to so many people!!

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

They're only censoring it because it's true. If you wrote a paper saying the 'vaccines' gave humans special powers they probably would have left it alone. Lies that benefit the regime are permitted.

Expand full comment

It wasn't censored, it was retracted. You can still read the whole thing.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10810638/

The paper is not "true". There's more layers to this than you think. The "retracted" status is an advertisement. It wouldn't get as much attention without being retracted. This is publicity designed to make you think that the elites are hiding the "truth", yet it still props up the false and imaginary concept of a "virus" and "contagion" which do not exist. A paper like that would never get published to begin with. "Germ Theory" is the greatest deception of all time.

Expand full comment

The Barbra Streisand effect is also in play.

Expand full comment

The important thing is that whatever your viewpoint we do not need this gene therapy! AND we certainly do not need it mandated! AND we certainly do not need BGWHO (Bill Gates World Health Organisation) having power to inflict all these things again on the whole world!

Expand full comment
Feb 29Liked by Jessica Rose

I think they miscalculated if their purpose is to bury this evidence, because the journals' track record of burying solid evidence and falsifying lots of other "studies" is coming more and more into public awareness. Make LOTS of noise!

Expand full comment
author

HEAR HEAR!!

Expand full comment