COVID-19
The New York Times Admits Injuries from COVID-19 Shots
From Heartland Daily News
By AnneMarie Schieber
“This is a promising start, but what about the dead?”
The COVID-19 shots have caused multiple, serious injuries, an article in The New York Times acknowledged on May 4.
It is the first time the self-described newspaper of record has reported on the severe side effects from the vaccines, since the massive inoculation campaign that went into full swing starting in January 2021. The article profiled several health professionals with advanced degrees who suffered debilitating injuries ranging from neurological disorders, shingles, hearing loss, tinnitus, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, and racing hearts, weeks and months after their COVID-19 shots.
‘I’m Told I’m Not Real’
The patients, all familiar with the internal workings of the health care system, described their utter frustration with their complaints not being taken seriously.
“I can’t get the government to help me,” Shaun Barcavage, a 54-year-old nurse practitioner from New York City told the Times. Barcavage now suffers from tinnitus after suffering from stinging in his eyes, mouth, and genitals upon getting his first COVID shot. “I’m told I’m not real. I’m told I’m coincidence.”
Similarly, Gregory Poland, editor-in-chief of the journal Vaccine, found little interest in his condition, according to the Times. Poland has urged his contacts at the Centers for Disease Control to examine the connection between the shots and tinnitus, which has afflicted him.
“I just don’t get any sense of movement,” Poland told the Times. “If they have done studies, those studies should be published.”
Changing Times?
The 3,244-word article—which the Times says was the result of months of investigation—highlights reports of COVID shot injuries reported by patients, conservative media outlets, and courageous doctors almost immediately after the vaccine campaign got underway, but were dismissed by the Times and other mainstream media outlets.
“That it took The New York Times more than three years to report on COVID side effects is just the latest indictment against our corrupt corporate legacy media,” said Jim Lakely, vice president and communications director at The Heartland Institute, which publishes Health Care News. “Back when such reporting would have been just as true, and actually mattered, the likes of The New York Times characterized all talk of negative side effects of a rushed COVID treatment as ‘disinformation’ and unproven ‘conspiracy theories.’”
Traditionally, journalism’s role was to remain neutral and to be skeptical of power, but the pandemic proved that corporate media outlets can no longer be trusted to report the news, and the article is the Times’ attempt to rehabilitate its image, says Lakely.
“The same legacy media that led the charge to de-platform and shame any free-thinking American who dared to question government narratives and mandates during the pandemic does not get points, for now, starting to gently report what has been true since the spring of 2020,” Lakely said.
Never Mind Deaths
“This is a promising start, but what about the dead?” wrote Jeff Childers on May 4 in his Coffee and COVID Substack. Childers has meticulously documented the “sudden deaths” of young, healthy people who received the COVID shots.
“Never mind!” wrote Childers. “Here we find the first serious gap in the article’s coverage. The Times avoided this difficult issue, only briefly referring to possible deaths. But maybe it was too much to expect in this cautious, tentative first step toward officially acknowledging that ‘Houston, we may have a problem.’”
Sudden deaths began getting serious attention late in 2022 after insurance executives started noticing a rise in death claims of young, working-age people. Pilots, whose health is closely monitored, oddly began dying mid-flight.
Also missing from the article is any mention of Peter McCullough, M.D., who has become one of the most recognizable names around the globe warning people about the mRNA shots. “No, I was not contacted,” McCullough told Health Care News.
‘Politics At Play’
Childers says the timing of the Times article is suspicious, noting that former CNN anchor Chris Cuomo, who championed pandemic mitigation measures, went on national television recently to discuss his COVID shot injuries.
“I’m speculating, a lot, but cynically I sense politics at play,” wrote Childers. “We’re six months out from the election. Who does admitting even partial failure of the vaccine program help, politically, and who does it hurt? The acknowledgment of the reality of widespread, unaddressed vaccine injuries would seem to hurt President Trump the most.”
AnneMarie Schieber ([email protected]) is the managing editor of Health Care News.
COVID-19
Tulsi Gabbard says US funded ‘gain-of-function’ research at Wuhan lab at heart of COVID ‘leak’
From LifeSiteNews
The director of National Intelligence revealed gain-of-function ties to US funding, which could indicate that the US helped bankroll the supposed COVID lab leak.
In this segment of a remarkable interview by Megyn Kelly, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard discusses the current Intelligence Community (IC) research into the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (aka, COVID-19).
Gabbard talks about the U.S. government funding of “gain-of-function” research, which is a soft sounding phrase to describe the weaponization of biological agents.
Gabbard notes the gain-of-function research taking place in the Wuhan lab was coordinated and funded by the United States government, and the IC is close to making a direct link between the research and the release of the COVID-19 virus.
Additionally, Gabbard explains the concern of other biolabs around the world and then gets very close to the line of admitting the IC itself is politically weaponized (which it is but would be stunning to admit).
From LifeSiteNews
A study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause mortality after Pfizer vaccination compared to Moderna
A new study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause, cardiovascular, and COVID-19 mortality after Pfizer vaccination.
The study titled “Twelve-Month All-Cause Mortality after Initial COVID-19 Vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech or mRNA-1273 among Adults Living in Florida” was just uploaded to the MedRxiv preprint server. This study was headed by MIT Professor Retsef Levi, with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo serving as senior author:
Study Overview
- Population: 1,470,100 noninstitutionalized Florida adults (735,050 Pfizer recipients and 735,050 Moderna recipients).
- Intervention: Two doses of either:
- BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)
- mRNA-1273 (Moderna)
- Follow-up Duration: 12 months after second dose.
- Comparison: Head-to-head between Pfizer vs. Moderna recipients.
- Main Outcomes:
- All-cause mortality
- Cardiovascular mortality
- COVID-19 mortality
- Non-COVID-19 mortality
All-cause mortality
Pfizer recipients had a significantly higher 12-month all-cause death rate than Moderna recipients — about 37% higher risk.
- Pfizer Risk: 847.2 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 617.9 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +229.2 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.37 (i.e., 37% higher mortality risk with Pfizer) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.384 (95% CI: 1.331–1.439)
Cardiovascular mortality
Pfizer recipients had a 53% higher risk of dying from cardiovascular causes compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 248.7 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 162.4 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +86.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.53 (i.e., 53% higher cardiovascular mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.540 (95% CI: 1.431–1.657)
COVID-19 mortality
Pfizer recipients had nearly double the risk of COVID-19 death compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 55.5 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 29.5 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +26.0 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.88 (i.e., 88% higher COVID-19 mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.882 (95% CI: 1.596–2.220)
Non-COVID-19 mortality
Pfizer recipients faced a 35% higher risk of dying from non-COVID causes compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 791.6 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 588.4 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +203.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.35 (i.e., 35% higher non-COVID mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.356 (95% CI: 1.303–1.412)
Biological explanations
The findings of this study are surprising, given that Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine contains approximately three times more mRNA (100 µg) than Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine (30 µg). This suggests that the higher mortality observed among Pfizer recipients could potentially be related to higher levels of DNA contamination — an issue that has been consistently reported worldwide:
The paper hypothesizes differences between Pfizer and Moderna may be due to:
- Different lipid nanoparticle compositions
- Differences in manufacturing, biodistribution, or storage conditions
Final conclusion
Florida adults who received Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine had higher 12-month risks of all-cause, cardiovascular, COVID-19, and non-COVID-19 mortality compared to Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients.
Unfortunately, without an unvaccinated group, the study cannot determine the absolute increase in mortality risk attributable to mRNA vaccination itself. However, based on the mountain of existing evidence, it is likely that an unvaccinated cohort would have experienced much lower mortality risks. It’s also important to remember that Moderna mRNA injections are still dangerous.
As the authors conclude:
These findings are suggestive of differential non-specific effects of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines, and potential concerning adverse effects on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. They underscore the need to evaluate vaccines using clinical endpoints that extend beyond their targeted diseases.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal accounton X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
Reprinted with permission from Focal Points.
In Defeat, Joe Tay’s Campaign Becomes a Flashpoint for Suspected Voter Intimidation in Canada
Columnist warns Carney Liberals will consider a home equity tax on primary residences
Ottawa’s Plastics Registry A Waste Of Time And Money
Nine Dead After SUV Plows Into Vancouver Festival Crowd, Raising Election-Eve Concerns Over Public Safety
Mark Carney: Our Number-One Alberta Separatist
Four new studies show link between heavy cannabis use, serious health risks
Trump demands free passage for American ships through Panama, Suez
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoThe Liberals torched their own agenda just to cling to power
-
COVID-1922 hours ago
Tulsi Gabbard says US funded ‘gain-of-function’ research at Wuhan lab at heart of COVID ‘leak’
-
Crime1 day agoCanada Blocked DEA Request to Investigate Massive Toronto Carfentanil Seizure for Terror Links
-
Business2 days agoTrump says he expects ‘great relationship’ with Carney, who ‘hated’ him less than Poilievre
-
Alberta14 hours agoPierre Poilievre will run to represent Camrose, Stettler, Hanna, and Drumheller in Central Alberta by-election
-
Business22 hours agoTop Canadian bank ditches UN-backed ‘net zero’ climate goals it helped create
-
Health14 hours agoRFK Jr. orders placebo safety trials for all new vaccines in major policy decision
-
Business2 days agoCanada urgently needs a watchdog for government waste