COVID-19
Funeral director says 25% of bodies now have ‘fibrous clots’ in arteries after COVID shots

Funeral Director John O’Looney
From LifeSiteNews
By Frank Wright
Despite attempts to alert authorities to the novel clotting, no action has been taken, with government policy seemingly avoiding investigation.
Reports have persisted following the rollout of the so-called mRNA “vaccines” of the incidence of white fibrous clots in the bodies of the deceased.
Despite repeated attempts to “debunk” the sudden and widespread appearance of these clots, evidence is mounting that they are not only present, but that the reason this novel pathology has attracted hardly any attention from the medical profession is that the dead in whose bodies they are found have one thing in common:
They have all been vaccinated.
Two recent video interviews featuring whistleblowers from the U.K. and the U.S. have now been published, in which each present evidence of the presence of white fibrous “calamari-like” clots in the corpses of the COVID vaccinated.
The claim that they occur in those who have received the mRNA injections is advanced by both men. One, John O’Looney, is a funeral director from Milton Keynes in England. He is the source of the shocking quote above, made in a recent interview with nurse instructor Dr. John Campbell.
Published on February 9, the video details how O’Looney began to notice the incidence of these novel fibrous white clots “around six months after the [COVID] vaccines were introduced.”
He states that midway through 2021 he noticed the first incidence of the white fibrous clots – six months after the introduction of the so called “vaccines.”
O’Looney says that around “25 percent” of all bodies he sees now have these clots present.
He showed a recent sample of these “arterial obstructions”: “They grow inside the arteries and veins and take the shape of them” – until those who develop them die, claims O’Looney.
So how are they different from normal clots – commonly called “thromboses”?
The clots we are seeing are different – traditionally clots are like jelly – you can wash them down the sink.
These clots are very tough – like calamari.
I have never seen anything like this. It is very tough, very rubbery.
I can’t see how this can be removed without invasive surgery.
We follow government policy
O’Looney says he has repeatedly attempted to alert the authorities, with no action taken as a result.
He related the recent postmortem of a young man who “died suddenly,” having discovered a “bright white” clot the “full length” of the leg of the deceased.
O’Looney claims he documented the strange clot with the local coroner by email. A later response from the pathologist said that these clots normally form and “there was nothing to report,” directing him to effectively “dispose of the evidence,” said O’Looney.
He added that the BIE – the national embalmer’s organization – has warned its members not to speak to him personally. The chief coroner has refused to investigate.
“When I emailed the chief coroner of England I did not get a reply,” O’Looney said. On a second attempt he received a “four word reply” from the secretary, simply stating “We follow government policy.”
O’Looney concluded that it is therefore government policy to refuse to investigate. “We have record numbers of excess deaths. We are trying to raise the alarm and nobody is listening.” Instead, O’Looney claims the authorities “are actively gaslighting people.” Deaths involving the presence of these anomalous clots are attributed to “thrombosis,” with no mention of any relation to the so-called “vaccines.”
Not alone
O’Looney claims he has had “60 or 70 other funeral directors contact” him in support, saying “mortuary managers have told me thrombosis deaths have gone up 600 percent.”
Why have they not spoken out? “These people are frightened” O’Looney says, “I am just not frightened. I have a moral compass which will not allow me to be complicit.”
Against the debunkers’ charge that there is no evidence of any connection to the mRNA injections, O’Looney says he has asked “the loved ones of the deceased” whether they had received a COVID jab.
“They are all vaccinated.”
Nurse John Campbell, Ph.D., points out that this “new pathology” is something doctors would normally be motivated to investigate. O’Looney explains why this is not happening:
Where do the families go with it? The coroners won’t entertain it. I reported this to Thames Valley Police on April 28 of last year, incident number 1068.
I said I really need to speak to someone about [these deaths].
They would not even speak to me.
This has left him with “no faith in the police or in the system at all.”
Measures on suspicious deaths ‘diluted’
O’Looney says measures to monitor and record unlawful deaths may be removed.
“It’s a great time to do a murder,” he notes, as the measures to prevent corpses being cremated under suspicious circumstances have been “diluted – as a result of COVID, so they said.”
Formerly, he claims, two doctors would have to certify a cremation – this has now been reduced to one.
“I won’t stop telling the truth” says O’Looney, citing a report from a hospice nurse showing “turbo cancers” which kill within weeks of having no symptoms, dying of aggressive cancer “before they can receive a single treatment.”
“These people have one thing in common. They have all been vaccinated.”
Whilst Campbell says “This can’t be hidden much longer,” O’Looney warns of the “future these genocidal maniacs have for us.”
He says he has lost friends and even relatives over allegations he is a “conspiracy theorist.”
Yet far from being a lone voice, his data is “completely consistent with that collected by Major Tom Havilland,” as Campbell says.
A survey conducted by retired U.S. Air Force Major Thomas Haviland found that “70 percent of embalmers reported finding strange blood clots beginning in mid-2021.”
Haviland carried out a second survey in 2023, with over twice the number of participating embalmers from across the U.S.
His study showed that over 75 percent of respondents were still seeing the anomalous fibrous white clots.
Evidence from US investigations
Alex Jones has published a video featuring U.S. funeral director Richard Hirschman showing vials containing clots identical to those displayed by O’Looney.
One of four funeral directors on the show, Hirschman is shown extracting one such clot from the jugular vein of a deceased and vaccinated individual.
“These are the strange white fibrous materials we are seeing.” One was “27 inches long,” he said.
“We used to never see clots in arteries – they are typically in veins. They are abnormal – rubbery – like a rubber band.”
In a second show, Jones interviewed Haviland himself, who said his interest in the issue was provoked by the controversial Stew Peters documentary, “Died Suddenly.”
“I watched that the night it premiered, the week of thanksgiving of 2022,” Haviland said. “I know there are some problems with the film, but at the thirteenth minute an amazing statement was made.”
Haviland refers to seeing the embalmer from the state of Indiana, Wallace Hooker, who on October 26, 2022, was briefing “about a hundred embalmers” at an Ohio Embalmers’ Association lecture.
“He showed them photographs of these white fibrous clots… and asked – “by a show of hands, how many of you are seeing these?”
Haviland says:
Almost the entire room of 100 embalmers raised their hands – yes.
He continues, saying the embalmers “all agreed it was in the middle of 2021” that the clots first began to be noticed – “after the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines.”
Haviland decided to investigate himself. The next day he called the president, vice president, and secretary of the Ohio Embalmers’ Association.
“The vice president corroborated” the claims, saying he had “seen the clots himself.”
In the video, Haviland goes on to present evidence from his two surveys in a presentation.
The surveys, conducted in 2022 and 2023, show details of admitted clotting side effects from the COVID shots, and that two thirds of embalmers he contacted in his first survey had witnessed the novel fibrous white clots in “up to 50 percent or more of their corpses.”
His studies, to which international embalmers also responded, show that the higher incidence of clotting is not restricted to the novel pathology of these white fibrous clots, but also shows a sharp increase in “traditional ‘grape jelly’ blood clots.”
Haviland was keen to corroborate the testimony of John O’Looney. When asked why more did not participate in the study or speak out, he too cited fear as one reason, with the reluctance of funeral directors to admit such side effects in vaccines they are likely to have compelled their own employees to take.
“Embalmers want to tell you what they are seeing only if they think they have permission” – from the authorities, says Haviland.
A lot of these [embalmers’] association presidents are directors themselves of funeral homes.
Would you want to participate in a survey showing these clots if you have mandated your employees to get the vaccine?
Fact check?
Haviland’s, Jones’, and O’Looney’s findings have been repeatedly dismissed and “debunked.”
The Poynter Institute is one leading self-appointed authority which claims to have disproven O’Looney’s reports. It says there is “no scientific evidence” for any connection between the clots and the mRNA injections.
Its purported rebuttal reads as a template for the maintenance of the COVID narrative.
The rebuttal –such as it is – immediately pivots from discussion of the evidence to warning people to take more of the so called “vaccines.” The strategy relies on attributing any alleged adverse effects of the “vaccine” to COVID-19 itself.
On February 10, 2022, the Poynter Institute “debunking” said, “Experts we talked to say there’s something to the claim about a greater incidence of blood clots, but they dismiss the idea that it’s linked to the vaccines.”
“What embalmers are noticing, they say, could well be the effects of COVID-19 infection itself, and those effects are occurring in people who are vaccinated and unvaccinated.”
Why is there no evidence presented by the Poynter Institute for its own claims? There is no attempt to investigate the abnormally high incidence of all types of clotting in the deceased in the period immediately following mass “vaccination.” Similarly, no attempt has been made to investigate the international incidence of vaccine side effects being reported by people like Haviland and O’Looney.
“It’s only anecdotal evidence, and there’s no scientific evidence to draw any conclusions,” said Jessica Koth, director of public relations for the U.S.-based National Funeral Directors Association in the Poynter article.
Why is there no “scientific evidence”? No scientists seem willing to study the case at all. As Campbell pointed out, it is unusual that there is so little interest in a “novel pathology.”
Unevidenced claims
Poynter’s supposed rebuttal itself makes an unevidenced claim which, through repetition alone, appears to be held up as the truth by those who still believe that the “vaccines” are “100% safe and effective.”
“Generally, the vaccines available in the U.S. have been shown to sharply reduce the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19,” their February 2022 article states.
There is no way of distinguishing between “vaccine” and viral harm as no effort was made to do so, which itself is a suspicious measure when promoting a novel treatment whose manufacturers are permanently indemnified from any resulting claims of injury or death.
It is noteworthy that the so-called “vaccines” were not initially advertised on television as they had not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. This, claim the debunkers, is a fact unrelated to the requirement to include warnings of known adverse effects.
Motivated reasoning
The motives of those defending the “vaccines” from any connection to the emergence of these fibrous clots, other thromboses, and the many horrendous conditions noted by doctors such as Britain’s Dr. David Cartland is at one with “following government policy.”
What then is the motive of people like John O’Looney?
O’Looney claimed in his interview with Campbell that he is motivated only by “truth and honesty, and the desire to protect others.”
“We are raising concerns – but no one is listening.”
He is also determined to see those responsible brought to justice, as he said in May 2023:
I’ll be totally honest, I live now only to give my testimony in Nuremberg and see these people sentenced appropriately for their crimes against humanity and shame on those who took the money and went along with it.
They will fill the prisons they built for us.
COVID-19
Why FDA Was Right To Say No To COVID-19 Vaccines For Healthy Kids

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
The FDA’s decision not to authorize COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children has drawn criticism. Some argue: If parents want the shot, why not let them get it for their kids? That argument misunderstands what FDA authorization means — and why it exists.
The FDA often approves drugs that carry risks or have imperfect evidence of effectiveness. This is a tradeoff we sometimes accept for people who are ill: when someone is already sick, the alternative is untreated disease. Vaccines are different. They are given to millions of healthy children. This requires a higher standard, not just evidence for safety and immune response, but clear, durable clinical effectiveness. Approval for optional use isn’t neutral; once the FDA authorizes a vaccine, it carries the full weight of institutional endorsement.
Measles provides an example for how the FDA approaches vaccine approvals. Before the measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, the U.S. saw 3 to 4 million infections, ~48,000 hospitalizations, ~1,000 cases of encephalitis, and 400-500 deaths each year. Infants bore the brunt of the most severe outcomes.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
That created a natural instinct: why not vaccinate the youngest and most vulnerable? The initial measles rollout was to 9-month-olds, but within two years that timing was changed to children who were at least 1 year of age. This was not because younger babies were not at risk or that the vaccine was riskier for them, but because it just didn’t work well enough to justify a universal campaign.
The knowledge of the particular risk younger infants face has led to continued research on the effectiveness of measles vaccination in that group. A 2023 trial of the combined measles/mumps/rubella (MMR) vaccine in infants aged 5-7 months, and subsequent safety and immune studies in 2024 and 2025, produced consistent results—safety and the ability to generate antibodies were demonstrated, but a durable response and protection against hospitalization were not.
That is why the FDA does not approve MMR for routine use in healthy children younger than 12 months of age. It is also precisely why getting back to herd immunity for measles is so essential: the youngest infants can only be protected if the rest of us are immunized.
What’s the evidence for COVID-19 vaccination in infants and children? It generates robust antibodies, often higher than in adults. But clinical benefits are modest, short-lived, and inconsistent. It is nowhere near the level of proof U.S. regulators require before making a vaccine universally available to healthy kids.
Some argue that even if benefits are modest, parents and pediatricians should be free to choose. But FDA authorization is not about personal preference; it is a stamp of approval for more than 70 million healthy children. Statistical safety is not enough. At that scale, even rare risks mean real harm to real children. COVID-19 vaccines were originally authorized in the hope that immune responses would translate into population-level benefits. For healthy children, the initial optimism sparked by early encouraging signals has steadily given way to three years of disappointing clinical results.
The lessons from measles are clear: safe but minimally effective isn’t enough. We don’t authorize MMR for 5-month-olds, even to parents who might want their children to get it. COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children should be judged similarly. This is not because there is a lack of any benefit, but because it doesn’t rise to the level we use for other vaccines. Only if and when proof of clinical effectiveness becomes available should authorization be reconsidered. At this time, the FDA is right to say no.
Monique Yohanan, MD, MPH, is a senior fellow at Independent Women, a physician executive and healthcare innovation leader, and Chief Medical Officer at Adia Health.
COVID-19
The Persecution of Canada’s “Other” Freedom Convoy Truckers

While thousands of serious criminal cases across Canada are dropped merely due to delays, many Convoy-related prosecutions on trivial charges continue more than three-and-a-half years later. The cases of Freedom Convoy truckers (left to right) Bern Bueckert, Clayton McAllister and Csaba Vizi (whose Volvo is shown at bottom) are still not fully resolved. (Sources of photos: (top left and right) screenshots from documentary Unacceptable?; (top middle) ThankYouTruckers.Substack; (bottom) Donna Laframboise)
On September 8, three and a half years after the 2022 Freedom Convoy departed Ottawa, and five long, stressful months after his trial actually ended, Robert Dinel walked out of court a free man.
Dinel, a Quebec heavy equipment operator who’d behaved entirely peacefully during the protest over Covid restrictions, had been charged with mischief and obstruction of police. Court proceedings were repeatedly delayed — four times alone just this year — until judge Matthew Webber of the Ontario Court of Justice finally stayed the charges on the grounds that Dinel’s Charter rights to a timely trial had been violated.
For Dinel, it was a relief. For Canadians concerned about freedom and justice, his legal ordeal was yet another example of a system gone off the rails.
Most Canadians are aware of the trials of convoy leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, which ended in conviction; they are to be sentenced in October. Few may realize that many more protestors were charged, most for the relatively innocuous infraction of mischief, and have had their cases drag on and on through the courts for more than three years.
The record of Canada’s legal system clearly shows that mischief charges are routinely withdrawn before scarce and expensive court time is expended on relative trivialities. But when it comes to the truckers, the Crown attorneys at the Ottawa courthouse – employees of the Government of Ontario, not the federal government – appear to have lost all perspective. They are on a mission. The sheer intensity of the prosecution of Convoy members looks less like the fair administration of justice than revenge upon people who dared protest the arbitrary and oppressive measures of the Covid years.
The initial police crackdown itself was a mess. Those arrested were passed from police officer to police officer. Officials writing up the paperwork had no direct knowledge of what had actually transpired; extra charges appear to have been tacked on willy nilly. In Dinel’s case, the prosecution doesn’t even know the identity of the tactical officer who pointed a gun at his head and hauled him out of his vehicle on February 18, 2022.
In a police processing trailer four hours after his arrest, Dinel received a medical assessment from a paramedic. Seated and hand-cuffed throughout, the five-foot-three Dinel calmly and repeatedly told police he was in no fit state to be making decisions and that he wanted to speak to a lawyer. “I want to know what I’m signing,” he insisted. But the police officers, who outnumbered him ten-to-one, kept pushing him to sign an undertaking that he wouldn’t return to the protest area. The fact he never got his phone call – that he was denied his Charter right “to retain and instruct [legal] counsel without delay” – should have stopped this case in its tracks. The Crown chose to pursue it, anyway.
A week after Dinel’s mother died in July 2023, he suffered the first of four strokes. In December 2023, one occurred in the courtroom. “My whole face just seized up,” he recalls. “I had another stroke. My whole face drooped, then the judge freaked right out.” An ambulance was summoned and his trial was adjourned. “I hate court,” says Dinel. “It’s hard, you know. It’s stressful, it’s exhausting.” Rather than staying the charges on compassionate grounds, the prosecution continued, with Dinel accompanied by a service dog.
Nova Scotia trucker Guy Meister spent hours in the same paddy wagon as Dinel the day they were arrested. After travelling from his Nova Scotia home to Ottawa for court appearances more than a dozen times – at considerable expense – in May of this year Meister was found guilty of mischief, but not of obstructing police. In late July, he was sentenced to 20 hours of community service, six months’ probation, and ordered to pay a $100 victim surcharge.
The trial for Windsor, Ontario trucker Csaba Vizi began just this month, the same day Robert Dinel’s charges were stayed. Video broadcast around the world in February 2022 shows him being assaulted by multiple police officers after he’d exited his truck and knelt down in the snow with his hands behind his head. None of those officers were themselves charged following this violence. None were forced to raise tens of thousands in lawyers’ fees, as Vizi has. Even protesters who have endured the stress of a trial and been acquitted have still not always walked free and clear, because the Crown has often insisted on filing appeals. As a result, defence lawyers routinely advise Freedom Convoy protesters that their legal nightmare isn’t actually over until an additional 30 days have come and gone. In one instance, the Crown waited until the last afternoon of the last permissible day to file its appeal.
These are just a few examples of what’s been going on in Canada’s justice system, one already beset by long delays for cases involving far more serious crimes. Credible news reports suggest that the majority of criminal cases in Ontario aren’t even making it to trial, with sexual assault
charges dropped because of delays. Yet the Convoy prosecutions continue.
Many people insist Covid is over, that we should all move on. But the legal persecution of the truckers who bravely protested government overreach in the bitter winter of early 2022 is far from over.
Donna Laframboise is an independent journalist and photographer. A former vice-president of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, she is the author of Thank You, Truckers! Canada’s Heroes & Those Who Helped Them.
The original, full-length version of this article was recently published in C2C Journal.
-
Health2 days ago
MAiD should not be a response to depression
-
Business2 days ago
Global elites insisting on digital currency to phase out cash
-
illegal immigration2 days ago
Biden admin freed illegal alien now accused of decapitating boss
-
Business2 days ago
Red tape is killing Canadian housing affordability
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy8 hours ago
Bloodvein Blockade Puts Public Land Rights At Risk
-
Crime2 days ago
Trump ‘100%’ supports designating Antifa a domestic terror organization
-
Alberta12 hours ago
Parents group blasts Alberta government for weakening sexually explicit school book ban
-
International1 day ago
Trump to Confront Starmer Over UK Free Speech Laws During State Visit