Because You Asked

I’ve had some burning questions that I couldn’t answer, because none of the data that I’ve looked at explained the huge anomaly, namely, why did some people have severe reactions, including thousands or perhaps millions of deaths worldwide, from the mRNA jabs, while the majority didn’t seem to have any problems whatsoever. If the jabs were poison, as many believed, then why didn’t everyone experience problems? The many reports that I’ve read indicate that around 95% experienced no issues, or at least nothing significant, although it is accepted, even by the CDC, that adverse reactions have been significantly underreported. And of course the fear is out there that perhaps some problem could show up later. A very new theory has been crafted that actually explains the situation elegantly, and I think that for the most part, it’s good news for those who got the jab and haven’t experienced any symptoms of vax related issues.

Today’s blog is about both known and unattributed adverse vaccine reactions, including adverse events resulting from normal vaccines, not just the covid jabs. The theory encompasses and answers all of the controversial claims, both from the anti-vaxers as well as the disclaimers and denials from medical authorities. While I previously stated that I would not have any of my children or grandchildren vaccinated, my stance against a few critical vaccines has softened in the course of researching for this piece. However, I have an important caveat for anyone choosing to have children vaccinated: it is absolutely critical that you monitor the procedure to ensure that a proper aspiration protocol, which I’ll explain shortly, is followed. Doing this should eliminate a very high percentage of adverse events, possibly all of them.

I’ve heard from a number of people that they are concerned about potential long-term adverse effects from the covid jabs, as well as some folks concerned about the safety of their own and their children’s normal vaccinations. Much of this is due to a massive loss of trust in medical authorities and Big Pharma that followed organically from the pandemic. When I was a kid, the people I trusted implicitly, outside of my immediate family, were teachers, priests, ministers, and doctors, and I don’t think I’m alone in that. 70 years later, the people I have learned to trust the least, aside from politicians, would include teachers, priests, ministers, and doctors. In evaluating clinical trials, I’ve come to realize that Big Pharma doesn’t care if their latest invention kills you or cripples you, as long as they make enough of a profit to pay off any lawsuits and still come out ahead. And your family doctor, for the most part, trusts them, although it’s hard to understand why.

An incredible number of people took the covid shots, trusting that their doctors and the medical profession in general were doing their best to protect us from the pandemic. But as more information leaks out, we’re hearing some very troubling stories. We now know that nearly everything they told us about the pandemic, about SARS-CoV-2, about its origins and most of all, about the jabs, was horribly wrong. There is significant reason to believe that all of this was deliberate, but that doesn’t matter in respect to today’s topic. I’ve been consulted by folks experiencing unexplained issues who just want to have their lives back, to return to the life they had three years ago. I’ve also had inquiries from people who didn’t have any noticeable issues with the jabs but now fear that something horrible could happen, out of the blue, today, tomorrow or ten years from now.

The news is not all bad. We do not know, and will not know for a decade or more, what sort of long-term adverse effects, if any — and I should stress that there very well could be none — may arise from the covid jabs. We should be vigilant, but not paranoid. We do know of nearly 1300 adverse events (AEs) which manifest almost immediately. So the good news there is that if you didn’t suffer a near-term AE, if it has been six months or more and you feel fine, you are very likely to be in the clear, as far as the known short-term issues are concerned. While I caution anyone who has received the jab to request a d-dimer test and a troponin test for possible excessive clotting or heart-muscle damage, if those tests come up negative, I think your odds of a long and healthy life are quite good.

To bolster this idea, here’s a graphic from data received through FOIA requests from Australia. We go overseas for this because we know the US CDC is cooking the books. European data supports the Australian data. Notice that some very bad things happened, in terms of adverse jab reactions (line graph, which is only cardiac events), concurrent with, and followed by a dramatic increase in covid-related hospitalizations (bar graph). What this clearly shows is that the jabs, unquestionably caused a massive increase in heart conditions requiring emergency interventions, and the worst of it hit the 10-29 age group, followed by the 30-39s, population segments where this issue was formerly an extreme rarity. It also shows (and here’s the good news) that the cardiac issues tapered off quickly, and are almost back to normal as Australians began saying “no mas” to the jabs. There is also the idea that what we saw, in terms of both covid illness and adverse jab outcomes was the “dry tinder,” or “low-hanging fruit,” individuals in poor general health, overweight, diabetic, etc.

The bar graph of hospitalizations for covid itself also makes clear that the jabs not only didn’t reduce the problem, they made it worse and that conclusion is inescapable. But again, the good news is that the negative effects of the jab, in terms of increasing your chances of contracting the virus and your case being severe, taper off somewhere in the 6- to 18-month range, which likely depends on individual robustness. This is what prompts me to suggest that if the other shoe hasn’t dropped in your case, it seems probable that it won’t. I’ll shortly go into the proposed mechanism of action (MoA) for severe vaccine reactions that does a magnificent job of explaining how this all happened.

We were “sold” the jabs on the basis of several false assumptions that were, as far as I’m concerned, bald-faced lies. First, we were told that the mRNA could not reverse transcribe to our DNA. That has been proven to be incorrect and with thirty years of prior research on injectable mRNA, this was well known in the field. Numerous “experts,” all dependent upon Tony Fauci for their livelihood, got together to write a paper decrying the lab leak theory. It turns out that the lab leak theory is the only viable theory left standing, and FOIA discovery has shown that the paper was simply a conspiracy to create false evidence, and that the many cosigners spent virtually no time investigating, but simply did as Tony Fauci asked and signed on to the conspiracy. It should be noted that this conspiracy, which was presented in Congressional hearings, represents a federal felony, but like Hunter Biden, Fauci and friends are above the law. As I’ve shared previously, it is beyond debate and records are unambiguous, that both SARS 1.0 & 2.0 originated at Ralph Baric’s lab at UNCCH. This was well explored by Dr. David Martin, the world’s foremost authority on intellectual property (patents). And of course, we all know that “safe and effective” was not one lie, but two.

What we know about virtually all “foreign invaders,” the various pathogens from nature and the unintended consequences of human activities, such as the many toxic chemicals we have created and dispersed, and including the mRNA and the horde of spike proteins that it releases, is that our bodies, over multiple millennia, have found a way to defeat every invading pathogen that came our way. Yes, we lost people along the way, but in the end, we’re not just still here, our numbers have exploded to greater than 8 billion. There is every reason to expect that whatever adverse effects we’ve seen from these jabs and the bioweapon SARS-CoV-2, will also diminish and pass into history, leaving billions of humans still standing. Despite all that has happened world population continues to increase at the rate of nearly 175,000 per day. We are apparently not the weakest link.

There have been many claims and hypotheses as to why the long list of adverse events occurred with the covid jabs but until recently, none of those explanations gained traction, because they failed a basic law of science, the Bradford Hill criteria, used to determine causality. If the graphene theory or the defective lot theory held, there should have been conformity in the results and there wasn’t. Still, a lot of the folks who didn’t experience an immediate adverse event are hearing about myocarditis, Guillain-Barré, miscarriages, strokes, and a host of other possible repercussions, and wondering if they could yet fall victim. Well, this new theory may explain, not just the disparity in reactions to the covid shots but also addresses the controversy about normal vaccines and their possible connections to autism and other health issues. And it strongly suggests that the worst effects happened in close temporal proximity to the injections.

First, let me share some thoughts from Pierre Kory, one of the two most renowned and respected cardio-pulmonary physician in America, and author of several hundred peer reviewed papers. Dr Kory confesses that he was taught, in medical school, that vaccines were the most significant creation of medical science, that it was a settled matter, not open for discussion, and that vaccines were responsible for most of the increases in life expectancy over the past two centuries. Like virtually all med students, he had no reason to doubt this information, nor any reason to suspect or recognize, the corruption in medical education. Like all of us, he trusted his teachers. I’ll be writing about that topic soon, as well. After having his children vaccinated, and seeing some very troubling issues with them afterwards, he came to question what he’d been taught, and discovered that it simply wasn’t true.

First of all, most of the increases in lifespan are due to improvements in sanitation, both in hospitals and in general. As one example, we now know that the vast majority of deaths during the Spanish Flu were not from the virus, but from bacterial pneumonia, likely acquired due to substandard (by today’s norms) sanitation practices in hospitals 100 years ago. Research indicates that the defeat of various infectious diseases may be owing to a much greater degree on herd immunity and to a lesser and perhaps insignificant degree to vaccines. He discovered that a) “settled science” is a phrase used to shut off dissent and discussion, thus antithetical to science, and b) he found out that, far from being the panacea he was taught, vaccines have a checkered history and have never been properly tested, either for efficacy or safety, as I shared in a recent post. Once society had bought into the concept, vaccines were never questioned, and the pharmaceutical industry began piling on with more and more vaccines and the profits they brought. The result is that our population is not healthier, with autism, heart disease, dozens of new forms of cancer, and the big one, all-cause mortality, being higher in vaccinated cohorts than in the unvaccinated. Yet still, our medical authorities adamantly refuse to perform the clinical trials that would answer these questions; they simply insist that they know vaccines cannot harm you, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.

Dr. Kory states that a review of children in Africa, many years after a campaign to vaccinate them with the DTP vaccine showed a ten-fold higher all-cause mortality in the vaccinated kids when compared to their younger counterparts who had been too young to receive the vaccinations during the campaign. While the vaccines apparently protected against the three target pathogens, it would appear that it degraded overall immunity, the health of the immune system. Dr. Kory also commented that, if autism isn’t such a new problem, where are all the autistic seniors? While approximately one in every thirty-six children is considered ASD, or “on the spectrum,” virtually no one in their eighties shows any sign of it. So let’s take a deeper look at the potential MoA that might be at play here.

Marc Girardot, a researcher who has been looking into adverse vaccine reactions, from regular vaccines as well as the covid shots (which are not vaccines) has developed a highly plausible theory that explains one of the biggest controversies in the vaccine debate: why do some have severe issues from vaccinations and others seem to be completely unphased. One of the positions of the pharmaceutical industry has been that vaccines don’t cause autism, because if they did, everyone would be autistic. This inconsistency supports the case that the cause must be something unrelated to vaccines. Explaining autism in terms of a connection to vaccines had failed all the standard Bradford-Hill criteria, until Marc Girardot came along. I’ll get to the covid jabs in a minute, because the answer is the same, although more problematic.

Anecdotal evidence against vaccines is mounting. Autism was virtually unknown, during the time before vaccines, and has leapt onto the stage rather precipitously. In 1950, the year I was born, and when we got three injections and a sugar cube, but not as infants, ASD was estimated to affect less than one child in 10,000, <0.01%. The greatest likelihood was that you not only wouldn’t know anyone who had ASD, you also wouldn’t know anyone who knew anyone, who knew anyone. Today, it is estimated that one out of thirty-six, or 2.77% may qualify, and I know four kids with ASD. Yet there is the issue that if vaccines are to blame, why isn’t it 100%, 36 out of 36? Well, here’s the theory, which Marc calls The Bolus Theory.

Bolus is a medical term which looks at both the volume of medicine administered and the speed at which it is absorbed. There are essentially five basic means by which medicine can be received: topically, orally, inspirationaly (inhaled through mouth or nose), or by injection, either intramuscular (IM), or intravascular, more commonly known as intravenous (IV). In terms of the Bolus Theory, absorption rate is slowest with topical administration, followed by oral, intramuscular injection, inspiration and intravascular injection. The reason I’m saying intravascular rather than intravenous will be clear in a moment.

When medicine is applied topically, orally or intramuscularly, it goes through processing before hitting its target. Topical application being somewhat similar to intramuscular injection, but slower to act. Consider what might happen if the nicotine from an anti-smoking patch were injected IV, so that it hit all at once, instead of being absorbed over an extended period. All three of these methods have the medicine being filtered, buffered, and reduced by various mechanisms associated with the lymphatic, immune and/or digestive systems and being absorbed at a modest pace. Oral medication is subjected to the harshness of the digestive tract and the 2.0-4.0 pH level found in the stomach, and for those not familiar with pH scales, 2.0 will take the chrome off a trailer hitch in less than two minutes. These “processing” stages are both protective and slow absorption, so that we don’t generally refer to any of these administrations as a bolus. Inspiration is popular for decongestants, asthma medications, and of course, cocaine and other recreational drugs. These are also fast acting, but not relevant to today’s issue, since I don’t know of any snortable vaccines, although some may be in the offing.

A drug meant to be administered topically or intramuscularly will have a much more dramatic effect, which could range from moderate overdose reactions to death, if injected intravenously, due to the bolus effect. When an intramuscular injection is done, procedurally, the person administering the shot is supposed to perform a technique called aspiration. After the needle is inserted into the muscle, the plunger should be pulled back just enough that if the needle tip has entered a blood vessel (vein, capillary, or artery) some blood will appear in the syringe, alerting the practitioner to NOT dispense the medicine without first relocating the needle tip. The deltoid muscle, the customary locus for IM injections, has significant vascular density, which can vary. Your typical American, who doesn’t exercise much, has moderate vascularization, where those who hit the gym multiple times each week will have a greater density of circulatory vessels. This means that the probability of hitting a blood vessel with a careless injection is higher for gym rats than for couch potatoes, which could explain the significant number of athletes who have suffered injuries from the covid jabs.

If the medicine is dispensed without this check, there is a risk that some or all will go directly into a blood vessel. If you’ve seen the folks in line for the early covid jabs, you might have noticed that approximately 0% of the practitioners were aspirating; they simply stuck the needle in, pressed the plunger and hollered “next.” While it is estimated, based on surveys, that 1.9% of “normal” vaccines are accidentally injected at least in part intravascularly, I believe that the practice of aspiration, and the recognition of its importance, has been lost, so that every year a greater and greater percentage of practitioners are injecting without aspirating. After all, until this very moment, no one has posited failure to aspirate as being a potential danger, and the FDA and CDC insist that vaccine injuries are as scarce as hen’s teeth. Most of the surveys were self-reporting, so human nature tells me that practitioners who don’t aspirate as a rule, and even those who aspirate some, or most of the time, might report that they aspirate all the time. In other words, I believe the 1.9% figure to be low. [While writing this, I received an update from Marc, indicating that he has reason to believe that the true number is approaching 5%, although this is not verifiable, because it is not a metric that is monitored.]

In medicine the admonition is “the dose dictates the poison.” With an accidental intravascular injection, the bolus is larger and faster, possibly by orders of magnitude if a significant portion goes directly into a blood vessel. It is possible that one or more normal vaccines could cause a tendency towards ASD, but the effect, if the medicine goes only into muscle, might be unnoticeable, whereas a substantial intravascular bolus could create significant damage. This idea, that vaccines, even when properly administered, could have repercussions leading to such mild ASD that it goes unnoticed, would actually dovetail nicely with recent findings that the general intelligence level in western society has declined by close to a dozen IQ points over the last 40-50 years, something also attributed by some to fluoridation.

As an analog, you can swallow a bit of rattlesnake poison and have a mild reaction or none all. An intramuscular injection (snake bite) of the same amount could require significant intervention and perhaps even hospitalization. An intravascular injection (bolus) of that same dose will likely kill you before help can arrive. This may also explain why some people survive snake bites while others don’t.

The same paradigm likely holds true with regard to other adverse effects, including the roughly 1300 known adverse effects from the covid jabs. This theory is bolstered by the higher incidence of these adverse effects seen with the Moderna jabs, which contain nearly 2.5X the mRNA found in the Pfizer jabs. A significant bolus could inflict significant harm and any bolus with Moderna would be 250% more dangerous.

In the case of the covid jabs, it is my belief (based on almost no evidence other than the knowledge of human nature and casual observation) that the alleged urgency to inject all 8 billion people on earth accelerated this carelessness, leading me to suspect that while the accidental vascular injection of “normal” vaccines is likely to be close to 3-4%  over the last decade, it is probably closer to 10% for the covid jabs, and perhaps the percentage is growing for all injections, as a result of changing the practice (virtually eliminating aspiration) during the pandemic. Proper aspiration would increase the time per injection by more than 500%. A 2-3% rate of IV injection would correlate with the increased incidence of autism (around 2.5% today v. 0.01% 70 years ago) but could mean an even greater incidence is to come, as aspiration becomes a lost art.

The MoA of any and all injected medicines firmly dictates whether IV is appropriate or dangerous. Leaving aside “normal” vaccines, the actions of the covid jab are such that even a partial IV injection has the potential to be extremely hazardous or fatal. The spike proteins generated by the mRNA should absolutely not come into contact with the endothelium, the cells lining all blood vessels, nor should they directly contact any organs, and especially not the heart and brain. Because ACE2 receptors are the targets of the spikes, injecting into blood vessels, whose lining is replete with these receptors, presents the possibility of serious damage to the vessel walls, causing clots, embolisms, arterial blockage, and strokes. Proceeding on to the heart, brain and central nervous system (CNS), intravascular injection, even partial, could rather easily explain some of the horrors we’ve seen, with heart attacks, strokes and CNS disorders.

A quick look at the pertinent MoA: mRNA injections cause a mutant messenger RNA to replicate the spike protein portion of the SARS 2.0 virus, and not the virus itself, thus potentially teaching the immune system to recognize, attack and destroy, not the virus, but the spikes and whatever cell they may have transfected. [This is why mRNA can never work as a vaccine. By recognizing only a single component of the target pathogen, it makes it a simple matter for the pathogen to simply mutate that single protein and escape detection, even assuming, which I don’t, that the MoA is viable. Even if mRNA “worked,” the minimal effectiveness would wane rapidly.]

So assuming for a minute that the theoretical MoA of the jab actually works, any cells to which the spikes adhere then become targets. If the mRNA is injected intravascularly, then it will likely have a severe impact on the endothelium, then go on to the heart, brain, and other organs. Since the spikes look for ACE2 receptors, and since those are ubiquitous, a lot of cells that we don’t want attacked will be attacked. And since the actual virus hasn’t landed yet, 100% of the spikes, if attacked, will also take down a multitude of healthy cells that were never the intended targets, potentially leading to the cytokine storms reported as a significant cause of death from covid. The action of the injection, if properly aspirated and only injected into muscle tissue will, per force, still be ineffective as a vaccine, but will be unlikely to present such a serious threat.

Additional lies were that the mRNA would stay localized to the deltoid muscle, an assertion so ridiculous one has to wonder why they claimed it, and that the spikes created by the artificial mRNA were generated in such a way that they would not fold properly, and thus could not bind to ACE2 receptors, but would serve to alert the immune system to be on guard against the spikes, so that the virus, when it arrived, would be recognized and neutralized. This was expected due to the development of a false RNA shell, using a psuedouradine in place of the normal uracil, which was then expected to create defective spikes with no open receptor binding domain (RBD). Recent research has shown that, in contradiction to this claim, one or two of the RBDs are open on perhaps 50% or more of the artificial spikes, enough to cause some serious havoc and additional proof that insufficient study was done prior to inflicting these jabs on an unwitting public. And again, if the mRNA is injected vascularly, its actions will be considerably more pronounced.

Further support for the Bolus Theory is provided by more than three-quarters of a million reports to the V-Safe database established to deal with possible covid jab complications. This amounts to roughly 4% of jab recipients reporting some kind of health event needing medical attention, emergency room intervention, and/or hospitalization. 25% of the V-safe users report events leading to missed school or work and/or stopping of the flow of normal daily life. These numbers would support two things we need to know about the jabs. First, that there is a greater association between the jabs and severe adverse events than all other vaccinations combined since we began keeping score in 1990, and second, this strongly supports the Bolus Theory because >90% of recipients reported no issues. So since the jabs can cause harm, but don’t always do so, we are virtually forced to recognize that there must be differences in how they were dispensed.

This also answers the “bad lot” theory. That theory suggested that since certain lots were associated with more adverse events, there must be a problem with the lot. But the Bolus Theory would answer that by stipulating that the problem showed up in clusters due to careless administration at the locations where the “bad lot” association appeared. Still, however, the significantly higher percentage of reportable incidents should have served as a “stop” signal to the FDA and the jabs, beyond any doubt or any question, should have been stopped, in accordance with normal FDA practices. Far more people died from the covid jabs than from Vioxx, PPIs, and dozens of drugs that the FDA had previously recalled.

According to a recent report from Pfizer, obtained by FOIA request, as near as makes no difference 5 million instances of adverse effects have been reported, that Pfizer is aware of. While that’s a terrifying number, it only represents 3-4% of the recipients of the Pfizer jabs, consistent with Marc’s Bolus Theory. It is likely that there are additional injuries that were either not reported or were rejected for various reasons, but we’ll assume those numbers represent the majority of events. Often a report of injury due to medication is excluded as unverifiable if the time from administration to the filing of the report is considered excessive (violating the first tenet of Bradford Hill). Reports can also be rejected if any other condition, such as a comorbidity, is believed to have been a potential cause, a “confounding” variable. For this and also political reasons, it is accepted within the scientific community that such things are significantly underreported. While we know about the more serious events, some of the adverse effects reported are minor and transient, things like dizziness, tinnitus, or gastric distress that passes within a week and does not reoccur. Anaphylaxis was one known potential side effect, for which reason recipients of the jab were required to be monitored for 20-30 minutes before being released. A number of anaphylactic reactions were therefore treated immediately and may not have been reported. After all, we were busy trying to get a jab into every arm.

These numbers are only for the Pfizer jabs, which were the most widely distributed in the US. It should also be noted that some of the reports may have involved a single jab recipient reporting multiple abnormalities, such that 5M reports might not indicate 5M patients. The Moderna jabs used a significantly larger dosage, approximately 2.5X the mRNA dosage of Pfizer, which was the alleged reason why the Moderna jabs were considered a single dose, while the Pfizer jabs were not considered fully administered until two weeks after a second jab. While fewer people received the Moderna jabs, they were responsible for a disproportionate share of the serious adverse events, giving further weight to the Bolus Theory, since even a tiny IV dose would have a 250% greater likelihood of harm. Several countries banned the Moderna product after discovering its greater danger.

One major anomaly, with the mRNA jabs, is that when a new drug is introduced, any adverse effects reported are assumed — always assumed — to be caused by the drug until proven otherwise, on the basis that it is the only variable. With the mRNA jabs, a great deal of effort was expended, and at taxpayer’s expense, to publicize these jabs as “safe and effective,” and to reject most claims of harm out of hand. This is a disturbing first in western medicine, and just one more thing to give us all pause the next time public health officials cry “wolf.”

With proper injection, including aspiration, a significantly smaller amount of the mRNA-generated spikes could potentially get into circulation and affect endothelium and organs. The amount and therefore the effect, will be dramatically lessened. There will essentially be no “bolus,” which should dramatically reduce or even eliminate many of the potential adverse effects as well as making full recovery more probable. For most of the serious adverse events, if you didn’t experience them in short order, there is every reason to believe that you’re in the clear. Our bodies have an amazing ability to rebound, so that minor adverse effects can be expected to fade away in a short time. While I can’t guarantee this, it follows logically from Bolus Theory

Getting back to vaccines in general, there is a relatively unreported problem that general health, especially in the western world, has deteriorated dramatically since the big vaccine push of the 80s, facilitated by the Childhood Vaccination Act of 1986, which indemnified vaccine manufacturers, holding them harmless from liability in the event of any and all adverse occurrences. But even so, there exists a long list of potential contributors to this decline. The list would include lead from gasoline, paints, and plumbing, PCBs, mercury, asbestos, aluminum, paraquat, glyphosate, PFAS, bisphenols, and about a hundred other chemicals that were supposed to make our lives better. As Murray Hamilton said to a young Dustin Hoffman, “There is a great future in plastics.” But with both the production and disposal of plastics, we have fouled our nest. While much research has gone into the hazards associated with the items listed, almost no research has been done on the long-term effects of vaccines.

Since there have been no studies to attempt to suss any of this out, we’re left with plenty of questions and no definitive answers. Looking to good news and bad news, excess mortality in EU countries in 2021 and 2022 has averaged between 8-13%, numbers that are showing a decline that mirrors the reduction in covid jabs as Europeans, like most of the world, are tiring of the idea that they’ll need to get them 2-3 times a year, combined with a growing awareness of the dangers posed. In looking at myocarditis, one of the more dangerous potential effects of the jabs, a recent EU study showed that evidence of the impairment (troponin levels) was found in nearly 3% of recipients, which tends to be comforting, since it was thought by many to be much higher, but also showed that the damage was detectable almost immediately, and did not arise at a later date, once again pointing to “no news is good news,” if you received the jab a year ago and haven’t shown any disturbing symptoms.

I don’t have a single acquaintance from my early years, back when we only had a handful of vaccines, who exhibits signs of autism, and only a few people my age are afflicted with leukemia. Yet a frightening percentage of those from subsequent generations are presenting with these and with an array of new cancers. Perhaps of greater concern should be the increases in genetic abnormality diseases like psoriatic arthritis, Charcot-Marie-Tooth, Ehler’s-Danlos, Down syndrome, FragileX, Kleinfelter, and more. Whatever the main driver is, world population growth has slowed dramatically in the last sixty years, from a high of 2.2% annually to currently just less than 0.8%. While this slowing of the growth curve is seen by many as a good thing, the cause of the decline may be something sinister.

I’ll have more to say, but don’t want to go deep into the weeds today. I want to leave you with this admonition: If you choose to vaccinate your children, and there is ample reason why you might choose to do so, be sure to monitor the administration. Let the practitioner know that you’re doing this to be certain that the proper aspiration is performed. And if the practitioner gives any pushback, especially if they say aspiration isn’t necessary and that whoever told you that it was is a hack, abort, bail, run away. Find a practitioner who will follow the proper procedure. There is no downside to making sure it is done correctly. And of course, no more covid jabs!!

Additionally, as I wrote recently, there are several vaccines that may be completely inappropriate for some children. And there is a considerable controversy, off line, over whether vaccines administered to newborns can actually have a beneficial effect due to the immaturity of the infant’s immune system, and whether vaccinating too early can cause immune deficiencies or autoimmune disorders, which evidence suggests to be highly probable. I plan to circle back to that later, as I don’t want today’s post to be too lengthy.