There’s no ambiguity about health-destroying flu/covid jabs.
Designed for this purpose, there’s nothing remotely beneficial about them.
Last week, eminent virologist Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche minced no words saying the following:
“Never, ever allow anything, or anybody, to interfere or suppress your innate immune system” that’s vital to protect against illness.
Flu/covid mass-jabbing weakens immunity, he stressed.
Jabs “do not contribute to (so-called) herd immunity.”
He called mass-jabbing children “an absolute no go” because their “innate immunity” will be severely harmed, making them vulnerable to autoimmune and other diseases.
Vanden Bossche also called boosters “absolutely insane,” telling refuseniks:
“For God’s sake, stay un(jabbed),” adding:
Flu/covid “is not a disease of healthy people.”
“People in good health have a healthy innate immune system that can deal with a number of respiratory viruses without any problem.”
“These people are not only protected against the disease, but they can even in many cases prevent infection.”
In stark contrast, flu/covid jabs “are breeding ground for” outbreaks.
Protect your “innate immunity” by being jab-free.
Unjabbed individuals should avoid close contact with their jabbed counterparts as much as possible.
If populations reach a critical mass of inoculated individuals, it “will inevitably (cause) health system(s) to collapse.”
“It cannot be otherwise.”
According to American Heart Association (AHA) study results published last month — an NGO that “funds cardiovascular medical research, educates consumers on healthy living and fosters appropriate cardiac care to reduce disability and deaths caused by cardiovascular disease and stroke:”
(Pfizer and Moderna) mRNA jabs “dramatically increase endothelial inflammatory markers and ACS (acute coronary syndrome) risk as measured by the PULS cardiac test.”
The endothelium is a thin membrane that lines the inside of the heart and blood vessels.
The PULS cardiac test measures the most clinically significant protein biomarkers of the body’s immune system response to arterial injur(ies) that cause cardiac lesions that risk rupture, heart failure and death.
An abstract of the AHA study with the above information was published in its Circulation journal, saying the following:
“Our group…us(ed) the PLUS Cardiac Test…a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS).”
“The score is based on changes from the norm of multiple protein biomarkers…”
“Elevation above the norm increases the PULS score, while decreases below the norm lowers the PULS score.”
“The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years.”
“Recently, with the advent of the mRNA (jabs) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients.”
A highly technical explanation produced the following conclusion:
Harmful to health “changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk.”
“At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post-second (jabbing) dose.”
“We conclude that the mRNA (jabs) dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following” jabs.
Thrombosis occurs when blood clots block veins or arteries.
Symptoms include pain and swelling in one or both legs, chest pain, and/or numbness on one side of the body.
Complications of the condition can be life-threatening by causing a fatal stroke or heart attack.
Cardiomyopathy heart muscle disease obstructs normal blood flow throughout the body.
It can cause heart failure and death.
Last May — before the above study results were published — the AHA said benefits of flu/covid jabs “enormously outweigh risks, despite possible rare heart complications (sic).”
The AHA and American Stroke Association “urge adults and children ages 12 and older in the US to (be flu/covid-jabbed) as soon as they can (sic).”
“We remain confident that the benefits of (jabs) far exceed the very small, rare risks (sic).”
“The risks of (jabs) are far smaller than the risks of (flu/covid) infection (sic), including its potentially fatal consequences and the potential long-term health effects that are still revealing themselves, including myocarditis.”
“The recommendation for (mass-jabbing) specifically includes people with cardiovascular risk factors such as high blood pressure, obesity and type 2 diabetes, those with heart disease, and heart attack and stroke survivors, because they are at much greater risk of an adverse outcome from the (flu/covid) than they are from” jabs (sic).
The above assessment no longer applies.
November-released AHA analysis revealed a polar opposite conclusion from its months earlier support of jabs.
Taking them harms health, it now says.
Remaining jab-free protects it.
The AHA shifted from support of mass-jabbing to the other way around.
A Final Comment
In response to the November-published AHA data on harm from flu/covid jabs, the organization faced heavy establishment criticism.
Its publication Circulation said the following:
“Soon after publication” of the data in question, the AHA was (dubiously) accused of “potential errors.”
Despite no evidence of unreliability in its study conclusions, revisions may be published ahead.
After shifting from support of flu/covid jabs to questioning their safety, the AHA once again endorsed them “as the best available public health strategy to address the pandemic (sic)” that exists for the jabbed alone, adding:
“The American Heart Association continues to fully support the (Pharma-controlled) CDC’s (mass-jabbing) recommendations” — to its shame, knowing kill shots cause heart damage that risks death.