In the final 12 months, have you ever ever felt that you simply’re dwelling in an altered sense of actuality, the place belongings you as soon as knew to be true now not are? It’s not in your creativeness. In latest years and months, the long-held definitions of three phrases all modified, with immense ramifications for public well being coverage within the midst of COVID-19.
The even larger implication for society is that by placing out this false information, they’re trying to alter your notion of what’s true and never true, and perverting science within the course of.
WHO Changed the Definition of Pandemic
What precisely is a pandemic? WHO’s unique definition of a pandemic from May 1, 2009, specified simultaneous epidemics worldwide “with enormous numbers of deaths and illnesses:”1,2
“An influenza pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in several, simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.”
This definition was modified within the month main as much as the 2009 swine flu pandemic, eradicating the severity and excessive mortality standards and leaving the definition of a pandemic as “a worldwide epidemic of a disease.”3
This swap in definition allowed WHO to declare swine flu a pandemic after solely 144 folks had died from the an infection worldwide, and it is why COVID-19 continues to be promoted as a pandemic regardless that a lot of knowledge recommend the lethality of COVID-19 is on par with the seasonal flu.4
Vaccine Definition Changed
By referring to COVID-19 vaccines as “vaccines” slightly than gene therapies, the U.S. authorities is violating its 15 U.S. Code Section 41,5 which regulates misleading practices in medical claims. Per this legislation, it’s illegal to promote:6
“… that a product or service can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made.”
Further, you can’t have a “vaccine” that doesn’t meet the definition of a vaccine. Up till lately, Merriam-Webster outlined a vaccine as “a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease.”7
COVID-19 vaccines usually are not typical vaccines made with stay or attenuated viruses. They’re really gene therapies. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are made with lipid nanoparticles that include polyethylene glycol (PEG)8 and messenger RNA (mRNA).
mRNA are snippets of genetic code that carries directions for cells to provide proteins. The definition of genetic is “relating to genes” and genes include educational code that inform the physique what proteins to make. Therapy is the medical therapy of illness, so mRNA vaccines are very clearly gene remedy.
As famous by David Martin, Ph.D., Moderna’s SEC filings9 specify and stress that the FDA considers its know-how a “gene therapy technology,” initially supposed for most cancers therapy. Its mechanism of motion additionally confirms it to be gene remedy. The mRNA gene therapies presently being misleadingly marketed as “vaccines” flip your cells into bioreactors that churn out viral proteins to incite an immune response, and there is not any off-switch.10
Conveniently, since COVID-19 “vaccines” didn’t meet the previous definition of vaccine, Merriam-Webster’s vaccine definition has lately been modified to incorporate an outline of the experimental COVID-19 gene therapies:11
“A preparation that’s administered (as by injection) to stimulate the physique’s immune response towards a selected infectious illness:
a: an antigenic preparation of a sometimes inactivated or attenuated (see attenuated sense 2) pathogenic agent (equivalent to a bacterium or virus) or one of its elements or merchandise (equivalent to a protein or toxin)
b: a preparation of genetic materials (equivalent to a strand of synthesized messenger RNA) that’s utilized by the cells of the physique to provide an antigenic substance (equivalent to a fraction of virus spike protein)”
Why They Don’t Want COVID Vaccines To Be Called Gene Therapy
Moderna’s SEC filings, which, within the video above, Martin claims to have fastidiously reviewed, specify and stress that its know-how is a “gene therapy technology.” Originally, its know-how was set as much as be a most cancers therapy so, extra particularly, it is a chemotherapy gene remedy know-how.
As famous by Martin, who would elevate their hand to obtain prophylactic chemotherapy gene remedy for a most cancers you wouldn’t have and should by no means be in danger for? In all chance, few would bounce at such a proposal, and for good cause.
States and employers wouldn’t be capable of mandate people to obtain chemotherapy gene remedy for a most cancers they don’t have, because it merely wouldn’t be authorized.
Yet, they’re proposing that each one of humanity be compelled to get gene remedy for COVID-19. If they really referred to as it what it’s, specifically “gene therapy chemotherapy,” most individuals would — correctly — refuse to take it. Perhaps that is one cause for his or her false categorization as vaccines.
But there could also be different causes as properly. Martin strays into conjecture, as we’ve no proof of their intentions, however he speculates that the explanation they’re calling this experimental gene remedy know-how a “vaccine” is as a result of by doing so, they will circumvent legal responsibility for damages.
As lengthy because the U.S. is beneath a state of emergency, issues like PCR exams and COVID-19 “vaccines” are allowed beneath emergency use authorization. And, so long as the emergency use authorization is in impact, the makers of these experimental gene therapies usually are not financially responsible for any hurt that comes from their use.
That is, offered they’re “vaccines.” If these injections are NOT vaccines, then the legal responsibility defend falls away, as a result of there isn’t any legal responsibility defend for a medical emergency countermeasure that’s gene remedy.
WHO Changed Definition of Herd Immunity
In June 2020, WHO’s definition of herd immunity, posted on one of their COVID-19 Q&A pages, was in step with the extensively accepted idea that has been the usual for infectious illnesses for many years. Here’s what it initially stated, courtesy of the Internet Archive’s Wayback machine:12
“Herd immunity is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection.”
It must be famous that “immunity developed through previous infection” is the way in which it has labored since people have been alive. Your immune system isn’t designed to get vaccines. It’s designed to work in response to publicity to an infectious agent. Apparently, in accordance with WHO, that is now not the case. In October 2020, this is their updated definition of herd immunity, which is now “a concept used for vaccination”:13
“‘Herd immunity’, often known as ‘inhabitants immunity’, is an idea used for vaccination, through which a inhabitants may be shielded from a sure virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached. Herd immunity is achieved by defending folks from a virus, not by exposing them to it.
Vaccines practice our immune programs to create proteins that battle illness, generally known as ‘antibodies’, simply as would occur once we are uncovered to a illness however – crucially – vaccines work with out making us sick. Vaccinated individuals are shielded from getting the illness in query and passing it on, breaking any chains of transmission.”
On Twitter, analysis analyst Heather Taylor posted a screenshot with the 2 definitions — one from June 9, 2020, and the opposite from November 13, 2020 — clearly modified to indicate that herd immunity, over the course of a number of months, abruptly turned an idea that solely applies to vaccination. “This still astounds me,” she wrote.14 Indeed, it is a blatant corruption of science.
In a 2020 JAMA Patient Page on herd immunity, Dr. Angel Desai, affiliate editor of JAMA Network Open, and Maimuna Majumder, Ph.D., with Boston Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, clearly clarify that herd immunity could also be achieved by way of natural infection and restoration, as has all the time been the case:15
“Herd immunity may be achieved either through infection and recovery or by vaccination … Achieving herd immunity through infection relies on enough people being infected with the disease and recovering from it, during which they develop antibodies against future infection.”
WHO’s Advice Flip-Flops Often
You could do not forget that within the early days of the pandemic, face masks weren’t really helpful for most people. In February 2020, Christine Francis, a advisor for an infection prevention and management at WHO headquarters, was featured in a video, holding up a disposable face masks.
She stated, “Medical masks like this one cannot protect against the new coronavirus when used alone … WHO only recommends the use of masks in specific cases.”16
Those particular circumstances embody when you have a cough, fever or issue respiration. In different phrases, when you’re actively sick and displaying signs. “If you do not have these symptoms, you do not have to wear masks because there is no evidence that they protect people who are not sick,” she continued.
In March 2020, the U.S. Surgeon General publicly agreed, tweeting a message stating, “Seriously people- STOP BUYING MASKS!” and happening to say that they aren’t efficient in stopping most people from catching coronavirus.17
As of March 31, 2020, WHO was nonetheless advising towards the use of face masks for folks with out signs, stating that there’s “no evidence” that such masks utilization prevents COVID-19 transmission.18
By June 6, 2020, the rhetoric had modified. Citing “evolving evidence,” WHO reversed their suggestion, with Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO’s director normal, advising governments to encourage most people to put on masks the place there may be widespread transmission and bodily distancing is troublesome.19
Another instance of WHO conveniently altering former truths to suit their agenda occurred in June 2020. During a press briefing, Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO’s technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic, made it very clear that individuals who have COVID-19 with none signs “rarely” transmit the disease to others. In a dramatic about-face, WHO then backtracked on the assertion simply in the future later.
On June 9, 2020, Dr. Mike Ryan, government director of WHO’s emergencies program, rapidly backpedaled Van Kerkhove’s assertion, saying the remarks have been “misinterpreted or maybe we didn’t use the most elegant words to explain that.”20
Widespread asymptomatic spreading is the one cause that lockdowns and masks utilization among the many wholesome make sense. For months, well being officers have been perpetuating the parable of asymptomatic spreading to escalate concern. A landmark research involving 9,899,828 million residents of Wuhan, China, printed in Nature Communications,21 discovered not one case of asymptomatic transmission.
Living in a Topsy-Turvy World
Over the course of latest years, and in some circumstances latest months, the long-held definitions of pandemics, vaccines and herd immunity have drastically modified to slot in with the brand new narrative being churned out by public well being officers and mainstream media.
In some ways, you are dwelling in a fog of conflict proper now — a fog of COVID war — in accordance with Jeffrey Tucker, editorial director of the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER).
During such a fog, “It is often unclear who is making decisions and why, and what the relationships are between the strategies and the goals. Even the rationale can become elusive as frustration and disorientation displace clarity and rationality.”22 Seeing through the fog is step one to popping out of the battle unscathed.